Red Alert - Our 1953 USSR

Should Pak Kum-chol replace Kim Il Sung as leader of North Korea
B) No. Though if the plan goes through I'd like assurances that the Kim family remains safe during a power transfer. How else can the next pioneer in film revolutionize the industry?

1*Am8e50sF2ysSGKXAZA1fPw.png
Not only that but the world will lose great NKpop music like
 
Should Pak Kum-chol replace Kim Il Sung as leader of North Korea
A) Yes
B) No
I declare that the question itself is posed incorrectly. Pak Kum-chol is currently a member of the "guerrilla" faction and a loyal follower of Kim Il Sung. The Kapsan Faction incident will not occur until 1967. The closest opportunity to overthrow Comrade Kim is August 1956 and is associated with the “August Faction” (a united bloc of Soviet Koreans and Yananites) - and for the sake of this, it is better for them to postpone actions until September. There was also an internal faction of Pak Hong-yong, but it was defeated back in 1953 and no longer has any serious influence. So it’s better to study the material, and as they say in my homeland:
(Don't rush!)

1. Should all German POW's be released from the Soviet imprisonment?
Such a question requires the start of negotiations with Germany (two if necessary), as well as a detailed trial. For now, I recommend only releasing those who have not been involved in significant crimes against the civilian population of our homeland.

2. Please write down how should upcoming administrative reform/anti-corruption and anti-bureaucracy campaign be done?
Firstly, it is necessary to significantly reduce additional remuneration and eliminate “envelopes” (additional remuneration that is not subject to accounting). Secondly, it is necessary to exclude from the party those persons found guilty of bribery, moral and everyday decay, bureaucracy and disregard for the needs of the people. Firstly, it is necessary to significantly reduce additional remuneration and eliminate “envelopes” (additional remuneration that is not subject to accounting). Secondly, it is necessary to exclude from the party those persons found guilty of bribery, moral and everyday decay, bureaucracy and disregard for the needs of the people. Firstly, it is necessary to separate economic management from party issues: this means that industrial, agricultural, transport, construction and other departments within the party must be disbanded; later, the departments of administrative bodies, science and educational institutions, economics and finance must also be disbanded. The Central Committee of the CPSU will retain only 7 departments - Ideological, Information, Personnel, International, General, Organizational and Administration. Regional party organizations should be reformed in a similar way. Thirdly, I recommend simplifying the management of the regions, and party leaders of regional sections should also occupy senior executive positions in the constituent entities of our Union. And the main thing is to introduce the principle of personnel rotation - after each congress, the leadership must be renewed. And the same person cannot hold his position for more than 10 years in a row.

3. In a few weeks time, General Secretary Zhukov will attend a summit in Moscow, where he will meet with leaders of Eastern European governments. Please write down, on which topics should the summit focus on?
Easing the economic burden and abolishing reparations, and further economic restructuring of the CMEA. Political reorganization. Tactics during a new round of international struggle.

4. As General Secretary Zhukov is now 6 months in charge, it's high time to form a stance of the new Soviet government towards the legacy of 30-years of Joseph Stalin. Please write it down.
Stalin's question is not only a question of the Soviet party, not only a question of the Soviet people and government, it is also a question of the international communist movement. Therefore, we cannot solve it alone. It is necessary to convene an international congress of communist and workers' parties, and at it to determine the further attitude of the communists and a new ideological course.

Not only that but the world will lose great NKpop music like
This is a product of Soviet cultural influence, not the dictatorship of Comrade Kim.
 
I declare that the question itself is posed incorrectly. Pak Kum-chol is currently a member of the "guerrilla" faction and a loyal follower of Kim Il Sung. The Kapsan Faction incident will not occur until 1967. The closest opportunity to overthrow Comrade Kim is August 1956 and is associated with the “August Faction” (a united bloc of Soviet Koreans and Yananites) - and for the sake of this, it is better for them to postpone actions until September. There was also an internal faction of Pak Hong-yong, but it was defeated back in 1953 and no longer has any serious influence. So it’s better to study the material, and as they say in my homeland:
The thing is we must act as we dont know the future,as such we dont know when is best time to kill Kim or can we convince him to change course.
 
The thing is we must act as we dont know the future,as such we dont know when is best time to kill Kim or can we convince him to change course.
Then it is all the more strange to bet on a little-known figure who is a supporter of Kim Il Sung. It’s better to bet on pro-Soviet and pro-Chinese figures - especially since they already visit the Soviet embassy too often. However, if we take what the Soviet leader knows, the North is much more developed and is developing faster than the South, which is affected by the corruption and psychopathy of Syngman Rhee. The main problem (if you believe the reports of the August conspirators) is the cult of personality, but it is still much more restrained than it was in the seventies.
 
Then it is all the more strange to bet on a little-known figure who is a supporter of Kim Il Sung. It’s better to bet on pro-Soviet and pro-Chinese figures - especially since they already visit the Soviet embassy too often. However, if we take what the Soviet leader knows, the North is much more developed and is developing faster than the South, which is affected by the corruption and psychopathy of Syngman Rhee. The main problem (if you believe the reports of the August conspirators) is the cult of personality, but it is still much more restrained than it was in the seventies.
This, if we can make the North prosperous and well built first and foremost, we can both ensure it looks more attractive to South Koreans and possibly began a second Korean war as well as making Kim pass down the leadership role to someone else that is not his kid and avoid that Juche shit.
 
This, if we can make the North prosperous and well built first and foremost, we can both ensure it looks more attractive to South Koreans and possibly began a second Korean war as well as making Kim pass down the leadership role to someone else that is not his kid and avoid that Juche shit.
Or you can prepare the “August Faction” (I would rather say the August Bloc) for a coup.
As for Juche, you need to understand that this word has existed in the Korean lexicon since the beginning of the 20th century. Moreover, southern nationalists also use it. Few people know, but the ideology of the South Korean dictator Park Chung-hee was called something like “Juche Song.” In fact, "Juche" consists of two words - "Ju" (himself, or master), and "che" (body, consciousness...). In principle, the meaning of this can be translated as “sovereignty”. The term "Juche" was first used in North Korean government rhetoric in 1955, but Kim used it in the spirit of "Why do we have portraits of Pushkin everywhere and why don't we teach national literature in schools?", and the word Juche was used in the context of "sovereign" or " National way". At the same time, Kim Il Sung did not study theory, and he was a pragmatist focused on some kind of practice. An attempt to flesh out “Juche” began only with his son, and the first work devoted to the study of the issue was published in 1987. As we know it, the idea only took shape in the 90s.

In general, as Lankov (a Russian-speaking specialist living in Korea) said: “The tragedy of North Korea is that those decisions that led to the current situation at the moment when these decisions were made looked quite logical. And if suddenly I found myself in those conditions, among those people whoever made the decision, I would most likely have done the same. As a result, the situation became infinitely confused."

As for the South, the fact is that the regimes of Syngman Rhee and Park virtually destroyed the opposition, and it is necessary to somehow create and maintain a leftist movement focused on reunification with the North.
 
A). It has almost been a decade, and while some of them have committed crimes worthy of frozen hell, a majority of them are guilty of being on the wrong side. Release the elderly, sick, and those without a record of crimes first, and gradually move up the list.

@ruffino's plan, but we should also reduce the incentive for corruption by encouraging honesty and competence. Perhaps reducing the penalties for failure to meeting quotas and encourage record-keeping for stronger veracity.

I support @ruffino's plan, but also we should discuss the public opinion in each of the states, and how we can improve them through slight liberalization and rise in standard of living. We can tie that with economic developments.

Gradual de-Stalinization. 70% Good, 30% Bad. Reintroduce the people he purged, but gradually. Remove the cult of personality and allow criticism against his actions.
I support this plan.

Should Pak Kum-chol replace Kim Il Sung as leader of North Korea
A) Yes
B) No
A)Yes. He can't be any worse.
 
possibly began a second Korean war
It's too dangerous. The Korean War was an almost successful mad gamble at a time when the USSR still wasn't a peer nuclear power to the US, that's why even Stalin chose to sit out of it. We should only seriously think about starting something funny when we reach the early 70s. There's nothing to gain by starting a major conflict there.

If we provoke the US in Korea they will intervene head on. Our objective should be to lower tensions, not increase them.
 
Last edited:
It's too dangerous. The Korean War was an almost successful mad gamble at a time when the USSR still wasn't a peer nuclear power to the US, that's why even Stalin chose to sit out of it. We should only seriously think about starting something funny when we reach the early 70s. There's nothing to gain by starting a major conflict there.

If we provoke the US in Korea they will intervene head on. Our objective should be to lower tensions, not increase them.
However, the success of Pyongyang's reforms depends on the reunification of the peninsula. To do this, we need to liquidate the South and force the United States to leave the territory.

(Besides, at that time the situation was so tense that the main question was not “Will there be war”, but “When” and “Who will be first”)
 
Last edited:
Top