I have not read Hegel and I have a very rough understanding of Hegelianism so I can't comment on that. But I don't see why Juche is in a way "worse" than the humanism in Marx himself, like his theory of alienation and the theses on Feuerbach. Kim Jong Il was to me very clearly inspired on the latter when he wrote that passage. Things like:
I The chief defect of all hitherto existing materialism – that of Feuerbach included – is that the thing, reality, sensuousness, is conceived only in the form of the object or of contemplation, but not as sensuous human activity, practice, not subjectively. Hence, in contradistinction to materialism, the active side was developed abstractly by idealism – which, of course, does not know real, sensuous activity as such. […]
X The standpoint of the old materialism is civil society; the standpoint of the new is human society, or social humanity.
XI The philosophers have only interpreted the world, in various ways; the point is to change it.
would fit just fine in Kim's passage.
Maybe you're too quick to dismiss a philosophy that emerged in an actually existing socialist society. Once we're rid of the class struggle that colours the philosophy of today, what do you imagine the philosophy of tomorrow will focus on, if not on the struggle with the environment and with ourselves to build a better world?
I don't dismiss it, and yes, the philosophy of some FALGSC would definitely focus on the agency of a liberated humanity, given that it is largely post-scarcity.
But I think that Juche arises from it's material conditions (the focus on "age of independence" for instance, is clearly a response to the DPRK's forced Autarky, since we clearly do not live in that age) and saying that these material conditions are now secondary, even internally, is not correct. Necessary, maybe, in ensuring the survival of Socialism in the DPRK, but not correct in any external sense.
Much of my criticism is not that it isn't useful (if it was moderated somewhat into merely emphasising the effect the Cultural Superstructure can have in turn on material conditions I would be largely in agreement), but that it is in many cases a philosophy that tries to merge a desire to go beyond the current ongoing material class contradictions with the unfortunate reality that those contradictions are largely why the DPRK is under siege socialism.
So while I might find some aspects of Juche excellent tools for resolving post-capitalist contradictions in high stages of Socialism, and I admire how it has allowed a Socialist state to survive in extremely adverse conditions, I don't find it very useful as a toolset for Socialist development in the Imperial Core, or for the initial stages of a global Socialist society.
This is a great passage by Kim Jong Il, but I can't help but feel this is a return to Hegelianism with the Mass Line replacing the Zeitgeist.
I have not read Hegel and I have a very rough understanding of Hegelianism so I can't comment on that. But I don't see why Juche is in a way "worse" than the humanism in Marx himself, like his theory of alienation and the theses on Feuerbach. Kim Jong Il was to me very clearly inspired on the latter when he wrote that passage. Things like:
would fit just fine in Kim's passage.
Maybe you're too quick to dismiss a philosophy that emerged in an actually existing socialist society. Once we're rid of the class struggle that colours the philosophy of today, what do you imagine the philosophy of tomorrow will focus on, if not on the struggle with the environment and with ourselves to build a better world?
I don't dismiss it, and yes, the philosophy of some FALGSC would definitely focus on the agency of a liberated humanity, given that it is largely post-scarcity.
But I think that Juche arises from it's material conditions (the focus on "age of independence" for instance, is clearly a response to the DPRK's forced Autarky, since we clearly do not live in that age) and saying that these material conditions are now secondary, even internally, is not correct. Necessary, maybe, in ensuring the survival of Socialism in the DPRK, but not correct in any external sense.
Much of my criticism is not that it isn't useful (if it was moderated somewhat into merely emphasising the effect the Cultural Superstructure can have in turn on material conditions I would be largely in agreement), but that it is in many cases a philosophy that tries to merge a desire to go beyond the current ongoing material class contradictions with the unfortunate reality that those contradictions are largely why the DPRK is under siege socialism.
So while I might find some aspects of Juche excellent tools for resolving post-capitalist contradictions in high stages of Socialism, and I admire how it has allowed a Socialist state to survive in extremely adverse conditions, I don't find it very useful as a toolset for Socialist development in the Imperial Core, or for the initial stages of a global Socialist society.