Through the documentary "Holidays in the Axis of evil" one may perceive that North Korea, being on the talk when it comes to nuclear weapons and their "great leader" Kim Jong Il, is of a supremely evil state, who is against practically everyone. Heavily guarded, the host of the show had to comply with numerous rules before entering the North Korea proper. There was no forms of communication, whether it may be television, internet, or telecommunication. North Korea is depicted here as a place of isolation.'
Upon entering the North Korea proper, it is noticeable on how North Korea exemplifies communism: People wearing same clothes, working at different tasks, and have a great honor to their "great leader". Their book stores in fact sell only books talking about their "great leaders" in various versions and languages. Their museums are all about their victories and conquests against other states, particularly the United States. In their exhibits, they even have the axe they used to kill hundreds of Americans, and a Naval ship that they took from the United States because of espionage issues. Even their military bases and monuments of the great leader are heavily guarded by soldiers, who dedicate their lives on fulfilling this task.
On these initial observations, it is clear that North Korean residents have a very high sense of Nationalism to the point that they look up to their leader, Kim Jong Il and Kim Il Sung as their gods. Their approach towards nationalism hence is very radical when you would compare streamline nationalism in other countries.
Yet, how come North Korea seemed to be not threatening to the world, given the observations made throughout the documentary? Are we being brainwashed by the elite countries about what is North Korea? Frankly speaking, this whole issue on North Korea can be seen in two perspectives.
In the first perspective, North Korea, being a state that is inferior to that of the elite states such as the United States, would have a hard time to compete against them. The solution to their insecurity? Brain wash the citizens, make them honor the leader, promote communism through the principle of every North Korean Citizen working for North Korea, and the like. Hence in this manner, even if North Korea is not exactly that strong (the evidence of communal life presents to us that they are not as technologically advanced as other countries), they create an illusion that they are threatening through the use of communism. Why illusion? First, the people are not as fit as those from the United States. Second, they rarely talk about Kim Jong Il and his condition (sources say that he's critically ill, but given North Korea's isolation to the world of media, this can not be assured as well). Third, they are not technologically advanced! But since the people believe that they can win no matter what, this strategy that North Korea implies results in a high morale among its citizens, having deep faith in themselves that they can win no matter what.
In the second perspective, we can see this as the United States refusing to give away its reputation as the most powerful state to a country like North Korea. The United States, in fact, can be likened to the master who refuses to step down of its power. The United States as well is the one who has the lust and greed for power, not the states that they perceive as "most evil". Hence, they are insecure in the sense that they don't want to lose that power and domination. The solution? Threaten North Korea, gang up on the state (with the help of other elite states), and do "peace talks" with the North Koreans. Again, this is the US' coping strategy to ensure them of their domination (which they actually do the same thing for China, Russia, and other "threatening states")
So what does this show us? Countries have the greed for power. They don't want to be overthrown by other countries. As a response, they create and attempt to execute actions in order to balance that power. In the end, this war on domination can be seen with the phrase "fight to the death", through employing different strategies, both active and passive, violent and non-violent.
