Behind The Myth: The Future Greatness of Kim Il-sung

The amazing leadership of Kim Il-sung, founder of the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK), is a myth that DPRK citizens may never stop believing – even after their country falls.

Andrei Lankov from Kookmin University shares a similar belief. In a May 4, 2011 article for the Asia Times (“The inevitability of Kim Il-sung revisionism”), he suggests that when South Korea absorbs North Korea, North Koreans will find themselves without one resource everyone needs: pride. In wealth, skill and even height, North Koreans will be inferior to their southern brothers and sisters. Their complete lack of social status will be humiliating.

Since North Koreans will not be able to assert economic, intellectual or physical equality, their only venue for self-respect will be moral and cultural equality (or even better, superiority). Since North Korean morality and culture are DPRK inventions, they may do the seemingly unthinkable: defend the DPRK’s honor.

Believe it or not, some North Koreans will be willing, because they will not need to respect the DPRK as it exists at the time of some future collapse; they will only need to love the DPRK as it began (or as they will imagine it began) in 1948, under Kim Il-sung’s leadership. For comparison, Lankov points to his native Russia, which freed itself from Soviet rule 22 years ago. Joseph Stalin, father of the Soviet Union, is now popular again there. Celebrated for defending the country against invasion, his crimes and failures are ignored, downplayed or blamed on other officials. Is a similar rebirth hard to imagine for Kim?

In fact we need not imagine it; it is happening. While interviewing North Korean defectors for a book, Bradley K. Martin discovered that most North Koreans understand their country is a wreck and their government is responsible – but they blame Kim Jong-il, Kim Il-sung’s son. One defector said, “The moment Kim Jong-il came into power, the problems started. I still revere Kim Il-sung, think very highly of him. Probably all the defectors here think that way.”

This myth of Kim Il-sung’s innocence is receiving some unintentional support from modern historians. Researchers such as Bruce Cumings have revealed that some unflattering stories about Kim are also myths made by his enemies. Correcting these inaccuracies without improving Kim’s deservedly bad reputation is a difficult balancing act.

When the Republic of Korea absorbs North Korea, it will have to be careful too. Communism (or “Kimilsungism”) will be outlawed, of course. Yet with the DPRK gone, many people will consider social harmony more important than historical facts. When North Koreans eventually become voters, their sensitivity about Kim will become important to politicians. Ironically, the failure of Kim’s legacy will then have secured his myth.