That was my first thought too.
Would it be even possible in today's world to have a country that is purposefully underdeveloped/feudal, but without an oppressive regime?
Would it be even possible in today's world to have a country that is purposefully underdeveloped/feudal, but without an oppressive regime?
There are still some refugees living in camps in Nepal, and it took over 10 years before some Western countries agreed to take them in. They are still slowly being resettled.
I know some of these refugees who spent the first 17 or 18 years of their lives in squalid camp conditions. They are lovely people.
[0] http://www.oocities.org/bhutaneserefugees/forcedeviction.htm...
[1] http://www.hurights.or.jp/wcar/E/doc/other/Refugee/AHURA.htm
On the terms of its dictatorship. Not on the terms of the people.
Rate of modernization has little to do with the form of government.
If we'd been more active in engaging North Korea on friendly terms, maybe they would have developed along a similar route as China.
It seems like we're trying to squeeze them till they collapse, and North Korea are understandably doing all they can to be self-sufficient and not appear weak and desperate.
Take a land mass the size of the lower 48 states, and take out all the people except for Oregon on the west coast and Florida on the east coast. Remove nearly all the interstates and all but three of the railroads. That is Australia.