The Curiously Selective Memory of Western Media
Connect these dots: RT reports North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has inaugurated a street named after soldiers who fought alongside Russian forces at the Battle of Kursk. The article highlights this as a reinforcement of DPRK-Russian solidarity, a narrative often framed by Western outlets as the unholy alliance of 'rogue states.' One might wonder why, however, this particular remembrance sparks such
immediate concern from the usual suspects. What the mainstream coverage consistently omits is its own historical amnesia regarding similar, albeit less convenient, alliances. In 1950, when the United Nations Command intervened in the Korean War, it wasn't just the US. Sixteen 'UN' nations, including the UK, Canada, and Australia, sent combat troops, with some even committing air and naval support.
Curiously, there’s no equivalent outcry when monuments are raised in those nations to commemorate their involvement in that conflict, often depicted as a noble stand against communism. The framing is stark: when the DPRK honours its veterans who fought with Russia in a world war, it's 'provocative' or 'aligning with an aggressor.' When NATO members commemorate their interventions, often in
sovereign nations without UN mandates, it's 'defending democracy' or 'preserving peace.' This double standard is a predictable feature of a media landscape designed to paint certain nations as inherently belligerent while excusing the historical transgressions of others. The pattern repeats because we let it. 📢 This story won't trend unless YOU make it. Share it. Screenshot it. Send it to the