North Korea's closed society means its language has changed little since the post-WW2 division of the peninsula. Meanwhile, the southern version has developed rapidly due to exposure to outside culture and technology.
All of the real examples given by the article show that this is absolutely
not the case. All this shows is that North Korean language planners are generally more strict in in introducing neologisms based on Korean roots rather than direct borrowings from English. This sort of linguistic purism is not unheard of in liberal-democratic European states, and I don't think many would chalk up coinages like Finnish
sähköposti (e-mail) to a "closed society". In fact, I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a European language where the words for
shampoo and
juice are direct English loans.
Although we see the claim that North Korean hasn't developed due to a "lack of exposure to technology", the article itself
explicitly contradicts this by mentioning North Korean equivalents of words for technology, including one actual
foreign loan word (not even a calque based on Korean roots):
tteuraktoreu!
Having risked death by escaping through China - which hands back refugees it captures - defectors often find themselves at a loss to understand words for tax, homelessness and rent.
All are alien concepts to northerners used to state ownership of everything.
Are they alien concepts or do they have different words for these concepts? The article isn't very clear on what it's talking about, it starts out talking about language and then mentions this cultural difference without really going into it, as if they were fundamentally the same thing.
In any case even if it is true that an average North Korean might not be familiar with these concepts, that does not mean that they don't have their own term -- surely North Korean press has mentioned homelessness or rent at some point, even if only to point out how evil it is and how South Korea has problems with it.