Forum for Alternative Ideas:
Welfare Society (2)
"Tangerines south of the Han River in Seoul become hardy oranges when they are grown north of the Han River." This popular phrase is used to underscore the importance of considering outside factors in bringing an idea to life. In order to make a welfare state a realistic alternative, rather than merely a dream, it is necessary to think carefully about the particular features of South Korean society.
The forum participants proposed that the concept of welfare be reworked. South Korea has never witnessed a satisfactory welfare system materialize here, but regarding the issue of welfare, the nation has suffered to overcome its own cultural particulars, which give it an impression of being 'old-fashioned.'
First of all, many people agree that an infant Western welfare system can't be planted in Korea as it currently stands; it would not survive. Professor Kim Yeon-myung of Chung-Ang University said, "[Unlike European countries,] Korea has no welfare system, and it is no better than a wasteland in terms of taking care of its population."
In order for welfare to put down roots in this wasteland, the nation needs to construct an uniquely Korean welfare state model, "which criticizes the negative aspects of the 1960s Western model and also positively accepts values such as environmentalism and gender equality," Professor Kim pointed out. Professor Lee Il-young of Hanshin University put welfare in context with the division of the Korean Peninsula. "Because of North Korea, the number of recipients of welfare may one day reach 10 million." Therefore, we should bear in mind the timing of reunification, he said. "Let's consider a model of welfare containing within it a model of national development," Professor Kim Ho-ki of Yonsei University said. The professor means that welfare so far has mainly been an "ex post facto guarantee for those forced out of the work market, but from now on it should be changed to a concept of social investment, one which can contribute to economic growth." Ko Se-hoon, a professor at Korea University, offered that "spreading the unique idea of welfare throughout society as a whole" is a more urgent task than reconstructing the concept of welfare. He worries that if new values-ones that have emerged as issues in Western Europe, for example-are introduced alongside Korea's concept of welfare, they might prove controversial with the populace. A researcher with the Korea Labor Institute, Jeon Byeong-yu, said, "We should deliberate on how to accept policies adopted by other nations in terms of the unique Korean situation." Professor Jeon suggested Korea should first lay the basic groundwork of welfare policy rather than conceiving of a large-scale welfare model right off the bat. Professor Kim Yeon-myung said, "When we talk about a welfare state, we tend to think on a large scale, as in the formation of a political labor party, but the nation's drive to eliminate corruption, support gender equality, and promote environmental standards also are important virtues to include in the concept of a welfare state. We should first think about the benefits of such a state, rather than trying to decide whether to accept a social democracy or not," he added. The forum participants discussed a systematic strengthening and reworking of the welfare concept, as well as forming a new 'welfare solidarity' to push for change and counter opposition. Professor Shin Jeong-wan of Sungkonghoe University said, "Labor movements, citizen's campaigns and progressive information societies can agree in terms of welfare, but there is no central force to lead this drive." "It is essential to form a citizen's society, one with labor and politicians simultaneously concerned with the future of the welfare state," Professor Kim Yeon-myung said. In Western Europe, labor parties took the initiative, but in Korea, for now, we cannot expect to build a labor party-led welfare state when one considers the condition of Korea's labor movement. Professor Ko suggested "a solidarity to include all of the 'have-nots,' both social and economic." Professor Kim Yeon-myung in particular emphasized the necessity for progressive reformist forces to create a welfare model and put it into operation. It would be started in a strategic area of society in an effort to increase ’welfare solidarity’ within South Korea. Professor Kim said, "It is important to make a sample of progressive 'livelihood politics.' Even if it takes 20-30 years, we should concretize our image of the future welfare state." Professor Lee Il-young stated that the mission of reformist forces is to prepare a solid alternative plan. "Libertarian forces, when they are faced with problems, merely say, 'Markets will solve the issue.' The problems look easy. But progressive reformist forces are different. They should speak who and how to solve the problems that have an influence on society and the general public. For that reason, it's a difficult question."
