The results of the regional elections of May 31 mean more than just the defeat of the Roh Moo-hyun administration and the ruling party. They also serve as a strict warning toward all progressive and reformist forces that have led the country for most of the past ten years. Popular sentiment turned away from not just the ruling Uri Party and its banner of reform and progress; people also did not look favorably upon the Democratic Labor Party (DLP). Uri was completely defeated, even in the greater capital region, which usually never lets a single party have it all, and the DLP failed to absorb the voters that abandoned Uri.
The results were expected. The ruling party put all its emphasis on the idealistic political goal of eradicating regionalism, but it failed to handle social and economic issues, such as the gap between rich and poor. It acted as confused and inconsistent as ever about issues confronting the Korean nation as a whole, and it hurt Korean pride as it wandered all over the place on relations with the United States.
It was more than a problem of amateurism and inexperience. The president tried to lead the people how he wanted. He has talked a lot and produced little concrete results, while his talk caused countless controversy. Twice he was given the right conditions to get things done, but he stubbornly insisted on his idea for a nonsensical coalition government because he wanted more seats in the National Assembly. He actually regarded the political elements that would have been his allies in reform with hostility. The result was that he was unable to win the country’s support. He went through a lot of trial and error, despite having set reform goals that included eradicating real-estate speculation, resolving socioeconomic disparity, increasing taxes, expanding welfare, and promoting balanced development.
The same failures were committed by the DLP, the Korean Teachers and Education Workers’ Union, the Federation of Korean Trade Unions, and other civic movements. Instead of leading the Roh administration in the right direction and choosing a reform agenda upon which to pool their strengths, they all spoke with different voices and to some degree became part of the privileged establishment. Of course, media that are part of the old establishment played a part as well, tenaciously and maliciously spreading bad press, and the main opposition party thwarted any constructive activity that it could.
The introspection within the progressive reform camp must be intense. However, we hope it does not lead to doubts about its progressive values. The universal human values of freedom, equality, and benevolence are still the hopes of the land. The results of these elections are only an expression of the people’s disappointment with the actions of the political elements that claim to be about reform, and with their failure to show the people hope for the future. As one saw during the revision of the Private School Law, our society still agrees with the need for reform. It also supports the thorough clarification of irregularities in recent Korean history so that they are never repeated. One cannot ignore the strong desire that exists for resolving socioeconomic disparity in the areas of education, welfare, and income.
Pushing ahead with the reform agenda is more important than winning next year’s presidential election. It needs to be a humble and not arrogant push, promoted through persuasion and not ’societal enlightenment,’ and it should be unifying and not divisive. Reformist progressive elements are at a crossroads. They need to decide whether they will merely have decorated an era in history, or whether they will overcome their initial trial and error and be the ones who implement democracy at the level of individuals’ lives.
[Editorial] As election dust settles, progressives must be doing some thinking |
