hankyoreh

Illustration by Jaewoogy.com

It has now been six months since the inauguration of the Yoon Suk-yeol administration. From the beginning, I had more concerns than positive expectations, but there was also some hope that Yoon would do better than in the election, which he managed to win by a razor-thin margin. I had similar moderate hopes when the Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye governments first came to power as well.

Although I worried about what would happen if this administration would move away from extreme conservatism and adopt a smarter “rational” conservative strategy, resulting in long-term conservative rule in Korea like in Japan, this would still be a better option than them ruining the country. But, whether it was for the best or for the worst, this is not what happened.

While it has already been six months since this new government took power, many questions remain. There is a popular joke going around that Yoon Suk-yeol’s only goal was to become president, but he clearly had no idea what kind of country he wanted to create once he was in power.

If we look at Yoon’s campaign promises, there are various details but there is no general outline tying them together. In reality, the vision he put forward for his government was simply described as “A Korea that leaps forward again, a prosperous nation of the people,” with no real substance.

Even Lee Myung-bak and Park Geun-hye had more detailed plans for their governments when they came to power. In the case of Lee, although the plan ended up being more hot air than anything else, he proposed the so-called “747 Plan,” through which he aimed to achieve 7% annual economic growth, an annual per capita income of US$40,000, and to turn Korea into the world’s 7th-largest economy.

Similarly, the Park Geun-hye administration also put forth a major plan focused on “economic democratization.” The progressive colors of the plan briefly got the hopes up of the people hurt most by economic inequality.

But, for some reason, the Yoon government has failed to draw up a plausible blueprint encompassing a clear vision for the country. Why is this?

Let's take a look back at what the Yoon administration has done over the past six months.

If we look at the major things first, we can point to the relocation of the presidential office to the Yongsan Ministry of National Defense building, the opening of the Blue House to the public, the push to abolish the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family (MOGEF), the shift from supporting a nuclear power phase-out to becoming pro-nuclear power, and a shift from a dovish approach to North Korea to a hawkish stance.

It’s questionable whether the changes the administration has made are suitable as a future vision meant to give hope to the South Korean public. That includes things like the presidential office relocation decision, which was a source of chaos, allegations, and high costs. And it includes some changes that have been very negative, like the abolition of the MOGEF, the adoption of pro-nuclear power policies, and the shift toward a hardline approach on North Korea.

Besides opening up the Blue House, relocating the presidential office, and abandoning the shift away from nuclear power, a look at the “achievements” the administration has touted for its six months in office shows things like downscaling the presidential office, cutting housing costs for ordinary South Koreans, creating a “digital platform administration,” and increasing compensation to small business owners for losses stemming from the COVID-19 pandemic. (Gonggam Policy Weekly, Nov. 17, 2022)

Is it really appropriate for the administration to single these things out as the “achievements” of its first sixth months of office when they read like a list of the ordinary annual duties of the different Cabinet offices?

If they really thought these self-proclaimed achievements were going to meet the public’s hopes for the newly formed administration, they are either awfully arrogant or awfully naïve.

We can see the reality from the approval ratings for the administration’s performance, which remain stuck around the 30% range: The vast majority of South Koreans are feeling deep misgivings about the nature and actions of this incompetent administration.

They are experiencing a profound fatigue that has never been seen so early in any past administration — over things like repeated failed appointments; the deployment of prosecutors, the Board of Audit and Inspection, and other authorities for an onslaught of biased investigations into opposition figures and key officials from the preceding administration; a high-handed approach to governance that is a far cry from “cooperative”; and one diplomatic disaster after another on the global stage.

In the wake of the bumbling, irresponsible reaction to the recent tragedy in Itaewon, those feelings of fatigue and misgivings are transforming into criticism and anger.

Under the circumstances, it’s not out of line for people to be directing extreme words like “resignation” and “impeachment” at an administration that has been in office just six months. Indeed, over a dozen popular demonstrations have already been held in areas like Gwanghwamun and Yongsan to call for Yoon to step down.

These activities warrant support as legitimate exercises of the public’s right of resistance against an incompetent administration. But even if the actions of the president and administration are deplorable and enraging, it won’t be easy to impeach them out of office like Park Geun-hye unless they commit some flagrantly criminal act that tramples on the Constitution and damages national morale, and solid evidence is found to prove it.

While I certainly understand how frustrating it is to find ourselves having to call for an administration’s resignation when it’s only been around for half a year, the only way I currently see to pass judgment against it will be through the general elections or the next presidential election.

If only because of the lessons learned in the wake of Park Geun-hye’s ouster, I also don’t think it will be easy to get a million ordinary South Koreans out calling for Yoon to resign like in winter 2016.

Ushered into office with the fervent support of candle-holding citizens in the wake of the Park administration’s collapse, the Moon Jae-in administration failed to reward that support. In the process, it conclusively showed the real problems facing our era cannot be resolved by passing the presidency back and forth between reactionaries (the People Power Party) and moderate conservatives (the Democratic Party) the way we’re doing now.

With neoliberal hegemony holding sway in South Korean society today, true control now lies with the business interests that dominate the market and the technocrats who shore them up.

While the two sides may appear to be deeply at odds, the vast two-party system they’ve created is really just a system of interdependence where they trade places every five to 10 years, acting as a foil to the ones with real power while collecting their own cut.

In this situation, the Yoon administration may represent a model of political “humility” for the neoliberal hegemony era — with its attitude of “As long as I win the election and take power, what’s the point of sharing any sort of vision that I don’t intend to stick to anyway?”

I don’t mean to suggest that we shouldn’t be criticizing this incompetent, immoral administration or reining in its excesses. It’s time for us to break with this feeble vicious cycle — where the only alternative to our current reactionary administration is to bring the moderate conservatives back to power — and start looking farther and more deeply.

If we intend to bring an end to the barbaric rule of the neoliberal regime, respond proactively to the onslaught of climate catastrophe, and create a true democratic society where everyone’s different hopes and demands in life are met, then those of us who find the current situation unacceptable have no other options left.

We must emphatically reject the endless revolving door of conservative mega-parties taking turns in power. We must boldly expand our political and social imagination beyond defeatism and the accommodation of neoliberal dominance. And we must set in motion an audacious initiative for organizing new political movements to achieve this in the realm of realpolitik.

Please direct questions or comments to [english@hani.co.kr]