My Insight on Korean Politics

     So last time I wrote something about the things that happened in South Korea recently. I'm going to proceed such writing and talk about my overall insight on the status quo Korean politics.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     About three days ago, I scribbled about the controversy over free lunch service that dominated South Korea (especially Seoul) for about three months. (From June to August) And one thing that Mr. Garrioch had asked me was: Why is free lunch service being such an issue in Korea?

     And I tried to come up with a reason why. Why do the South Korean politicians had to be obsessed with free lunch service out of a sudden? Weren't there other more important issues that could have been more closely dealt by the DP (Democratic Party, the most influential left-wing party in South Korea) and the GNP (Grand National Party, the largest right-wing party in the National Assembly), such as the low quality of public education in South Korea or the poor treatments toward those with a distressful job? Why did the free lunch service suddenly have to be a subject of extreme quarrel?

The mark of the Democratic Party (DP)

The mark of the Grand National Party (GNP)

     Honestly,  I didn't know. And when I asked the same question (why the "free lunch service" had to be an issue rather than other urgent welfare issues like the minimum wage) to my peers, the answer was also the same.
     Coming to think about it, I think the mere reason that made the politicians to be extremely enthusiastic about the free lunch service was the fact that it was something dealt importantly during the Seoul mayor election in 2010. Out of a sudden, Myung-sook Han, the official candidate of DP as a Seoul mayor, happened to bring up the issue (which almost nobody in the society, even the students, cared about) and since then the free meal idea has been a matter of severe altercation.

     And this, is the type of problem that I find in South Korean politics. The politicians are too busy fighting about the things that people don't even know why they should care about. Even to me, a person who was one of those attending public middle schools in Seoul, the free lunch service simply seemed simply out of place, out of time.

     Another good example of South Korean politicians' foci being deviated from the public's wants could be the Four River Project. The Four River Project basically aims to promote the quality of the four major rivers in South Korea (The Han River, Kum River, Yong-San River, and Nak-Dong River). This project was put onto open dispute after its proposal as one of the promises that the current president of South Korea (Myeong-bak Lee) made.

The mark of Four River Project

     Many people in South Korea simply assume that 'promoting the four rivers in South Korea' is something worth being done, for it is an issue passionately dealt with in the National Assembly. But if we stop and think about it for a moment, it is not hard to realize that the project referred to as "Four River whatever" by South Koreans is not something to be so crazily fighting over about. Before being proposed as part of the presidential election promise, there was basically no noteworthy public appeal neither a renown survey on the public asking for an improvement on the quality of the four rivers. In other words, the politicians have been being frenzy about something that nobody in the public really cares (or should care) about.

     In this piece of writing, it is not of my intention to censure a specific party for making foolish proposals. Rather, my intention is to criticize the overall South Korean politicians for being so uncommunicative with the public. Every now and then in "election seasons", we find Congress member candidates babbling about "being a good listener to public's needs," and then find them on the news for being involved in a corruption after a few months.

     One of the cardinal premises of a representative democracy (a form of democracy in which politicians "represent" the public) is that the politicians are able to correctly analyze the public's desires and reflect them in upcoming policies. And if that's not something being done in South Korea, I have to say, it is time for a reformation to be made inside the National Assembly Hall, not on the Four Rivers of South Korea that nobody even "gives a damn."