Politicians and debates
By Yang Bo-ram
Korean politicians are notorious for taking part in dishonorable actions such as using violence in the National Assembly.
Politicians are primarily responsible for this disgrace. I believe that a secondary cause for the aggressive behavior is the culture to which Koreans are accustomed.
Korean culture values traits such as modesty and reticence. Although these traits are helpful in some aspects, they are also attributable to the main reason why Koreans have difficulties communicating. Consequently, many Koreans, including politicians, ironically lack the ability to solve problems through discussion.
In contrast, the British Parliament and the U.S. Congress seldom have physical conflicts because they have used debate throughout history as a means of solving controversies. Particularly interesting is the British Parliament’s use of debate in discussing critical issues. The British Parliament debates on various current issues and the result of the debate mainly determines whether or not a law will be passed. This tradition eventually gave birth to a whole new style of debate, the British Parliamentary style debate.
The United States, which inherited much of British culture, also used a series of debates to judge right or wrong, and should or should not. For example, Abraham Lincoln debated with his political rival Stephen Douglas to convince the public that the U.S. should abolish slavery. Although Lincoln lost the debate, he was able to persuade many in the audience. The Lincoln-Douglas style debate has also become a unique form of debate.
On the other hand, Korea has never developed a culture that embraces debate. Rather, the nation still lingers in a strict Confucian culture. Any orders are expected to be implemented immediately. Debating with an elder or a supervisor is intolerable. While Korea has adapted democracy as a political system for over half a century, the culture seems not to change.
In addition, support for debate is still at a primary level. Only a minor portion of school classes employs debates or discussions. University-level debate championships are only occasionally held.
To plan a solution, we must closely inspect the status quo and the cause of the problem. One of the problems is that the elders were educated to be silent and diligent. However, this is less of a problem nowadays, since newly-educated students put more emphasis on communication abilities.
Nonetheless, these students still do not have wide access to education on forensics. The current lack of education on rhetoric and forensics stems from the public school system. Middle schools and high schools alike have an excessively high student-to-teacher ratio. Most classes focus on lecturing and memorizing, rather than discussing and debating.
Finally, communication abilities are hard to measure and are often neglected in admissions and recruiting. Civil-service exams measure test takers’ abilities through written tests, which inherently cannot test communication skills. Job interviews are the only means of judging an interviewee’s presentation skills. But this is also only a subjective and limited way of evaluating a person’s ability.
Fortunately, Korea still has hope despite this abysmal situation. The nation has the capacity to improve through some changes. The government must alter the current curricula to include debate. Students need to make it a habit to present their opinions with logic. Individuals should value discussion and the exchange of ideas rather than silence. These efforts will ultimately change the country’s culture for the better.
Debate is the art of persuasion using logic and rhetoric. Only when we teach students how to present their opinions logically, shall we truly achieve a democratic society.
The writer is a student majoring in global business administration at the Sungkyunkwan University. He can be reached at boram145@gmail.com.