Desolation of the left
.jpg?w=728)
By Andrew Salmon
Talk about a wipe-out. For Korea’s left wing, 2012 has been an annus horriblis: Less a series of defeats, more one long, bloody massacre.
First, they let April’s parliamentary elections slip through their fingers as arch-rival Park Geun-hye adroitly nudged her party from the right toward the center.
Then, they lost the presidential election by a wider margin than anyone had predicted – despite the key independent candidate endorsing Moon Jae-in and the hard left candidate pulling out to ensure he got her votes – amid unseasonably high voter turnout.
And, adding insult to injury, they lost a gubernatorial by-election and the top Seoul education slot on the same day.
Given that just last year, when Park Won-soon won Seoul City Hall, all indications were that Korea’s political compass was pointing to the left, what went wrong?
I don’t think it was politics. Examine the policies espoused by Park and Moon and try to find clear ground. There was not much; what differences there were, were largely differences of degree. The only real gaps between the two were over chaebol policy.
So what was the left’s key message? “Vote for change!”
That sounded good – until you thought about it. With no reasonable, significant or credible alternatives, their slogan was empty.
But if the battleground was not politics, then what was it? Demographics?
One friend (and disappointed Moon voter) told me indignantly that Korean politics just ain’t fair. The older folks always vote for the right, so the left won’t have a chance until this generation of dodderers dies out.
As excuses go, this is piffle. Demographics did not prevent left-wing victories in 1997 and 2002.
Another friend was more (brutally) honest when she told me – only half jokingly – her with those over the age of 50 could be scratched from the electoral register. Ironically, she, herself, was one of the firebrands who, in the mid-1980s, battled for democracy at the epicenter of the student struggle, Yonsei University. If democracy does not stand for “one man, one vote” then what does it stand for?
Moreover, the left proved un-Christian, with no sense of “the children will not be held responsible for the sins of their fathers.” Instead, they gleefully sought to link Park to her father’s excesses, turning the election into a consensus on Park Chung-hee – an oddly retrospective race for a future-focused nation
The tactic backfired with what could be described as spectacular irony. The fish took the bait and the vote, indeed, split along generational fault lines - yet it was the very generation who had lived through the Park years that voted overwhelmingly for his daughter.
Then what about the left’s key personalities?
I don’t see any left-of-center party fielding a better candidate than Moon any time soon. Not only did he have the perfect CV – jailed for anti-authoritarian protests; ex-human rights lawyer; ex-Roh Moo-hyun aide – he also ticked every Vladimir Putin-style alpha male box – Himalayan hiker; judo badass, ex-spec ops soldier. Add good-looking, smart, dynamic and charismatic into the mix, and you have him. When we look back with hindsight, Moon may be the best president South Korea never got.
Looking forward, Ahn Cheol-soo is no savior of the left (or the right or whatever constituency he represents); the man proved gutless. His vaunted “new politics” could more accurately be dubbed half-hearted politics. First he dilly-dallied on declaring his bid; then he pulled out of the fray when the going got tough; finally, even his endorsement of Moon was limp-wristed. Politics is for decision makers and risk takers, not scholars and wimps, and I don’t think he has what it takes – the ethics of a hungry shark married to the confidence of Twain’s “Christian with four aces.” Best return to the lecture theater, professor.
As for Lee Jung-hee? Well. She was certainly entertaining in debate but she may have proved a liability rather than an asset for the left. I'd guess her attack-dog attitude, barely-masked insults and un-masked extremism lost more votes than they won. And if anyone wants to sample her brand of politics in action, why not decamp to Pyongyang?
Enough. Whatever may have been behind it – hollow key message, retrospective attitude, generational politicking or negative campaigning – the left has lost the House for four years and the Blue House for five.
This is not ideal. The left wing has, itself, stated that “Korean democracy is under threat.” If so, they must shoulder the lion’s share of responsibility, for they are not providing a credible electoral alternative.
A loyal opposition, providing a balance of power, is critical for a democracy. I fear that what will emerge here will be a bitter, angry “oppose-for-the-sake-of-it” opposition.
Still, there is good news.
Nothing is more irritating than the strident, self-righteous leftie motor-mouth. With a bit of luck, the left’s recent debacles may compel these irksome ideologues to shut their pie-holes and spare us their prattle for, if not years, than at least the next few months.
And the bad news?
The strident, self-righteous lefty will be replaced by a creature even more loathsome – the smug, privileged conservative windbag.
Andrew Salmon is a Seoul-based reporter and author. Reach him at andrewcsalmon@yahoo.co.uk.