Cho Yoon-je
The author is a special appointment professor at the Graduate School of Economics at Yonsei University.
One of the most dramatic political shifts in early 20th-century Britain was the collapse of the Liberal Party. Rooted in the Whig tradition, the Liberals had stood at the center of British politics in the late 19th century, producing prominent leaders such as William Gladstone. Yet within a generation, they were pushed to the margins. Though they championed free trade and represented industrial capitalists and the middle class, they failed to incorporate the rising working class through a broader agenda. As a result, they ceded political ground to the newly formed Labour Party. Internal divisions and leadership conflicts surrounding World War I accelerated their decline, and after Prime Minister David Lloyd George, the party faded into irrelevance in the 1920s.
Citizens attend a candlelight rally calling for the impeachment of President Yoon Suk Yeol and march in protest toward the People Power Party headquarters (the building with the green neon sign on the right) near the National Assembly in Yeouido, Seoul, on the afternoon of Dec. 11, 2024, as the fallout from the declaration of martial law continues. [YONHAP]
The history of Western political parties shows that their values and policy orientations evolve in response to social change. The roots of today’s Democratic Party in the United States lie in the early Republican movement led by Thomas Jefferson, who opposed Alexander Hamilton’s federalism and advocacy of a strong central government. Renamed the Democratic Party in the 1820s, it has since evolved into a party that supports a more active state and progressive policies. Conversely, the modern Republican Party, formed in the 1850s, inherited elements of Hamiltonian federalism but now emphasizes limited government, once associated with Jeffersonian ideals. The U.S. Constitution itself made no mention of political parties, yet parties endured because they adapted to shifting public demands, forming new coalitions and helping sustain democratic competition.
Korea’s conservative opposition, the People Power Party, traces its roots to forces that led the country’s industrialization. However, Korea’s industrialization was driven largely by a state-led model that, by today’s standards, might be considered interventionist or even progressive. The party’s traditional anti-communist stance has also lost some of its earlier significance following the end of the Cold War and changes in the global order. Since the end of military-backed rule, the party has struggled to cultivate leaders internally, often relying on external figures to secure power. Of the four presidents it has produced since democratization, two were impeached and removed from office. Former President Yoon Suk Yeol repeatedly emphasized “freedom” in his inaugural address, invoking the term 35 times, but his tenure ultimately raised questions about how deeply that value had been internalized.
Korea has undergone discontinuous transformation over the past century. Traditional knowledge and values have often been rendered obsolete within a single generation. Those educated in classical village schools lost relevance as modern education systems emerged. Professors trained in Japanese-era institutions were later overshadowed by younger scholars returning with degrees from the United States and Europe. These ruptures weakened the continuity of knowledge, eroding the authority of senior generations. Individuals trained abroad and firms that adapted foreign models often achieved greater success than those rooted in domestic traditions. In contrast, European societies developed knowledge and institutions cumulatively. Isaac Newton famously remarked that he stood “on the shoulders of giants,” underscoring the incremental nature of intellectual progress. In Korea, however, the space for conservative values has remained limited, as the country’s political origins include a legacy of military coups.
Yet the present moment may call for a renewed role for conservative values. Over the past seven decades, Korea has achieved remarkable economic and social progress. Values such as diligence, reward for effort, educational rigor and respect for social order remain important. However, Korea’s labor practices and regulatory systems have, in some respects, moved too quickly toward advanced economy standards relative to its technological base. Korean workers now compete with younger labor forces in China and Southeast Asia who accept lower wages and longer working hours. Sustaining future prosperity may require a conservative emphasis on preserving and reinforcing these foundational values.
Jang Dong-hyeok, leader of the People Power Party, sits in thought during a press briefing at the National Assembly in Yeouido, Yeongdeungpo District, Seoul, on the morning of Sept. 20, 2025. [NEWS1]
Political parties are pillars of democracy and the source of state power. A balanced party system with a strong opposition is essential to prevent policy excesses and ensure stable development. However, despite its name, the People Power Party currently lacks cohesion and influence. It has struggled to adapt to changing times and has been mired in internal conflict and division, weakening its credibility as a governing alternative.
The social base for conservatism in Korea has not disappeared. What has eroded is the party that claims to represent it. Whether through internal reform or the emergence of a new political force, a stronger conservative opposition is necessary for Korea to achieve more balanced and sustainable development. The future of Korea’s political system may depend on whether such a transformation can take place.
This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.
댓글
0