Yesterday, Sunday 27 January, I spent the whole afternoon at a discussion meeting on the situation in Korea, particularly in the South, with the main emphasis on the meaning of Ms Park's election as the new President. She is going to be inaugurated in about a month. Those who participated were all Japanese, many of them well acquainted with Korea. Here I will summarize what mainly has been said on the election.
Interestingly much of the discussion was done from the point of why the Opposition candidate, Mr.Moon, could not win, rather than why Ms Park won. Park was not only the first woman to be elected, but also the first person with educational background in science and technology. Park got 1.08 million votes more than Moon, and the first time that there was a disparity of more than one million. The difference was 3.5%. Moon and his Democratic Party made a great effort to make the people to go to the polls, and partly because of that the voting rate was a surprising 75.8%. But it did not help Moon.
Hypothetically it may be said that age-wise those in their 50s voted for Park, and this overwhelmed the voters in their 40s who voted for the Opposition. Questions, however, may be asked why those in the 50s, who were the generation active in the democratization of South Korea, and are being hard hit by the ongoing restructuring, liked to vote for Park? But it was also pointed out that Park was the symbol of the women in the 50s.
Therefore it may be wrong to say, as is often made out, that the elder generation is more conservative and has closed their ranks against the more progressive younger generation backing the Opposition.
Attention has been paid to the withdrawal of Mr.An, the third possible candidate. It was supposed to be in favour of Moon, and the Democratic Party was boasting of the Opposition unity thus supposedly achieved. But not all of An's supporters have voted for Moon.
At the same time it is doubtful if Moon had a clear set of policies. Therefore he might have been in trouble if he had been elected. Even at Gwanju itself, his stronghold, the Democrats are criticized for not having constructed a role model for governance. On the nuclear plants also Moon said something like opposing them, but he did not show any real policy.
Interestingly much of the discussion was done from the point of why the Opposition candidate, Mr.Moon, could not win, rather than why Ms Park won. Park was not only the first woman to be elected, but also the first person with educational background in science and technology. Park got 1.08 million votes more than Moon, and the first time that there was a disparity of more than one million. The difference was 3.5%. Moon and his Democratic Party made a great effort to make the people to go to the polls, and partly because of that the voting rate was a surprising 75.8%. But it did not help Moon.
Hypothetically it may be said that age-wise those in their 50s voted for Park, and this overwhelmed the voters in their 40s who voted for the Opposition. Questions, however, may be asked why those in the 50s, who were the generation active in the democratization of South Korea, and are being hard hit by the ongoing restructuring, liked to vote for Park? But it was also pointed out that Park was the symbol of the women in the 50s.
Therefore it may be wrong to say, as is often made out, that the elder generation is more conservative and has closed their ranks against the more progressive younger generation backing the Opposition.
Attention has been paid to the withdrawal of Mr.An, the third possible candidate. It was supposed to be in favour of Moon, and the Democratic Party was boasting of the Opposition unity thus supposedly achieved. But not all of An's supporters have voted for Moon.
At the same time it is doubtful if Moon had a clear set of policies. Therefore he might have been in trouble if he had been elected. Even at Gwanju itself, his stronghold, the Democrats are criticized for not having constructed a role model for governance. On the nuclear plants also Moon said something like opposing them, but he did not show any real policy.
No comments:
Post a Comment