Home > Opinion > Meanwhile

The 'me' era: From 'Squid Game' to Korean sports

Published: 10 Jan. 2025, 00:01

Song Ji-hoon

The author is a sports team reporter of the JoongAng Ilbo.

The second series of Netflix's “Squid Game” continues the harrowing narrative of contestants engaging in life-and-death games to win a prize of up to 45.6 billion won ($31.2 million). Survivors, at the end of each round, are given the opportunity to determine their fate by voting. They must choose whether to continue the perilous games to increase the jackpot or to end the challenge and distribute the accumulated prize money equitably among the remaining participants.

The internal conflicts experienced by voters serve as a central theme in season two. The “correct answer” seems obvious to everyone involved: halting the games immediately to prevent further casualties and sharing the prize money fairly. Yet, when the time comes to cast their votes, individual dilemmas take center stage. As continuing the games results in more deaths, it simultaneously increases the prize money — and, by extension, each participant’s potential share. Caught between personal financial struggles — whether repaying debts or imagining an easier fresh start — many end up pressing the blue circle button to proceed. Ironically, the principle of majority rule in these votes often prioritizes “me” over “us.”

A striking parallel can be drawn between these fictional voting scenes and the ongoing elections for heads of various sports federations under the Korean Sport & Olympic Committee. In these elections, candidates and voters alike often seem to act with a “me first” mentality. Some federation heads, despite past controversies during their tenure, insist on running for re-election, claiming that the ultimate decision rests with the voters. Meanwhile, candidates vying to challenge these incumbents frequently refuse to consolidate their efforts, even at the risk of splitting the vote. Some voters, for their part, unabashedly approach multiple campaigns asking, “What will you do for me if I secure votes for you?” It’s a textbook display of “it has to be me.”

There are, however, intriguing deviations from this pattern. In both “Squid Game” season two and the federation elections, attempts emerge to challenge and reform perceived unfairness. In the drama, contestants actively rebel against the organizers. In the elections, procedural issues such as the voting timeline and rules have led to calls for change, including legal challenges seeking to halt the elections through injunctions. These efforts represent a noteworthy attempt to rationally revise long-accepted norms and practices.

How far these election reforms might go remains uncertain. However, one thing is clear: Unless the core principle of “maximizing the collective benefit” is restored, procedural changes alone are unlikely to bring about a fundamental transformation. Much like the contestants in “Squid Game,” who repeatedly vote to “continue the games” as long as the temptation of a 45.6 billion won jackpot looms, the participants in these elections may continue prioritizing personal gains over collective progress.

Translated using generative AI and edited by Korea JoongAng Daily staff.