Home > Opinion > Columns

Populism's ugly course

Published: 09 Oct. 2025, 00:01

Jang Deok-jin

The author is a professor of sociology at Seoul National University.

Every holiday brings a flood of greeting texts from politicians, many of them little more than spam. Numbers scraped from name cards end up on bulk lists, and most messages arrive from people the recipient has never met. Still, a few stand out. This Chuseok, a senior People Power Party official texted: “Leave Jung Chung-rae and Choo Mi-ae to me, and enjoy the holiday.” Jung Chung-rae is a former chair of the National Assembly’s Legislation and Judiciary Committee and now the Democratic Party leader, and Choo Mi-ae is the committee’s current chair. The line was sharp, if uncomfortable, and it captured the irritation many voters feel.

Until the holiday began, the committee’s breakneck pace had driven public fatigue, and it is expected to resume right after. Even the president could not stop it. In earlier administrations, it was hard to imagine ruling party heavyweights burning through presidential approval to charge ahead. However, they watched President Lee Jae Myung succeed by relying on a fervent base. Politicians have learned that, in today’s politics, abandoning the middle to serve the party’s hard core can be a winning strategy. With local elections only eight months away, and some already thinking, “Why not me for president one day?” even the presidential office may struggle to rein them in. By now, the Democratic Party’s hard line is difficult to separate from talk of a lame duck.

Choo Mi-ae (left) of the Democratic Party, elected chair of the Legislation and Judiciary Committee at a plenary session of the National Assembly in Yeouido, Seoul, on Aug. 21, leaves the chamber and greets Democratic Party leader Jung Chung-rae. [YONHAP]

For ordinary voters, the discomfort is not about that theory. It is the feeling that leaders shake the foundations of democracy for political gain. The current administration displays many hallmarks of populist politics.

First, it claims the “people’s will” should outrank formal rules while employing extraordinary maneuvers in the Assembly. The most transparent case was a parliamentary hearing pushed around the Supreme Court. The Legislation and Judiciary Committee, led by Choo Mi-ae, sought to summon Chief Justice Jo Hee-de and sitting justices to probe an unsubstantiated rumor that, before the presidential election, Jo tried to block Lee Jae Myung’s victory. There was no evidence for the allegation. Institutions exist to prevent arbitrary reinterpretations like this.

Second, competing views on major issues are brushed aside, and a single interpretation is pressed instead. When leaders insist that suppressing “insurrection” remains the nation’s top priority, asking whether the insurrection has already been quelled becomes taboo.

Third, as the government reorganisation bill shows, civil servants and policy experts are cast as a distrusted establishment that pursues private interests. Little is said about how much Korea’s economic rise owed to their service, or how expertise will be mobilised when it is most needed.

These are textbook traits of populism. What makes them more consequential is that they proceed lawfully in the National Assembly, the core institution of representative democracy. Scholars therefore describe populism as “using democracy to hollow out democracy.”

The Legislation and Judiciary Committee sits at the center of this tension. Jung Chung-rae, a former chair now leading the Democratic Party, and Choo Mi-ae, the current chair, show how the body’s power has become a partisan fulcrum. In recent weeks, the committee has pushed through contentious bills despite objections from the opposition People Power Party and amid procedural disputes. Critics argue the committee is stretching its remit to force through measures that should receive fuller deliberation or broader consensus.

Populism threatens democracy in several ways. It mimics a democratic form while seeking to bypass representative institutions in the name of popular sovereignty. Direct democracy is often presented as a superior model, yet it undermines confidence in constitutional procedures and concentrates allegiance on a single leader. President Lee, as party chief, often championed more direct participation.

Populism also defers structural reforms the country actually needs and prioritises short-term giveaways, notably cash benefits. And it turns politics from a forum for planning the nation’s long-term course into a risky spectacle of anger. Online video hosts berate veteran lawmakers on camera, while scuffles on the Assembly floor appear almost daily.

Korea’s political problems have undergone fundamental changes in the past decade, and the solutions must change accordingly. Many long-debated fixes have lost their effect. Some promote deliberative democracy, but experiments under the Moon Jae-in administration showed that proposals the president did not support had little meaning under majoritarian rules, even when citizen panels were convened with care.

With key witnesses — including Chief Justice Jo Hee-de — absent, a parliamentary hearing on alleged election interference by the chief justice proceeds at the National Assembly’s Legislation and Judiciary Committee on Sept. 30. [YONHAP]

Others blame social media and call for stricter regulation of these platforms. Social media certainly plays a role. Yet, as seen in moves to abolish the Korea Communications Commission and create a Broadcasting, Media and Communications Commission, “platform regulation” is unlikely to check populism. It risks becoming another instrument of it, aimed at referees rather than players.

A third view urges the restoration of strong party politics and the addition of parliamentary features. That argument once carried weight, but when the ruling party can outpace the president and barrel ahead, its force weakens. Without incentives to build coalitions across factions, the logic of mobilising the faithful wins out.

If none of these approaches works, history’s judgment is all that remains. World history shows what happens to countries that follow this road to the end.

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.