I thought it might be worth sharing the recent South Korean experience with
elections in light of the current discussion about U.S. electoral politics and
strategy.
As some of you might know, the National Assembly election in April produced a
major shakeup, with the Democratic Labor Party becoming the third largest party
in the assembly. It is a left-liberal party, although its base is largely
drawn from activists on the left.
The success of the DLP had a lot to do with a new election law which allowed
people for the first time to vote not only for candidates for also for a party.
The candidate selection filled about 65 percent of the seats and the party
list voting the remainder. The DPL won 10 seats, 2 based on voting for
individuals (which took place in heavily working class communities with strong
labor union support) and 8 seats based on the party voting. At the time of the
election the DLP was running with about 13 percent support in the polls. The
DLP now has about 25 percent support.
The DLP began in 2000 and ran a candidate for president and also candidates for
national assembly seats. They did very poorly in the voting. The DLP is
backed/supported by the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions (KCTU) but the
party did poorly even in areas where the KCTU was strong. This time, thanks to
the party list process, the party did quite well and now has a position within
the national assembly. Thus the reform, which was ironically pushed by the two
competing mainstream parties, turned out to work to the advantage of the left.
Without that reform it is unlikely that the DLP would have done any better this
time.
There are now very important debates going on in South Korea about how the party
should use its position in the National Assembly and its relationship to the
KCTU. The party won with strong student and middle class support in terms of
the party list voting. So, one issue is whether the party should dedicate
itself to organizing within the working class, and if so, in what relationship
to the KCTU. Should it rely on the KCTU to organize its members or should the
DLP form its own regional organizations and directly recruit? The KCTU
formally supports the DLP, but in the past it was not that interested in seeing
the DLP actually engage in militant politics for fear that it would complicate
its own efforts to consolidate its position within the society.
Another related issue is whether the party should actually set itself a target
of winning more votes in the next election or just using its presence to force
discussions of issues of concern to working people. Related to this issue, is
the question of how the party should work with the other two main established
parties, the more conservative Grand National Party (roughly like the U.S.
republican party) which has 121 seats and the more liberal Uri Party (a newly
formed and complex mixture that is at balance more liberal then the U.S.
democratic party but certainly not left) which has 152 seats. Should it seek
to align with the Uri party to achieve legislative victories or should it stake
out its own more radical positions? For example, right now the DLP strong
opposes the Korean presence in Iraq, with the Grand National Party supporting
it and the Uri party weakly also in favor. (For point of reference there are
two other parties which scored below the DLP, both of which are more
conservative then the Uri party.)
And then there are always organizational issues. The DLP passed a law that says
that those in the national assembly cannot hold positions of power in the DLP
itself. Unfortunately some of the strongest members of the DLP will be in the
national assembly thus creating leadership uncertainties. And finally, there
are issues like the following: there are leaders of the Peasants Association is
asking the DLP to change its name because they do not feel that they can be
equal partners with a grouping with Labor in its name.
One thing that was clear to me from my recent visit to South Korea is that the
election victory of the DLP greatly cheered the left. People there are feeling
optimistic that they can reach people and engage with them on critical
political issues. This sense of optimism was a refreshing change from the
discouraged feelings I experienced on my visits the previous few years.
One reason worth mentioning besides the victory is that there are now new
independent media sources. Something like 50 percent of South Koreans have
access to high speed internet connections. There are now independent web
newspapers. People are increasingly not reading the mainstream print media and
reading these newspapers. The current president has even given exclusive
interviews to these web newspapers; he is strongly opposed by the mainstream
print media.
Marty Hart-Landsberg
