(EDITORIAL from the Korea Times on Jan. 30)

Labor Party's rebirth
Progressives should not just protest but produce policies

Glum reflection is overwhelming rousing cheers among the members of the
Democratic Labor Party, which celebrates its 10th anniversary today.

Nothing strange about it: Even in its short, decade-long history, the elder and
larger of the nation's two progressive ??? or leftist ??? parties already seems
to be an anticlimax with its parliamentary seats halved from a peak of 10 in 2004
and its support rate remaining in the single-digit range.
The biggest reason for this rapid setback is the secession of the New Progressive
Party from the DLP over their differences in ideological priority between
``independence'' and ``equality'' ??? how to view North Korea in other words ???
a time-old bone of contention among progressives here.
We believe the time has long past for the DLP to keep turning a blind eye to
various problems in North Korea, including the serious human rights violations in
the reclusive country, either because of their similarity in socialist goals or
because the North Koreans are ``also our brethren,'' as some DLP officials say.
No progressive parties in the world would condone such brutal oppression of
individuals by an authoritarian state.
If politics is about how to improve people's lives, however, the fundamental
cause of DLP's decline is its inability to emerge as a political group that can
replace its larger and more or less centrist counterparts, by presenting its own
policies on major national issues. This is not to say the DLP has done nothing in
this regard, as its free education and free heath care policies have been
reflected in part on government moves toward lowering school tuition and medical
bills.
Still this appears far from sufficient to completely shake off the DLP's image as
a party that always protests but does not produce its own alternatives. So much
so that the DLP has come to stand at the center of the nation's much-ridiculed
parliamentary disorder and inefficiency, widely caricatured by its leader, Kang
Ki-kap, wearing Korea's traditional outer coat and long beard, stamping his feet
on the table at the office of the National Assembly secretary-general to protest
the majority party's legislative high-handedness.
Admittedly, Korea is one of the most difficult countries in the world in which to
run a progressive party, in part because of its past history marked by one of the
most horrible civil wars between capitalists and communists, and because of its
present reality, in which every individual is struggling against all others in
their desperate efforts to move up the ladder of social mobility.
That is an ironic reminder that this society needs fraternal and egalitarian
political force more than any other unless Koreans want to forever live in a
jungle in which only the fittest can survive.
So there is abundant room for the existence ??? if not the prosperity anytime
soon ??? of political parties like the DLP and NPP. Their eventual reunion will
be both inevitable and desirable but not immediately easy, considering their
still wide difference of views. The first step toward a second birth will be
electoral solidarity, and its first major test will be the June 2 local
elections.
The two progressive parties should try to field a single candidate between
themselves, and even cooperate with ``reformist (center-of-left) parties,'' such
as the main opposition Democratic Party, whenever possible. The DLP ought to be
reborn as a party which cares most about the people's livelihood.
In the process, it should remember at least two things: Even many of the DLP's
supporters do not expect it to come to power in another decade or so, and most
voters showed far greater interest in the DLP's policies on school lunch programs
and temporary workers than in peace regimes on the Korean Peninsula or the
abolition of the anti-communist National Security Law.
(END)

Delete & Prev | Delete & Next