[Column] The Reason Why Yoon Hee-sook's Speech Resonated with the Public

[Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Wondara] Yoon Hee-sook, a member of the Future United Party, has set the political world on fire with her '5-minute speech.' Unlike the opposition's usual harsh denunciations and loud voices, her 'refreshing' logic pinpointing the ruling party's blind spots increased its volatility. Even former Dongyang University professor Jin Joong-kwon praised it, saying, "The fact that conservatism is upgrading in that way itself means Korean society has taken a step forward."

As Yoon's remarks heated up online, ruling party members like Park Beom-gye and Yoon Joon-byung tried to counter her arguments over the weekend but faced backlash. Park was criticized for his 'strange intonation,' regional disparagement controversies, and the revelation that he owns multiple houses, leading to a flood of critical comments. Yoon, who sparked tenants' anger by advocating 'the praise of monthly rent,' defended herself on the 3rd, saying, "It is inappropriate to say that jeonse (key money deposit lease) is good and monthly rent is evil," but failed to quell the flames. Ultimately, the ruling party was caught off guard by Yoon's 5-minute speech without properly diagnosing public sentiment. It is not a matter of blaming anyone. Yet, they continued to misfire by shifting the blame onto the opposition.

The United Party appears highly encouraged. While praising Yoon's speech as a 'great speech,' they deliberately ignore the multi-homeowner issue that the public is pointing out. Is Yoon's sharp criticism really limited to the ruling party? Yoon, who was a multi-homeowner, sold her house in Sejong City and became a single homeowner, then criticized the monthly rent issue from the perspective of a tenant renting with jeonse. Whether right or wrong, she took the practical step of disposing of her property. However, Joo Ho-young, the United Party floor leader, called the ruling party's real estate policy 'communism,' fueling a 'colorism' controversy. He also countered by questioning why owning two houses should be treated as a crime. This resulted in the party undermining the points gained from Yoon's remarks while sitting idle.

The essence of Yoon's speech is not that the United Party did well and thus gained public sympathy. The public is also watching that the United Party itself did not follow Yoon's remarks with any self-reflective criticism. The ruling party requires even greater introspection. It is a time when both ruling and opposition parties need lessons in empathy and critical logic that meet the public's expectations.