[Reporter’s Notebook] Politics Needs Political Struggle

It happened at the National Assembly on the 25th. Lawmakers from both the ruling and opposition parties gathered in the rotunda hall in front of the plenary chamber. Although their expressions varied, the atmosphere was solemn. Each held a placard. They faced each other, forming opposing camps. Different voices erupted simultaneously in the same place. "The People Power Party must accept the special prosecutor law!" "Broadcasting tyranny and dictatorship, the Democratic Party must wake up!" The two voices intertwined. Neither side could clearly understand what the other was saying. They shouted even more fiercely as if trying to drown out the opposing camp’s voices. After a while, they dispersed in different directions.

Six days later, on the morning of the 30th, the filibuster (unlimited debate) initiated by the People Power Party to block the 'Broadcasting Four Laws' ended. It lasted about 110 hours since the debate began. The opposition parties, including the Democratic Party, forced the debate to end through a vote. They immediately passed the last bill of the Broadcasting Four Laws submitted to the plenary session, the 'Korea Educational Broadcasting System Act (EBS Act)'. From the protest against the bill submission that started in the rotunda hall to its passage, the ruling and opposition parties made no attempt to find a compromise over the six days. Lawmakers spent the nights filibustering, and the only topic of interest was which lawmaker spoke the longest without rest.

Lee Jung-bok, emeritus professor of political science and diplomacy at Seoul National University, says the core of politics lies in the distribution of power and wealth, which determine quality of life. Therefore, political conflict is essential. Even when dividing a single bean, opinions are exchanged; so naturally, disputes between groups arise when dividing wealth and power. Politics is about fighting with other groups, retreating, compromising, and negotiating to realize one’s intentions, even if only slightly. Politics is not about emotions. It does not mean yielding out of consideration for the other side. You give what you must and take what you can. In this process, alliances and divisions flourish.

However, in the 22nd National Assembly, there is no political conflict. They simply avoid facing each other. Each side tries only to suppress the other and claim victory. Without conflict, there is nothing to negotiate. While politics is a living organism, the 22nd National Assembly is like a plant. Ultimately, only fatigue accumulates. The end of opposition-only bill submissions is inevitably their rejection. This is because even after the president’s veto power is exercised and a re-vote is held, the ruling party cannot secure the two-thirds majority (200 seats). The vicious cycle of the 21st National Assembly is repeating itself. Lawmakers from both sides know this better than anyone. A ruling party lawmaker who participated in the placard protest in front of the plenary chamber confessed, "We went this far to stop the legislative rampage of the huge opposition, but honestly, I feel powerless." Frustration only grows over the unchanging results.

Politics requires political conflict. Belgian political philosopher Chantal Mouffe emphasized 'agonistic consensus,' where multiple forces resolve issues through constant debate and compromise. It is a paradox that political conflict ultimately makes democracy healthier. Raising placards and shouting at the opposing camp is possible. The effort of an all-night filibuster to block a bill is also legitimate. However, politics that suppresses the other side’s voice and aims only for uncompromising victory must disappear.