[The Editors' Verdict] The Language of Yongsan, the Language of Citizens

Meeting frequently and having conversations does not necessarily mean good communication. Conversely, one cannot conclude that a lack of conversation equates to miscommunication. The issue lies in whether he is using the same language as the other person. If the language is the same?that is, if his worldview aligns with or does not greatly diverge from the other's?then even occasional conversations can enable communication. On the other hand, if not, even meeting several times a day and exchanging words may fail to produce resonance. Would a Korean and a French person talking all day in their respective languages truly communicate?

The prolonged and frustrating political strife surrounding the fact that First Lady Kim Geon-hee received a luxury handbag also involves this principle. Could ordinary citizens have imagined witnessing the shady scene of the First Lady receiving money or goods from an unknown person in a secretive manner? The phrases “If this isn’t a crime, then what is?” and “No matter what, this isn’t something to just overlook” are the most straightforward translations into the “general citizen language.”

The presidential couple steadfastly uses the “Yongsan special language,” saying things like “It was inappropriate but merely exploited by trap journalism and political machinations” or “We cannot be swayed by the political offensives launched by the major opposition party.” It is easy to guess that ambiguous legal logic regarding job relevance and spousal liability predominantly governs their language. Thus, this language reads as rhetoric such as “The law isn’t that simple” or “They don’t understand the law well,” reflecting a “Seocho-dong worldview” that tends to look down rather than up.

[Image source=Yonhap News]

Even though it is not the end of the term, approval ratings firmly stuck around 30% on both sides eloquently demonstrate the fundamental communication barrier caused by the gap in language and worldview. Interpreting this as the price paid for boldly pushing necessary but unpopular measures like increasing medical school admissions feels like they are too far apart. Isn’t it said that politics operates before and after the law? If everything could be done Seocho-dong style, all state affairs could be handled through lawsuits and certified letters. There are many cases where the president, as the highest-ranking political official, becomes trapped in “the law” and causes unhappiness for many.

The prosecution and the investigation review committee have judged that it is difficult to legally indict Mrs. Kim. Unless the prosecution makes a different decision following the “recommendation for indictment” passed by the review committee regarding Mr. Choi Jae-young, the possibility of Mrs. Kim standing trial in this case is currently eliminated. The important question is whether the presidential couple will conclude the matter with a “lawful” judgment. The sight of Mrs. Kim confidently strolling across Mapo Bridge with police officers at this fortuitous moment strongly suggests she has made such a judgment. This may also be the essence of most issues tightening the president’s grip, including the special prosecutor law proposed by Chae Sang-byeong.

Gestures of reflection and apology that go beyond a corresponding level, and bold measures to institutionalize the First Lady’s conduct, are by no means extravagant nor a retreat to political offensives. Even if the opposition party truly acted outrageously and escalated the controversy, the “scene” remembered by the entire nation will not be erased. Will the presidential couple’s attitude change? It seems unlikely, especially since people rarely change and the ruling party leader’s request to talk privately with the two was rejected. The political situation, resembling chewing on a bitter gourd with the special prosecutor’s initiation, unilateral passage, request for reconsideration, and political disappearance, also looks difficult to resolve. Perhaps that is why people say, “Still, the president should be a politician!”