[Insight & Opinion] The Crumbling Resolve of Conservative Citizens Watching the People Power Party

Everyone works to earn a living. To continuously engage in a particular line of work is called an occupation. It means making a job into one's profession. Professionals are bound by ethics that must be upheld within their community or toward consumers.

Especially in fields that are central to society, there are oaths specific to each profession. Legal professionals swear to uphold the law, realize justice, and perform their duties according to truth and conscience. Medical professionals take the Hippocratic Oath as a code of ethics for doctors. In Christianity, there is the 'Baptismal Oath.' In education, various institutions in different countries require educators to take oaths as well. In the National Assembly, members take an oath at the beginning of their term, pledging to perform their duties with obligation and conscience. Even ordinary office workers maintain a contract (Rule of Engagement) outlining what they must observe during their service.

Given all this, looking back at how the People Power Party lost the presidential election, it was the result of individuals lacking conscience, ethics, and competence taking center stage. From the perspective of conservative free citizens who have supported them, it is a confusing, nauseating, and infuriating situation.

After having made someone president, he failed to accomplish anything properly due to a lack of competence. He could not foresee what might happen, declared martial law, was impeached, and continued to issue negative messages, disrupting the election that occurred because of his own actions.

The two leaders who held party power tarnished intra-party democracy and took the lead in actions that eroded votes, shamelessly displaying themselves. Unlike the perspective of the public or supporters, they seemed unaware of what they had done wrong.

The person who suddenly emerged as a candidate showed no ability to lead the country and instead focused on contrasting his life with that of his competitor. He asked for votes on the grounds that his own life was more admirable than his rival's. The problem is that while the past is important, the standard for judgment should be the future?a fact he overlooked. What is astonishing is that even after losing the election, instead of reflecting or stepping forward to help reform the party, he returned to his daily life, showing himself doing pull-ups and hula hooping the very next day. Whatever the reason, he does not realize that he is not in a position to comfortably return to everyday life after an election defeat. From the perspective of voters (consumers), it is a frustrating sight.

Compared to the Democratic Party, which unites even after suffering sudden and tragic deaths, what about the candidates who lost in the primary? One went to Hawaii, wore a Hawaiian shirt, stood with his wife looking out at the Pacific, and posted a photo on social media, causing people to frown. While regret or anger toward the party is understandable, instead of offering support, he stayed far away and only criticized, showing neither courtesy, responsibility, nor gratitude to long-time supporters. Another, who had served as party leader, continued to pressure the presidential candidate just because their views differed, pretending to offer reluctant support while being absorbed in his own political ambitions.

Those who fail to uphold even the basics required of politicians should not miss the opportunity to step down and self-purify. The new government, born from stepping over such a weakly collapsing opponent, should not undermine the constitutional ideals of the nation even if it pursues left-leaning policies. It is my hope that it will not bankrupt the nation's finances for the sake of future generations, and that it will safeguard the country's international standing.

Kim Hongjin CEO, Work Innovation Lab