The State of democracy U.S |BlindArticle

30 Years of Democracy, Time of Despair

Next year marks the 30th year after democracy in 1987. A generation has passed since democratization, and there are still many voices of despair saying that democracy in Korea is poor. Looking back from 1987 to a generation ago and considering the Korean politics of 1957, it is true that we have a feeling of self-doubt about what on earth we did after democratization.

Before 1987, until the April 19, which led to the president's night, the reform of the cabinet system and the 5.16 military coup, the dictatorship of Yushin and the fierce struggle for democracy, the death of the president and another coup, the 5.18 democratic struggle, and the June 1987 protest A generation is literally memorable for the hard work and sacrifices for democracy and the thrilling victory.

The history after 1987 is not so moving. After democratization, the protagonist of the coup won the election again, and the first civilian government was born out of the alliance with the military dictatorship. The first peaceful regime change since the establishment of the government was only possible due to the foreign exchange crisis and regionalist coalition, which faced a state default situation. The subsequent administration led to Bundang, where it was impossible to say that the same forces had the authority, the president was impeached, and after failing to recreate the regime, the former president faced an unfortunate situation of suicide.

Since then, conservative governments have entered the country twice in a row, but the previous government has been evaluated as an unconventional government while promoting the Four Major Rivers Project, and it has been revealed one after another that the resource diplomacy, which was criticized, is a fuss stained with corruption. In the government that followed, the daughter of the dictator became president, and when children died at sea, the government was worried about the report that would go up to the president, and the broadcast became the government's maid, and the freedom of the press and democracy indexes were falling.

'Democracy' is not good politics' Have

we did something badly wrong over the past 30 years? It's not like that. Democracy after democratization is like that.

Before 1987 we had democracy sacred. Democracy was considered a synonym for good politics. I thought everything would go well once I became a democracy. Politics, economy, society, and democracy now work and believe that problems will be solved quickly. But we seem to have been betrayed by democracy. Is that so?

There will be many answers saying that it is not. "Democracy has not been completed, has deteriorated in quality, socio-economic democracy has been further retreated due to deepening inequality and inheritance, and as seen in the case of the National Intelligence Service's election intervention, procedural democracy is now threatened in a deceptive form. Is again democracy." Is that so?

Modern democracy basically presupposes politics according to the opinion of the majority. Of course, there are numerous theories about what the majority opinion is, how it should be determined, and whether sufficient exchange of opinions and homogeneity of information have been secured before that, but following the majority opinion only provides important justification in democratic decision-making. Must still be.

We have elected all governments after democratization by this principle, and all governments after that are legitimate governments until it is too early to be overthrown. For example, even if all of the suspicions related to the NIS' intervention in the presidential election are true, the government is democratically justified to some extent if the majority of the people do not want the President's immediate need.

No, how is the government that has ruled illegally? Because democratic legitimacy goes beyond legality, violence can sometimes overthrow the existing government and constitution, and the ruling powers can be justified. Isn't the revolution right? Violence is often justified according to what it claims. And in democracy, there is no subject that gives legitimacy to violence other than'the majority of people'.

In short, democracy is basically an imperfect political ideology, and there is no such thing as a complete version of it. It's not synonymous with good politics. Democracy is nothing but an agreement on controversial propositions that governing according to the will of the majority people rather than the few in power is in many ways good, and in democracy, as much as good politics, bad politics is possible.

Therefore, we are not betrayed by democracy, but we are just beginning to see the face of democracy.

We Are Still Newlyweds

Democracy is like marriage. When you are in a relationship, you love someone to die, and you want to be with that person forever, and if you do that, it seems that happiness will flow, but where do you live?

Just as dating and marriage are different, so is democracy and democracy. Democracy takes time just as it takes time to adjust to the institution of marriage after burning love has cooled down. It seems like everything will be done once we get married, but couples who have lived in the world know that after marriage, life with someone real begins.

We are like newlyweds just married. If we turn history into human life, we are looking at the third year of marriage. The last three years before the goal of marriage were tumultuous, but looking back at the three years after the marriage that was won through hardships and adversities, there are times when I wonder why I got married.

Marriage is not happiness. We can never be happy if we continue to fantasize about marriage, if we only envy other couples on the outside and pessimism about my marriage. There are differences, but everyone has problems. The same goes for democracy.

Marriage is your goal until you get married, but marriage doesn't solve everything. Rather, there are a lot of new problems, problems that would never have arisen if we had not been married. It's not a matter of how you squeeze toothpaste or your habit of drinking water and rinsing cups.

How to raise the child, what school to send the child to, how much pocket money will be given to parents, how to balance the expenses for parents and children, how to balance the income and expenses of the machine, and buy a car. Whether to use public transport more, if you buy a car, whether to buy a light car or a medium-sized car, or whether to take a loan to buy a house. And what kind of life my husband and wife would like to be remembered in the future?

Democracy doesn't solve these problems on its own. No matter how good a couple may have a democratic conversation, answers to these questions cannot be easily obtained. These are the decisions of two loved ones, but what about in a world where so many people are tangled up? It is a tremendous thing to live a lifetime together just because there is love to live with

democracy

, to meet people who live in the world, and to make love that does not know how long it will last. It's worth doing. And the greatest driving force behind marriage is trying to respect, believe, and love each other.

That's what our society has lost right now. Without trust and love for each other and the idea that each other lives together, democracy is useless for any mate. I'm sure, democracy won't work.

There is also a democracy when there is a community. It is not a community where only me and my baby need to live well, everyone goes on their own path of life, and they only need to make a lot of money whether they are cursing or breaking the law. Just as there are people in hell, we don't call it a hell community.