South Korean protests show maturing democracy

Seoul, South Korea, June 20.— Democracy essentially means that a nation’s citizens have the power to decide how their political system will operate. In other words, their collective voice shapes their democracy. There are two types of democracy, depending on how the people’s power is exercised: representative, or indirect democracy and participatory, or direct democracy.

It is clear that a representative democracy has been considered to function as the trusted main framework in which the South Korean people exercise their political power, by choosing their political leaders who will act on their behalf. In contrast, the participatory democracy system has been traditionally considered limited, because citizens tend to pursue their own self-interests within this kind of system.

However, the favorable view of representative democracy has recently weakened as social circumstances have changed. Korean people have matured into more truly democratic members of their society who are willing to pursue the common good, thanks to education and accumulating experience within the democratic environment.

Without any additional means to control the politicians’ power except for democratic elections, lack of policy restraint and a low level of political responsibility are inevitable. It was natural that Korean people could clearly see that their political elites have become less attentive to their demands and shown themselves to care more about their own political interests than the needs of their citizens.
...

Human rights activist Peter Tatchell, in a column in the British newspaper The Guardian, pointed out that direct-action democracy – participatory democracy – arises as the only option left to people when politicians show they do not care about the demands of their people and when they break their election commitments. Tatchell advocates the use of direct action, claiming it is an effective way of improving human rights and social justice, as shown by Mahatma Gandhi, Sylvia Pankhurst and Martin Luther King, who successfully adopted it.

However, it appears that such participatory democracy can cause some problematic side effects. Because it usually involves participants in substantial numbers, who may demonstrate provocative behavior as they try to maximize their political appeal, it is quite likely to run the risk of breaching public order. However, this danger can be averted.

Mature democratic citizens, in an attempt to justify their political action as it impacts on a society, may choose to exercise self-regulation to keep peace and order. This has been shown in the Korean people’s candlelight protests. They demonstrated their prudence and responsible citizenship by planning ahead carefully in order to avoid infringing any laws when they decided to take to the streets for the nighttime protests.
...

It is true that the representative system plays a major role in driving democracy. However, it has increasingly revealed its own limitations and weaknesses and, as a result, promoted public desire to choose more direct methods to shape political decisions. Therefore, such direct-action democracy is praiseworthy, especially when it operates with a moderate degree of self-regulation.

In this regard, the emerging participatory democracy is a natural and acceptable social development ...

[ read full text ]