Weight of history

When voters head to the ballot boxes on Dec. 19, they will be thinking just as much about dead presidents as the new one.

With computer software guru and independent hopeful Ahn Cheol-soo withdrawing ahead of Monday’s registration deadline, the presidential race has turned into a showdown between Park Geun-hye, the candidate of the conservative ruling party, Saenuri, and opposition challenger Moon Jae-in of the Democratic United Party (DUP).

For voters, it will be difficult to choose between Park and Moon when just relying on the plans they have announced for the next five years.

Despite their lack of separation in policies, with both Park and Moon pivoting toward centralist politics, the political spectrum of their supporters couldn’t be more polarized.

That’s because both Park and Moon compensate for their inability to create new values by borrowing the identities of old leaders.

Park, 60, fully embraces the memories of her father, late military strongman Park Chung-hee, whose enforcement of aggressive, export-oriented industrialization strategies in the 1960s and 70s produced a magnitude of changes that took a whole century for European economies.

However, the elder Park is remembered equally for political oppression and bloody suppression of civilians, a dual reputation that has been cemented in Korean minds since he was shot dead by in 1979 by his own spy chief.

One big test of history for Park is how best she can define her views about her father’s place in history. Will she make a flat-out denial of her father’s dark legacy and be apologetic?

Or will she keep a straight face and declare that she is her father’s daughter?

By all indications, she will likely take a stance somewhere between the two but what would she do if Moon pressed her during a televised debate?

Moon promotes himself as the heir of the late Roh Moo-hyun, the last DUP member to unpack his bags at Cheong Wa Dae. Throughput his political life, Moon has been a close confidant of Roh, having worked for him as a presidential aide for a prolonged period, and willingly carrying his legacy since the former president leapt to his death in 2009.

It bears further watching whether it will prove a wise decision for Moon to continue to remind voters of Roh, lionized by liberal voters for his tragic death in spite of the shebang of neo-liberalist policies pursued during his government that is now blamed for widening inequality.

By no means are voters satisfied with the friend of a former president as their new president, if all he can offer is a rehash of what Roh did.

If the DUP’s disappointing performance in the April parliamentary elections is any indication, voters will be influenced more by current issues rather than emotional attachment or detachment to yesteryear presidents. The Saenuri Party has worked to build its support through policies and spending plans tailored for each region. The DUP has spent most of its efforts bashing the current Lee Myung-bak government and putting old video footage of Roh on constant playback.

While Park and Moon are more than willing to debate memories and histories, they have yet to show the intellectual sophistication and fortitude to navigate the country out of its state of mediocrity.

These are obviously critical times for Korea’s future. The economy is deep into its inevitable transition from a sprinter to plodder. Widening inequality and evaporating social mobility shows that happiness created from economic growth is now fully governed by the laws of diminishing returns.

Add that to the challenges of a population aging in dog years and it’s clear that Korea’s next president will have their work cut out for them.

Neither Park nor Moon appears to be inspiring confidence in their leadership at this point as they continue to mix lavish slogans with unspecific plans.

Park credits herself with leading a new breed of conservative politics that better represents the interest of working class Koreans. Moon promises to combat inequality without hurting economic growth. They both are accused of selling the silly idea that their governments will be able to tax like small ones and spend like big ones.

We are talking crabs and crawfish here, as the old Korean saying goes. <The Korea Times/Kim Tong-hyung>