단상斷想

Kim Moon-soo, born in 1951, graduated from Seoul National University with a degree in Business Administration, and was a leading figure in the democratization and labor movements of the 1980s. He once dedicated himself to protecting the rights and interests of workers in the labor field, wielding great influence in the progressive camp. In the mid-1990s, at the recommendation of former President Kim Young-sam, he joined the Democratic Liberal Party (Minja Party), officially entering mainstream politics, and from this point on, he began to transform from a politician from the activist movement into a central figure in the conservative party. He has followed the path that Korean politicians go through. Let's examine whether he became a 'reformer's lotus flower blooming on mud' in his conversion.

Afterwards, Kim Moon-soo solidified his political standing by serving as a three-term member of the National Assembly (representing Sosa-gu, Bucheon-si, Gyeonggi-do) from 1996 to 2006, and accumulated administrative experience by serving as the Governor of Gyeonggi-do from 2006 to 2014. During his time as Governor of Gyeonggi-do, he implemented conservative policies and gradually expanded his influence within the conservative camp. Subsequently, he further strengthened his conservative leanings through opposition to Park Geun-hye's impeachment, strong criticism of the Moon Jae-in administration, and the founding of the Liberty Unification Party, establishing himself as a leading politician in the New Right wing. In the Yoon Suk-yeol administration, he also held key positions such as Chairman of the Economic and Social Development Commission and Minister of Employment and Labor.

Several backgrounds and motivations have contributed to Kim Moon-soo's transformation into a New Rightist. The most direct trigger was joining the Democratic Liberal Party (Minja Party) in 1994 at the recommendation of former President Kim Young-sam. Kim Young-sam recruited a large number of figures from the opposition and activist circles to dilute the image of the military regime's descendants, and Kim Moon-soo also entered mainstream politics following this trend. This is assessed not merely as a change in political alignment, but as a result of the call of power and the motivation to expand influence in real politics. In addition, Kim Moon-soo himself stated that he was influenced by Ahn Byeong-jik, who was his teacher in college, and mentioned that as time passed, he came to realize that his past revolutionary movement was wrong. He expressed his hope that the New Right movement would lead society in the right direction, and showed an attitude of self-reflection on the past.

However, Kim Moon-soo's change of course and political 행보 has been criticized. There have been many criticisms that he has been strengthening his conservative and far-right stance in opposition to Park Geun-hye's impeachment, participation in far-right rallies, and the creation of the Liberty Unification Party, showing 행보 that conflicts with democratic values. Kim Moon-soo's relationship with Jeon Kwang-hoon is also closely linked to his image of political betrayal. Kim Moon-soo frequently appeared at far-right Christian groups and Taegeukgi rallies led by Pastor Jeon Kwang-hoon, and worked with Jeon Kwang-hoon as a key speaker at conservative and far-right rallies. The alliance with Jeon Kwang-hoon was interpreted as Kim Moon-soo's intention to solidify his political position by joining forces with far-right forces, which further highlighted the gap with his existing progressive image. The close relationship with Jeon Kwang-hoon drew criticism that Kim Moon-soo had not simply moved to the right, but had also accepted a far-right line. I don't know if this is where he started to show a mentality that went beyond common sense as a politician. How did a pseudo-religious leader become a major alliance for politicians in the Korean political scene?

Kim Moon-soo's change in political line is receiving strong criticism as 'betrayal' beyond a simple conversion. Once called the godfather of the labor movement and a renowned figure in the opposition, he is now established as a symbolic figure of the conservative camp, especially the New Right. Regarding this change, Kim Moon-soo himself claimed to belong to the 'most reformist party,' but the dominant interpretation is that his desire for power and influence, and the recognition of the limitations within the activist circle, actually played a role. His betrayal is not just a change in political attitude, but a result of changing values and moral norms, causing betrayal and disappointment to many. In particular, he is being labeled a 'traitor' who has abandoned his beliefs and ideals, especially by his former comrades.

Moreover, Kim Moon-soo strongly criticized the Constitutional Court during Yoon Seok-yeol's impeachment trial, and expressed his support for Yoon Seok-yeol by publicly stating that he wanted the former president to return. During the presidential primary, Kim Moon-soo argued that 'Han Dong-hoon is responsible for the impeachment' regarding Yoon Seok-yeol's impeachment and illegal martial law controversy, and that he should apologize to former President Yoon Seok-yeol. He emphasized that the relationship between Han Dong-hoon and Yoon Seok-yeol is 'more than a brotherly relationship,' revealing his personal and political trust in Yoon Seok-yeol. Kim Moon-soo took the most active stance on unification with competing preliminary candidates such as Han Duck-soo during the party's primary process. He repeatedly emphasized his will to pursue unification, saying, "Whoever comes out, we must unify," and through this, he succeeded in gaining the trust and support of party members and became the final presidential candidate.

On May 3, 2025, Kim Moon-soo was elected as the People Power Party's presidential candidate, but just a week later, on May 10, his nomination was canceled by a decision of the Emergency Response Committee, and Han Duck-soo was replaced as the candidate. Until just before the candidate change, Kim Moon-soo recorded 56.53% of the votes in the party's primary, but it was predicted that his actual presidential vote rate would be low due to concerns about his competitiveness in the general election, internal party conflicts, and division of support within the conservative camp. Fortunately for Kim Moon-soo, he was able to maintain his position as a presidential candidate by party members, but even in opinion polls, more than 80% of respondents agreed on the need for unification, indicating a great deal of skepticism about Kim Moon-soo's competitiveness in the general election. I believe there was a widespread perception that Han Duck-soo was one with the insurrectionist Yoon Seok-yeol, and there was public anger at the situation in which he continued to act as an incumbent.

The conflict between Kim Moon-soo and Han Duck-soo appears on the surface to be a competition for the presidential candidate position in the conservative camp, but in reality, it is merely a product of the power struggle and line competition within the conservative camp. Their conflict is rooted more deeply in individual desires for power and factional interests than in differences in the direction or policy vision of Korean conservative politics. First of all, the practical difference between Kim Moon-soo and Han Duck-soo is insignificant in that they both fail to significantly deviate from the existing paradigm of conservative politics. This is where one cannot erase the perception that human politics is a pathetic waste of taxes.

Han Duck-soo, a former bureaucrat, served as Prime Minister of the Yoon Seok-yeol administration, while Kim Moon-soo, who came from the student movement, has been active in conservative parties for a long time. Both of them do not deviate significantly from the typical framework of conservative politics in terms of policies such as a neoliberal economic line, a pro-American diplomatic stance, and a hard-line policy toward North Korea. Rather, their conflict stems from a personal ambition to build a political landscape centered on themselves while sharing the same conservative ideology. The politics of the future should be institutionalized so that artificial intelligence can rationally calculate the organization and budget to prevent unnecessary waste of organizations and taxes. However, we must prevent artificial intelligence from coveting human emotions and feelings through coding.

Moreover, their conflict has devolved into a partisan battle for power, failing to offer solutions or visions for the fundamental problems facing Korean society—inequality, low birth rate, aging population, energy crisis, climate change, etc. Kim Moon-soo tried to rally existing supporters by touting his relationship with former President Yoon Seok-yeol, and Han Deok-soo sought to expand the center by advocating a more moderate conservatism, but neither presented a concrete blueprint for the future of Korean society. Because, as a member of the insurrection party, Han Deok-soo is a man who has absolutely no brain to imagine the practical work of national self-esteem, such as presenting the future of Korea, because he is the one who is instructed to protect and save their ringleaders.

In particular, the surprise candidate replacement at 3 a.m. clearly demonstrated the lack of principles and disorder within the conservative camp, and Kwon Young-se and Kwon Seong-dong, who replaced Kim Moon-soo, who was elected through the party's democratic procedures, with a resolution by an abnormal organization called the Emergency Response Committee, themselves undermined the values ​​of the rule of law, principles, and procedural legitimacy advocated by the conservative camp. In the first place, in this country where it is surprising that the People's Power exists as a political party after the insurrection, there are concerns about how transparent the 6.3 election will be in this situation where it continues to commit deformed and habitual acts of internal insurrection until the end.

Conservative voters believed that there would be little policy differentiation between Kim Moon-soo and Han Duck-soo, regardless of who became the candidate, and rather worried that their internal conflict would only weaken the conservative camp's presidential competitiveness. In fact, as the combined approval ratings of the two figures continued to fall short of the opposition candidate's approval rating in polls, public opinion within the conservative bloc grew in favor of "unifying quickly, no matter who it is." In the end, the conflict between Kim Moon-soo and Han Duck-soo is nothing more than a power struggle within the conservative camp, not a competition of true political vision. They all seem to fundamentally follow similar conservative ideologies, but they have resulted in dividing the conservative camp for their own political gain. Meaningless internal strife shows that the core of conservative politics lies in money and power, hindering innovation and causing voters to turn away.

The bigger problem is that the political drama staged by their conflict has replaced healthy policy competition for solving fundamental problems in Korean society. Pressing issues such as the economic crisis, social polarization, and low birth rate and aging population have been pushed to the back burner, and instead, only a wasteful debate about who is more loyal to Yoon Suk-yeol and who has more competitiveness in the main election has dominated the political space. This ultimately exemplifies that Korean politics has not escaped from a power struggle centered on individuals. The conflict between Kim Moon-soo and Han Duck-soo is a stark example of the current state of South Korea's self-proclaimed conservative, objectively far-right politics, and symbolically shows the reality of Korean politics that has degenerated into a power grab rather than genuine policy competition.

In this situation, the Democratic Party is thrilled and can't keep their mouths shut. However, if they don't come to their senses, they will have to experience another incident like the attempted assassination of Lee Jae-myung with smuggled long-range guns and the rumor that the election commission tampered with absentee ballot boxes. In fact, Koreans are a people who don't even realize they've lost their children, let alone fixing the barn after losing the cow. Chronic low posture, servility, and flunkeyism have become deeply ingrained unconsciousness among politicians and the general public. Even with the Kim & Chang and Toyotomi Hideyoshi, and Cho Hee-dae's legal corruption scandals coming to light, the Democratic Party, which simply enjoys the opponent's confusion and expects victory, will not be able to enjoy this festival for long if it fails to present concrete solutions and a future vision for the real problems facing Korean society.

Enjoy the limitations of modern politics, where humans govern humans, to the fullest, but keep in mind that this is a system that can never be enjoyed for long, and the conservatives' infighting should be used as a turning point to return to policy-oriented politics, and through this, Korean politics should be able to move away from personality-centered, wasteful conflicts and become an opportunity to substantially improve the lives of the people.