단상斷想

President Jae-myung Lee named his government the 'National Sovereignty Government'. He put the people first. In fact, President Lee's 'love for the people' is the fundamental reason why the politician Lee Jae-myung has existed until now. The essence of Lee Jae-myung's politics is people first, people's sovereignty. He has always emphasized that he will follow the will of the people whenever he has the opportunity.

However, there is no word as abstract as the word people. What criteria does President Jae-myung Lee use when referring to the people so often? The operating method and levels of the 'people' that President Jae-myung Lee speaks of can be largely divided into several categories.

First, all 50 million citizens as sovereign under the Constitution fall into this category. This is the formal sense of the people. It also includes the standard of practical people who 'together' engage in social reform and political participation. It may also refer to citizens who are angry at injustice and vested interests and follow reasonable common sense. It could also be citizens who are likely to vote for him in the election.

Along with this, the fact is that among the layers of 'people' that President Lee mentions, there are also people who hate or distance themselves from him to death. In particular, if President Lee considers only 'acting citizens' or citizens who support him as sovereign, there is a risk that the remaining silent majority will be treated as non-citizens. This can erode the equal political representation of all citizens, which is a fundamental principle of democracy.

As I have mentioned repeatedly, President Lee Jae-myung is no longer a 'representative' of a specific camp, but the supreme ruler who embraces 'the entire nation' and the subject of national unity. However, if President Lee's word 'people' becomes fixed as a rhetoric referring to 'my side', the opposite side may not be 'people' or even be condemned as 'enemies'.

Recently, if you look at the progressive YouTube channels, they jokingly say, 'Who was the more genuine pro-Lee Jae-myung?' They brag that in the days when it was difficult to even mention the name 'Lee Jae-myung', so-and-so showed their loyalty by 'daring' to mention Lee Jae-myung in public. They jokingly say that anyone who belonged to the same progressive camp but showed even a little bit of a 'watermelon' color or hesitated to mention Lee Jae-myung is not a 'sacred bone pro-Lee Jae-myung'.

Of course, it must have been a joke. However, if the pro-Lee Jae-myung faction continues to show such exclusive and 독선적인 (self-righteous) behavior even after President Lee Jae-myung takes office, President Lee's reforms may be in vain. President Lee may not be, but it seems that there is no room for the 'opposing camp' to infiltrate the 'people' that the pro-Lee Jae-myung faction is talking about.

The person who succeeds in a revolution cannot complete that revolution. Revolution is the language of destruction, but the completion of that revolution must be achieved in the language of construction. Revolutionaries always need an 'enemy' and are accustomed to repeatedly reproducing the 'narrative of struggle' to justify themselves. They are often still intoxicated with the passion and emotions of the masses rather than building and integrating the system. It's like a painkiller to numb reason.

In this regard, it is time for the Democratic Party and its ardent supporters to put down the toast they raised. The party is over, and a stage of cool evaluation and verification awaits. Power is subject to the fate of finiteness, where it must prepare to descend from the moment it reaches its peak. Machiavelli said in The Prince, "It is difficult to acquire new power, but it is even more difficult to maintain it."

In this regard, Lee Jae-myung's "people" must show effort and sincerity that focuses more on the other side, not just his own. The fact that President Lee Jae-myung (58.2%) was lower than former President Moon Jae-in (78.4%) in the first public opinion poll on expectations for state affairs after taking office (Realmeter) released on the 9th means that our society and politics are more severely divided and polarized compared to that time.

This keyword suggests that President Lee Jae-myung's standard of the people, when compared to the past, should place more emphasis on integration and cooperation. So, what kind of governing method should President Lee choose in order to take the path of 'integration'? We will try to find the implications through the differences between Lee Jae-myung's people and Roh Moo-hyun's enlightened citizens.

The people Lee Jae-myung spoke of feel like the sovereign he must follow, but also the object of governance that must be managed and guided. However, the 'enlightened citizens' that former President Roh Moo-hyun spoke of are seen as meaning that citizens should solve problems themselves and play a leading role, rather than being governed by the ruler. Lee Jae-myung's people can be seen as a means of 'selective governance' depending on whether or not they are supporters, but Roh Moo-hyun's enlightened citizens read as comrades and companions who communicate with each other between the powerful and the people.

Of course, the opposition party also uses the word "people" until their mouths are dry, but they view the phrase "Lee Jae-myung's people" even more askew. They criticize that when President Lee Jae-myung says, "I will do as the people wish," it contains political engineering impurity to use the people as tools and means to gain their support.

However, Roh Moo-hyun used the word "citizen" more often than the word "people." Roh Moo-hyun saw 'citizens' themselves as the starting point of politics. The saying, "Democracy is only possible to the level of citizens," presupposes that power is not above citizens. He pointed out that 'citizens' should always be awake to power that is prone to corruption, and that the president should also be checked by awake citizens.

In a way, Lee Jae-myung's "people" and Roh Moo-hyun's "citizens" are just different interpretations, but their orientation towards the people's sovereign politics can be said to be the same. However, if President Lee Jae-myung, after taking office, considers the people who do not support him as subjects of 'enlightenment' and management and pushes ahead with reform tasks, this could lead to significant resistance and division.

For Roh Moo-hyun, citizens were 'the subject who delegated power,' constantly intervening in and monitoring politics, and even trying to question the president's every word. For him, citizens were the essence and starting point of democracy. The president did not dare to rule them. Rather, he was a being who asked them to 'keep me awake.'

On the other hand, for Lee Jae-myung, the people are beings he says he 'represents' in order to gain political legitimacy. He says it is 'the will of the people,' but in the actual political reality, the people can be measured by approval ratings and function like a mass instrumentalized to achieve political goals. The 'people' felt in President Lee Jae-myung's words may seem less like an ideal political entity and more like a source of power that grants political justification.

In the end, Roh Moo-hyun's 'awake citizens' were monitors who reigned over power, while Lee Jae-myung's 'people' are closer to being subjects called upon by power. Some may dismiss this difference as a play on words or a pun. However, since President Lee Jae-myung insisted on using the alias of power as the People's Sovereignty Government, I believe that a clear concept of the 'people' he speaks of and an agreement on social perception must precede it.

We must not vaguely ask them to call it the People's Sovereignty Government and give the people the illusion that the people's sovereignty is clearly being realized. If we only shout for people's sovereignty but still regard the people only as objects of rule, how is that different from the 'enlightenment' of a state of emergency?

Roh Moo-hyun emphasized 'awake citizens,' and he called himself the 'Participatory Government.' This contains a clear shift in perception. If 'popular sovereignty' is about upholding the will of the people from the perspective of the ruler, 'participation' is an active practice in which citizens themselves check power and intervene in politics.

In other words, if popular sovereignty is an ideological declaration and conceptual recognition that goes from top to bottom, national participation can be interpreted as an active intervention and practical form of the people that goes from bottom to top. This is not to find fault with the Lee Jae-myung government's 'National Participation Government,' but rather a minor interference with the hope and expectation that they will clarify their orientation from the start, as they have put popular sovereignty forward as the vision of the regime for the next five years.