단상斷想

In Korean society, the group called the so-called elite privileged class has long justified and reproduced their status by dominating the network of core social power such as politics, economy, media, law, and academia. This reality, in which every country maintains a pyramid-shaped class system, is the same regardless of East or West, past or present, and only the degree of exploitation differs. They accumulate 'symbolic capital' through their background, education, and professional position, and maintain their vested interests by leveraging social influence.

However, in the recent Korean political landscape, the rise of President Lee Jae-myung and the accompanying discourse of 'dismantling vested interests' is acting as a variable that directly threatens their structural stability. Therefore, the vested interests pouring out remarks that openly or secretly ignore or criticize Lee Jae-myung is not an expression of personal antipathy, but can be interpreted as a complex defense mechanism stemming from psychological anxiety and contraction. As the presidential election was brought forward due to the impeachment of insurrection leader Yun, elementary school students in Gangnam were already muttering and shouting 'Lee Criminal' before the election day, so readers should have a renewed awareness that this society is one that works hard to stop vested interests from being passed down through generations.

Lee Jae-myung's social background is a key factor that stimulates the anxiety of the traditional elite establishment. He is a figure who deviated from the typical path of the mainstream class in Korean society, namely Seoul National University-Civil Service Examination-Bureaucrat, and has a narrative of rising from the son of a worker to a lawyer, then a politician, and even to the president. There is no one in Korea who has no roots from the beginning. Due to the unprecedented continuous tragedy in human history of Japanese invasion and post-liberation war, families were annihilated and heritage was destroyed. Conversely, today's Korean society is one in which the descendants of the Japanese, wearing human skin, and rootless bastards act like noblemen on the remnants of the ruins. Now that this history has solidified and a new caste system has become entrenched, the name Lee Jae-myung has a symbolic meaning of neutralizing the 'exclusive entry barrier' that the modern Korean ruling class has built since liberation.

From a sociological perspective, elite groups have reproduced their status as much as possible by monopolizing cultural and social capital. However, the success of Lee Jae-myung, a non-traditional elite, fundamentally shakes the scarcity and exclusivity of their symbolic capital. In other words, the reality that 'you can have the highest power even if it's not us' threatens the basis of their identity. Lee Jae-myung's success story redefines the 'meritocracy' discourse in Korean society. Traditionally, the privileged class has justified their position as a result of personal ability and effort, but Lee Jae-myung's existence shows that true meritocracy does not necessarily coincide with the existing elite course. This has become a challenge that shakes the very foundation of their legitimacy. Will this be a lesson for readers and other citizens, or will it be a loss-making phenomenon? We, who take the side of pro-Japanese hosts for a long time because we have been brainwashed into things that even a child knows, may be Stockholm syndrome patients who have been fooled.

Another reason why the established powers are wary of Lee Jae-myung is that his reform agenda directly targets their institutional foundations. Strengthening fair competition, income redistribution policies, chaebol reform, prosecutorial reform, and media reform are all policies that touch the core axes of the existing power structure. In particular, criticism of the 'white-collar cartel' represented by the legal and media circles poses an existential threat to them. These fields have traditionally maintained privileged status through high barriers to entry and internal networks, and Lee Jae-myung's reform discourse acts as a message that shakes this 'privileged stability' to its core. In addition, Lee Jae-myung's people-first political philosophy conflicts with the growth-first, efficiency-oriented paradigm favored by the established powers. Policies such as basic income, universal employment insurance, and expansion of public health care include the possibility of changing the existing market-centered order, which irritates groups with economic vested interests.

The critical reaction of the elite establishment to Lee Jae-myung is that they have long maintained a collective identity as a 'rational elite leading society,' and Lee Jae-myung's rise calls into question the superiority of this identity. The early US military in Korea, the US military government, which occupied the Korean Peninsula after liberation, took colonial officials as they were and made them rule the 'liberated Koreans.' This is a deliberate policy, but there is no history that touches on this. History has made the existence of a 'president from a non-elite background' possible, based on the deaths and sacrifices of numerous patriotic martyrs, which has become a fundamental threat to their self-esteem and social status.

In a defensive reaction to this, they try to reaffirm their superiority by defining Lee Jae-myung as a populist, demagogue, and irrational politician. This can be said to be a typical example of downward comparison. It was the same during Moon Jae-in's administration. So people protect him, but as a result, the vested interests outwardly attacked Moon Jae-in and internally used deceptive tactics of collusion. The public is always at the very end, living in the lowest dimension of information, so they are in a state of rushing around without knowing anything. Therefore, people without self-esteem who try to cling to power have been gaining power. People find it difficult to endure the contradiction between their beliefs and reality. The privileged class is brainwashing the public with the belief that they are rational leaders of society, but the reality that the public supports and trusts Lee Jae-myung more than them is a contradiction and conflict of interest for the privileged group.

To resolve this dissonance, they take two approaches. The first is to deny or distort reality. This includes devaluing Lee Jae-myung's approval ratings or policy achievements, or making statements that question the public's judgment. The second is to exhibit 'confirmation bias,' selectively accepting only negative information or interpretations about Lee Jae-myung. When resource competition between groups intensifies, in-group solidarity strengthens and hostility towards out-groups increases. Lee Jae-myung's reform policies trigger a zero-sum game mentality among the privileged, further strengthening their solidarity. At this time, Lee Jae-myung plays the role of the group's 'common enemy.' Even factions of the privileged class that were internally competitive temporarily unite in the face of the external threat of Lee Jae-myung. This is a typical example of group cohesion in response to an external threat, as described in group psychology.

Psychological projection also plays a role in the criticism of Lee Jae-myung by the privileged class. They project their desire to protect their vested rights or selfish motives onto Lee Jae-myung, portraying him as a 'politician obsessed with power.' It would be strange if elite academic cliques looked favorably on Lee Jae-myung, who came from a working-class background, to the point where Korean society is piercing the sky with useless academic elitism that doesn't even earn money. In addition, there is a tendency to avoid their responsibilities by concentrating the causes of social dissatisfaction or crisis on Lee Jae-myung as an individual, making him a scapegoat. This is a remnant of the Japanese colonial era. It is not a new phenomenon to see Koreans, who readily give to charity when they see the pain of others, tearing at the scapegoat thrown to them by the privileged.

One of the reasons why criticisms of Lee Jae-myung by the vested interests effectively spread is because of the discursive power they have in the media and intellectual society. Because most of the editorial writers of major media companies, university professors, and expert groups belong to the vested interests or share their interests, negative framing of Lee Jae-myung is constantly reproduced. If you take a close look at the owners of mainstream media companies, they are usually connected to pro-Japanese power, either biologically or through their interests. They try to secure the legitimacy of their criticisms by packaging them as ‘reasonable concerns’ or ‘expert analysis’ through proxies.

However, behind that, there is a strong psychological motivation to protect their status and interests. Looking back at the history of Korean politics, there is a certain pattern in the reaction of the privileged class to politicians who deviate from the existing elite course. A similar phenomenon occurred during the Roh Moo-hyun administration, and at that time, personal attacks on the individual Roh Moo-hyun continued, citing reasons such as 'academic background', 'dignity', and 'lack of experience'. This shows that the privileged class sets the criteria for political legitimacy in their favor and reveals a structural bias to exclude those who do not meet the criteria. Instead of being angry at the sight of pro-Japanese remnants wielding power and attacking independent and nationalistic figures, the public comes forward and throws stones, so this absurd self-defeating cannibalism can be understood as an extension of the historical pattern that is also a sequelae of the 6.25 fratricidal war. In this situation, isn't the current criticism of Lee Jae-myung, who is from a working-class background, the best mercenary solution for the privileged class, where the working class beats up the working class?

We must not dismiss this phenomenon as mere selfishness of the privileged class. This is because it can be seen as a natural conflict arising in the process of social change, and as part of the growing pains experienced in the process of democracy maturing. The important thing is that the public must awaken to constructively manage these conflicts and create a mature political culture based on mutual understanding and respect. Ultimately, in order for Korean society to develop into a true democracy, an environment must be created in which various talents with abilities and ideals can compete fairly, regardless of their background or education. Korean society, which does not nurture teenage and 20-something future politicians and aims only for elites through academic elitism entrance exams, is very uncivilized in itself. The privileged class will slowly but surely collapse. It is inevitable that individuals and society will be left behind if they fail to seek new roles and identities suitable for the changing times, and they are a potential NPC corps. The result of liberation coming as pro-Japanese factions gained power is the result of artificial political mass being applied, but the flower of pro-Japanese sentiment will also not last long. Lee Jae-myung's rise is a signal flare of this change and will be an opportunity for Korean society to move towards a more open and inclusive society where people coexist.