The president’s ignored logic of broadening the party

Kim Seung-hyun

The author is an editorial writer at the JoongAng Ilbo. 

President Lee Jae Myung’s message appears to be falling on deaf ears within the Democratic Party (DP). Just a week ago, Lee met former President Moon Jae-in and called for party unity, yet the party has moved in the opposite direction.

The two leaders, representing the pro-Lee and pro-Moon factions, shared a bibimbap lunch at the presidential office. Rather than easing tensions, however, the contest for party leadership has deepened factional divisions, leaving the groups as irreconcilable as oil and water. The current and former presidents also placed subtly different emphases on their messages. Moon stressed party unity while Lee highlighted expanding the party's appeal.

As interpretations multiplied, Hong Ik-pyo, senior presidential secretary for political affairs, explained that the two goals were inseparable and should be pursued simultaneously. In practice, however, the clarification only made the original message appear detached from political reality.

Lee's argument nevertheless carried logical coherence.

In formal logic, the concept of extension is paired with intension, two foundational ideas. Extension refers to the range of objects to which a concept applies, while intension denotes the essential characteristics shared by those objects.

Take the concept of "person." Its extension includes all human beings regardless of race, nationality, age or gender. Its intension consists of defining characteristics such as rationality and the use of language and tools.

The two concepts share an inverse relationship. As extension expands, intension becomes less restrictive.

Lee's call to broaden the party's extension was likely intended to reduce the rigid defining characteristics that have fostered factionalism and internal divisions. Rather than categorizing members as pro-Moon or pro-Roh, the party could move slightly to the political center and embrace a more pragmatic approach, attracting broader public support and building what might be called a structural majority.

Instead, the Democratic Party (DP) is failing on both fronts. It is neither broadening its appeal nor strengthening internal unity.

Even when the president's sudden push for broader outreach exposes weaknesses, the party has been unable to produce a coherent response because of factional rivalries and political calculations. The leadership race has deteriorated from arguments over political legitimacy into accusations of self-serving ambition.

Former Prime Minister Kim Min-seok argued that "the damage caused by self-serving politics over the past year has created confusion within the party and between the party and the government." Former party leader Jung Chung-rae responded that "the prime minister, who should have focused solely on state affairs, stirred unnecessary controversy by expressing his dream of becoming party leader."

The party's uneasy combination of a rigid extension and fractured intension is becoming increasingly apparent.

One example was the resignation of former Regulatory Reform Committee Vice Chairman Lee Byung-tae. Lee represented an attempt by President Lee to broaden the party's reach through a bipartisan-style appointment. But during the recent Starbucks Korea controversy, he touched on a taboo that many core Democratic Party supporters found unacceptable by saying that "May 18 has become sacrosanct."

As core supporters reacted as though the party had extended its reach to political enemies, the presidential office accepted his resignation. In the process, a debate over freedom of expression that, though bluntly framed, nevertheless raised meaningful questions quickly disappeared.

Writer Yoo Si-min's criticism that "those who supported President Lee wanted an extension, but the president tried to carry out a reconstruction" illustrates another problem. His so-called reconstruction theory suggested that hard-line supporters imposed an overly rigid definition of what the party should be, undermining unity. Pro-Lee lawmakers have in turn accused the pro-Moon camp of "still acting like the owners of the house."

Over the next month, as the leadership contest continues, similar distortions between the party's extension and intension are likely to recur. With nomination authority for the parliamentary elections two years away at stake, factional victory and political advantage will almost certainly take precedence over broader considerations.

Meanwhile, consequential issues that deserve careful public debate, including abolishing prosecutors' supplementary investigative authority and creating a special counsel empowered to withdraw indictments, are likely to be pushed through at high speed without sufficient deliberation over what best serves the public interest.

Policies produced without clear conceptual foundations rarely remain isolated. Before long, their consequences may arrive all at once, like a tsunami.