Since the democratization in 1987, regionalism has occupied the status as the most explanatory factor of Korean politics. It has served as a fortress for democratic forces or opposition parties, resulting in the conditions in which opposition parties ...
Since the democratization in 1987, regionalism has occupied the status as the most explanatory factor of Korean politics. It has served as a fortress for democratic forces or opposition parties, resulting in the conditions in which opposition parties overwhelmed ruling parties in terms of the number of the elected. Unfortunately it has also revealed several dilemmas: political parties become personalized; voters and candidates have been thwarted to have free choice; and local politics were taken as hostage for the political power game.
It is assumed that several culprits have plotted to bring about the pathological symptoms. Social, cultural and economic, mostly political institutions played key roles in the process. Political elites also jumped on the wagon, employing a strategy of ‘optimization.’ Finally it is a product of passive correspondence, namely the product of the reaction of voters, who are under many limits, which are called the bounded rationality. From this aspect, it seems feasible that new institutionalist viewpoint is needed to explicate the process allowing the regionalism to emerge and the subsequent events. It is because the approach itself utilizes the influence of institutions and autonomous choices of actors in the Korean politics.
After a research, it was found out that political factors such as political environment, election system, and political party system are the very ones that have affected regionalism more than anything else. Lopsided recruitment of political elites and economic development have also enabled a political circumstance, the one that political parties too heavily depend on certain areas for their political clout that in turn have served as a material foundation of the confrontation of two provinces, ‘Yeong Nam,’ and ‘Ho Nam,’ the two southern parts of the country. Along with it, regionalism have played a key role as an ideology to activate such political institutions. Yet, it was revealed that the fissure between the metropolitan and the non-metropolitan areas was much wider than that of the Yeong Nam and Ho Nam, revealing that it is the deep bottom of the Korean regionalism. It shows that political regionalism has settled down as an ideology of the political forces that oppose sociial, economic and political centralization.
Meanwhile, political elites make their existence as reasonable actors. This leads them to much heavier responsibility in that they have appealed to regional sentiment as a viable method to win votes. At the same time, voters are not free from the outcome either since they have not used their own discretion to discriminate the gimmicks.
Therefore, following measures are believed to be vital to overcome the political predicaments: the isolated voters and free-riding political leaders: guaranteeing trust and cooperation for political leaders, and punishment overriding the benefits of complacency for voters
Although the measures put a heavy burden on the Korean society as a whole, they would be the way for the members to learn of democratic procedures at the lowest cost.