I found a striking part in a summary of international academic research published in Dong-A Business Review (DBR), so let me leave it as a record.
Why do people — especially older generations — defend politicians or parties who do not represent their interests?
Those who lived through the Japanese colonial era (comfort women, forced labor),
those who spent the youthful years of their lives under unfair competition or political oppression (386 generation),
the elderly who worry about things like dementia coverage under health insurance
— why are they able to defend or absorb the rough opinions of politicians and parties that go against their own interests?
I was able to find something of a personal parallel-answer? to that question.
Although the research was done with foreign citizens, the emotional fatigue and correlation between daily life and politics that people feel wouldn't be that different, would it? I jot down a few lines just in case.
Of course, the intent of this article may be different from my interpretation. I suspect the article's focus is on raising negative issues about Trump, who has a cordial relationship with the current administration.
My own insight, on the other hand, is not about using results-driven political fights to raise issues with current politics. It's about: the public tore down the wall through the recent candlelight protests and related inappropriate politics, and yet, barely a year after going through such a huge event.. why do political stances waver inconsistently depending on personal interests or concerns, or why does the willingness to participate keep failing to stay consistent — what's the reason?
Lecturer Kim Hyun-kyung closes the piece with the following lesson.
My view: we must not condemn those who tilt from the middle back to the right for personal reasons, or those who attend the "Taegeukgi" rallies. We need the open recognition that they are people acting sincerely for their own survival, their own sense of existence, and its realization. They, too, are citizens. They, too, are heads of households responsible for their families.
We should not blame the sincerity that moves them. What we need is the granularity to understand the intent and strategy of the forces that try to exploit them.
What comes before sincerity, justice, nation, and people is "interests."
No relational issue in the world can be divided into good and evil.
Everyone is living their own life, sensing crisis and opportunity within it, and doing their best at their own level to aim for stability.
The moment you define a specific group or force as evil, you yourselves are bound to fall into being someone else's evil.
To wrap up what I'm trying to say in a roundabout way: the insight I gained from this research is "the social-political deprivation they felt."
It's a kind of compassion for those who are, for now, being used by certain forces and simultaneously blamed by opposing ones.
They are not others. They could be the me of the past, or the me of the future..
