DP’s 20-year rule theory no longer sounds like empty boast

The rhetoric of Democratic Party leader Jung Chung-rae resembles physics. Beneath his remark that “a handshake is only with people,” lies a raw logic: We are the majority, so what can you do about it?

Lee Hyun-sang The author is the head of the editorial board at the JoongAng Ilbo.

The rhetoric of Democratic Party leader Jung Chung-rae resembles physics. He translates a simple principle — that power equals numbers — into the language of politics. Beneath his blunt remark that “a handshake is only with people,” lies a raw logic: We are the majority, so what can you do about it? His coarse words are less rudeness than calculation. By stoking cheers from the party’s fervent base, he consolidates his grip on leadership. That calculation worked: It carried him past Park Chan-dae, who had the backing of pro-Lee Jae Myung loyalists, in the party chairmanship race.

Such politics are possible for a simple reason: because he can. With 10 months left before local elections, there is little need to tone down his message for moderates. President Lee Jae Myung’s approval rating has slipped into the low 50s, but the Democratic Party still hovers around 40 percent. Its core base is unshakable. Add to that three special counsels targeting the Yoon Suk Yeol administration, and the ground looks even firmer. Just as Lee Jae Myung has his brand of politics, so too does Jung.

Democratic Party leader Jung Chung-rae waves the party flag during the party’s national convention at Kintex in Goyang, Gyeonggi on Aug. 2. [JOONGANG ILBO]

Jung’s real ally, paradoxically, is the People Power Party. Even his harshest jabs at the conservative camp often earn the reaction, “He wouldn’t say that without reason.” That is the relativity of politics. What Jung should truly fear is not the conservative party’s resistance but its exit. In any ecosystem, when prey disappears, predators vanish as well. If politics becomes too one-sided, even the strong risk losing relevance. For now, that prospect looks distant. With the ruling party’s convention tomorrow, the anti-reform faction seems favored. The PPP risks devolving into a regional vestige, surviving only as a remnant species.

Seven years ago, former Democratic Party leader Lee Hae-chan’s prediction of “20 years in power” sounded like bluster. Today, it is harder to dismiss. Like insects caught alive in a spider’s web, a conservative opposition trapped by ghosts of the past could well become sustenance for the governing Democrats. That is precisely the scenario the party wants.

Politics is always relative. One-party dominance becomes reality only when opposition ineptitude accompanies it. The U.S. Democrats and Japan’s Liberal Democrats offer precedents. Since World War II, it has been rare for a ruling party in advanced democracies to hold power for more than two decades. Where it did happen, the partner was a backward-looking opposition.

From 1932 to 1968, the U.S. Democrats won seven of nine presidential elections, with Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry Truman racking up five straight victories. Republicans managed only Dwight Eisenhower’s wartime-hero candidacies in 1952 and 1956. In the House of Representatives, Democrats controlled all but four years over a span of six decades. The “New Deal coalition” of urban workers, Black voters, immigrants, intellectuals and farmers propelled that dominance. Republicans, tied to Herbert Hoover’s failures, clung to small government and austerity even in the midst of depression, blind to the needs of new constituencies. While Democrats absorbed emerging groups, Republicans isolated themselves with an aging base.

The DP leader Jung Chung-rae(left) ignores the PPP interim leader Song Eon-seog at the memorial ceremony of former president Kim Dae-jung held at the Memorial Hall at Seoul National Cemetery on August 18. [KIM JONG-HO]

Japan’s Liberal Democrats offer a similar story. Since its founding in 1955, the party has lost power for barely four years in total. That longevity stemmed less from exceptional competence than from inept rivals. The Japan Socialist Party clung to slogans like protecting the peace constitution, opposing the Self-Defense Forces and rejecting U.S. bases, even through the high-growth consumer boom of the 1970s and 1980s. Alienated from moderates, the left collapsed. Later opposition groups fared no better, splintering repeatedly and shutting themselves out of government. Even amid the bubble’s collapse and calls for reform, they failed to read the times.

Korea’s political terrain is tilting against conservatives in much the same way. The 40s and 50s age group — shaped by democratization and the fervor of Roh Moo-hyun’s era — now anchors politics. As of 2024, they account for 36 percent of the electorate. Unlike older voters, they are unlikely to drift rightward with age. Meanwhile, the elderly bloc is shrinking, and the Seoul metropolitan area grows ever more dominant. Demographics steadily favor the Democrats. Issues of the moment can swing votes, but structural trends remain unchanged. The longer the People Power Party postpones reinvention, the steeper its decline.

Still, Democrats cannot afford complacency. President Lee’s approval is eroding faster than expected. Messages from the party and government diverge, and his appeals for unity are beginning to falter. To the faithful, majority rule feels triumphant; to moderates, it risks arrogance. And arrogance has always been the prelude to political collapse. America’s Democrats were branded an elitist party and fell to the maverick Donald Trump. Japan’s Liberal Democrats, too, once lost power to scandals and a stagnant image.

Politics is a numbers game. But numbers are never fixed. What feels like “we can get away with it” today can turn into “enough already” tomorrow. The opposition’s ineptitude may fuel the ruling party’s confidence — but the ruling party’s arrogance could in turn throw a lifeline to the opposition. In this zero-sum game, it is the public who pays the price.

This article was originally written in Korean and translated by a bilingual reporter with the help of generative AI tools. It was then edited by a native English-speaking editor. All AI-assisted translations are reviewed and refined by our newsroom.