Why empathy matters for politics

Politics must not capitalize on their rage for political gains but instead must empathize with their feelings.

Yeom Jae-hoThe author, a former president of Korea University, is the president of Taejae University. I recently watched “American Chaos,” a documentary directed by James Stern. The filmmaker — a Chicago Democrat growing up idolizing Robert Kennedy and became a fan of former president Barack Obama — had been baffled by the dramatic rise of political rookie Donald Trump to win the Republican candidacy and, more surprisingly, the presidential election against seasoned Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton in 2016. He could not understand the American frenzy over Trump, who even drew Democrat-tilting voters. It was not the United States he was used to.

Stern decided to meet Trump supporters and hear them out without bias six months ahead of the presidential election. He discovered that a form of collective rage he had never felt before steered voters toward Trump. The period of the United States offering the American Dream in the 1960s and 1970s is a bygone. The wealth gap has deepened, traditional values wrecked, and family happiness jeopardized, building up political rage to the boiling point. Coal miners lived tough but at least were able to keep the family comfortable. When mines shut down to contain greenhouse gas emissions due to climate change, households and communities crumbled with little help coming from political circles and the government. The white middle class began to believe the Democratic Party’s progressive policies on environment, immigration and gender minorities wrecked their values and lives — and became avid fans of Trump who chanted otherwise. Trump galvanized their rage with his populist slogan about making America great again. Voters came to think only Trump who, unlike apathetic mainstream politicians, understood them and sympathized with their hardship.

Stern believed that Obama’s environmental policy was a reasonable one the people had to pay the price for. He could not understand why South American immigrants, who did all the hard physical jobs on behalf of wealthier Americans, could not live in America, a country of immigrants. But as the interview progressed, he discovered an accumulated rage against politics by the white middle class. The Democratic mandates on human rights, environment, globalization and democracy did not help improve their everyday lives. Hillary, who was better educated and knowledgeable in state and international affairs, merely criticized Trump for being an unreliable and unreasonable man. But she did not understand their rage. Her preaching on the dogma of reason and the validity of values fell on deaf ears for those who felt their lives were victimized by others.

In Korea, the former conservative government under President Park Geun-hye failed to empathize with the wretchedness of the families who had lost their children in the sinking of the Sewol ferry. The opposition party and its mainstream faction composed of student activist-turned politicians saw through their rage and pains of the younger generation to capitalize on their anger. Economist Jang Ha-sung who later became the architect of income-led growth as the policy chief to former President Moon Jae-in, published “Why We Should Rage,” a book listing the inequalities in our society — especially among the younger generation — from the distribution failure. The opposition excited the young people whose job opportunities were slimming and whose future would be burdened by the surge in elderly population so that they felt they were living in the “Joseon hell.” The rage brought people to candlelight vigil protests that eventually impeached and ousted President Park.

The politics of rage tend to be regenerative. The extreme polarization of politics is a by-product. The lawmakers waste their legislative sessions with exchanges of offensive remarks. In his book studying the rage of ancient Greeks and Romans, Son Byung-seok, a Korea University professor and semantic scholar, argued that rage builds up when one is humiliated by another. Extreme political forces gain ground when the governing power changes. The political ecosystem built on rage generates more rage. According to Prof. Son, the ancient Greeks concentrated on how they could reasonably release — and refine — their rage instead of containing or removing the source of rage. What politics needs is the capabilities and wisdom to identify and sympathize with the vexed.

During a conference, veteran scholar Kim Woo-chang was asked whether the leader should reconsider layoffs for restructuring out of concern for the company. Kim, after some thought, said restructuring would be necessary for the viability and progress of the organization, but a leader would have to sympathize with the pains of the people losing jobs.

Supporters of former U.S. President Donald Trump gather near Mar-a-Lago in Palm Beach, Florida, on April 1. [AFP/YONHAP]

We easily steam up in anger when our right or benefit comes under threat as we live in deepening inequalities and uncertainties for the future. Politics must not capitalize on their rage from anxiety for political gains but instead must empathize with their feelings. The centrist voters would choose a political party that is better at empathic politics instead of politics of rage.

Translation by the Korea JoongAng Daily staff.