Article 1 of the Constitution of the Republic of Korea is not just a legal provision; it is a stern command directed at all those in power in this country. Sovereignty resides with the people, and all power comes from the people. The President is elected by the people, as are members of the National Assembly. Local government heads, local council members, and heads of constitutional institutions ultimately exercise authority delegated by the citizens. Therefore, public officials are not masters but administrators, not rulers but servants.
However, recent events in our society suggest that the fundamental principles of this democratic republic are increasingly being blurred.
Recently, criticism arose after it was revealed that the cost of a spouse accompanying the head of the National Election Commission on an overseas trip was covered by taxpayer money. Regardless of the legal judgment, the public's concern centers on a basic question: Did the head of an institution funded by the people's taxes act in accordance with the expectations of the citizens? The Election Commission explained that this was a matter of courtesy for heads of constitutional institutions, but many citizens find this explanation hard to accept.
This issue is not isolated. Controversies surrounding overseas training for local councils recur every year. In some cases, trips that resemble tourism have raised concerns, while in others, issues such as inflated airfare and improper budget execution have been highlighted. The Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission reported that it found numerous problems, including ticket manipulation, excessive per diem payments, and unnecessary travel itineraries, after investigating the overseas travel practices of local councils nationwide.
Citizens are asking: Why do those in power always seek exceptions? Why are rules strict for the public but lenient for public officials? Why does it seem that the public bears the responsibility while privileges are enjoyed by those in power? These questions are not new.
Professor Song Bok of Yonsei University pointed out long ago in his work 'Privileges and Responsibilities' that the greatest issue among Korea's elite is "enjoying privileges while avoiding responsibility." Time has passed, but his diagnosis remains relevant.
Legally, South Korea has abolished the class system. However, the shadow of a class society still lingers in the consciousness of its people. The sense of privilege once enjoyed by the yangban has resurfaced today in the form of power and position.
Upon passing the bar exam and becoming judges, prosecutors, ministers, members of the National Assembly, mayors, governors, or heads of public enterprises, individuals may unconsciously begin to see themselves as special. They might think, "Having reached this level, isn't it reasonable to expect this kind of treatment?" or "After serving the country for so long, isn't this level of courtesy deserved?" The moment such thoughts take root, public service transforms from a duty into a privilege.
However, the great texts of humanity teach a different path. The Bible states, "Whoever wants to be great among you must be your servant." Jesus taught that those in power should serve rather than dominate.
The Dhammapada states, "He who conquers himself is greater than he who conquers a thousand men." The most challenging task for those in power is not to dominate others but to restrain their own desires.
Laozi, in the 'Tao Te Ching,' said, "The reason rivers and seas can receive all streams is that they are lower than all." This implies that the highest leader is the one with the lowest posture. Confucius stated, "Politics is about doing what is right." A leader must first stand upright for the people to follow. Mencius said, "The people are the most precious, and the ruler is the lightest." This insight into the essence of democracy was articulated 2,500 years ago. The teachings of sages from both East and West remarkably converge: power is not a privilege but a responsibility.
South Korea has become one of the world's top ten economies. The semiconductor, automotive, shipbuilding, and battery industries lead globally. However, a nation's dignity is not determined solely by its economic size. Is there a leadership that the people can trust? Are stricter moral standards applied as authority increases? Do public officials bear greater responsibility than the citizens? This is the standard of a developed nation.
The anger of the 2030 generation today stems from this very issue. Young people are not simply upset about job scarcity and housing prices; they feel that those who should ensure fairness are not upholding it. They sense that those who should be held accountable are evading responsibility.
Adam Smith wrote 'The Theory of Moral Sentiments' before 'The Wealth of Nations.' He warned that without human conscience and restraint, a community cannot be sustained, even while discussing the development of market economies. Perhaps the book that South Korea needs to revisit today is 'The Theory of Moral Sentiments' rather than 'The Wealth of Nations.'
Public service is not a privilege; it is a responsibility entrusted by the people. Power is not an honor; it is an obligation to serve the citizens. For South Korea to truly become a developed nation, what is needed is not more power but greater responsibility. It is not higher positions but a lower posture.
Privileges may offer momentary sweetness, but responsibility shapes history. Ultimately, the public will remember those who fulfilled their duties longer than those who enjoyed privileges.
However, recent events in our society suggest that the fundamental principles of this democratic republic are increasingly being blurred.
Recently, criticism arose after it was revealed that the cost of a spouse accompanying the head of the National Election Commission on an overseas trip was covered by taxpayer money. Regardless of the legal judgment, the public's concern centers on a basic question: Did the head of an institution funded by the people's taxes act in accordance with the expectations of the citizens? The Election Commission explained that this was a matter of courtesy for heads of constitutional institutions, but many citizens find this explanation hard to accept.
This issue is not isolated. Controversies surrounding overseas training for local councils recur every year. In some cases, trips that resemble tourism have raised concerns, while in others, issues such as inflated airfare and improper budget execution have been highlighted. The Anti-Corruption and Civil Rights Commission reported that it found numerous problems, including ticket manipulation, excessive per diem payments, and unnecessary travel itineraries, after investigating the overseas travel practices of local councils nationwide.
Citizens are asking: Why do those in power always seek exceptions? Why are rules strict for the public but lenient for public officials? Why does it seem that the public bears the responsibility while privileges are enjoyed by those in power? These questions are not new.
Professor Song Bok of Yonsei University pointed out long ago in his work 'Privileges and Responsibilities' that the greatest issue among Korea's elite is "enjoying privileges while avoiding responsibility." Time has passed, but his diagnosis remains relevant.
Legally, South Korea has abolished the class system. However, the shadow of a class society still lingers in the consciousness of its people. The sense of privilege once enjoyed by the yangban has resurfaced today in the form of power and position.
Upon passing the bar exam and becoming judges, prosecutors, ministers, members of the National Assembly, mayors, governors, or heads of public enterprises, individuals may unconsciously begin to see themselves as special. They might think, "Having reached this level, isn't it reasonable to expect this kind of treatment?" or "After serving the country for so long, isn't this level of courtesy deserved?" The moment such thoughts take root, public service transforms from a duty into a privilege.
However, the great texts of humanity teach a different path. The Bible states, "Whoever wants to be great among you must be your servant." Jesus taught that those in power should serve rather than dominate.
The Dhammapada states, "He who conquers himself is greater than he who conquers a thousand men." The most challenging task for those in power is not to dominate others but to restrain their own desires.
Laozi, in the 'Tao Te Ching,' said, "The reason rivers and seas can receive all streams is that they are lower than all." This implies that the highest leader is the one with the lowest posture. Confucius stated, "Politics is about doing what is right." A leader must first stand upright for the people to follow. Mencius said, "The people are the most precious, and the ruler is the lightest." This insight into the essence of democracy was articulated 2,500 years ago. The teachings of sages from both East and West remarkably converge: power is not a privilege but a responsibility.
South Korea has become one of the world's top ten economies. The semiconductor, automotive, shipbuilding, and battery industries lead globally. However, a nation's dignity is not determined solely by its economic size. Is there a leadership that the people can trust? Are stricter moral standards applied as authority increases? Do public officials bear greater responsibility than the citizens? This is the standard of a developed nation.
The anger of the 2030 generation today stems from this very issue. Young people are not simply upset about job scarcity and housing prices; they feel that those who should ensure fairness are not upholding it. They sense that those who should be held accountable are evading responsibility.
Adam Smith wrote 'The Theory of Moral Sentiments' before 'The Wealth of Nations.' He warned that without human conscience and restraint, a community cannot be sustained, even while discussing the development of market economies. Perhaps the book that South Korea needs to revisit today is 'The Theory of Moral Sentiments' rather than 'The Wealth of Nations.'
Public service is not a privilege; it is a responsibility entrusted by the people. Power is not an honor; it is an obligation to serve the citizens. For South Korea to truly become a developed nation, what is needed is not more power but greater responsibility. It is not higher positions but a lower posture.
Privileges may offer momentary sweetness, but responsibility shapes history. Ultimately, the public will remember those who fulfilled their duties longer than those who enjoyed privileges.
* This article has been translated by AI.
Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.