A Call for Reflection: 15 Mirrors for President Lee Jae-myung

What is politics? Is it the art of gaining power, or the art of maintaining it? Is it about winning elections or managing approval ratings? Or is it about embracing even those who did not support you to move an era in a better direction?

Political philosophy throughout history has grappled with this question for thousands of years. Machiavelli urged a clear-eyed view of the harsh realities of power, while Confucius and Mencius placed benevolence and public sentiment at the core of politics. Laozi advised against excessive control over the world, and the Doctrine of the Mean taught the wisdom of balance without extremes. Buddhism warns against greed, anger, and ignorance, while the Bible teaches that those in high positions should serve more. Despite differences in time, religion, and philosophy, they converge on one point.

When power begins to exist for itself, politics starts to decline.

What President Lee Jae-myung needs now is not a new political technique, nor more sophisticated public relations, nor a tighter grip on his strong support base. It is to calmly reflect on what has gone well and what has not, and to return to the fundamentals of politics before the public.

I want to find the starting point in the four characters of Mencius: 一治一亂 (one governance, one chaos). This means that once a society is governed, it can also fall into chaos. However, this is not a fatalistic view that “the world is inherently like this.” It signifies the responsibility of humanity and politics to prepare for chaos during times of governance and to create governance again during chaotic times.

In Mencius, it is stated, '天下之生久矣 一治一亂' (The world has existed for a long time; it has been governed and has fallen into chaos). Looking back at history, when a nation thrives, it seems that prosperity will last forever, and those in power feel that their power will continue indefinitely. However, there is no eternal governance, nor is there eternal chaos. When things flourish, they decline; when pride arises, they shake; and when chaos reaches its peak, the desire to restore order emerges. Thus, the true meaning of 一治一亂 lies not in the cycle itself.

Do not settle in times of governance, and do not resign in times of chaos.

This insight is also needed in today’s South Korean politics. President Lee Jae-myung's approval ratings rose to the mid-60s earlier this year but have recently plummeted. According to a Realmeter survey from the first week of September, his positive rating hit a record low of 37.4%, marking eight consecutive weeks of decline. Another NBS survey conducted from September 7 to 9 showed a 43% approval rating and a 48% disapproval rating. While the absolute figures may differ depending on the survey method, it is undeniable that there has been a significant loss of public sentiment recently.

Approval ratings are not merely popularity contests regarding the president's character. They reflect a comprehensive evaluation by the public of the economy, housing, jobs, the stock market, judicial policies, personnel decisions, the ruling party's behavior, and the president's language. Therefore, the most dangerous response when approval ratings drop is to blame the opposition, the media, or conservative voters. There were reasons for high approval ratings, and there are reasons for the decline. The most perilous moment in politics is not when approval ratings fall, but when one fails to listen to why they are falling.

One of the events that will be studied for years in modern Korean politics is former President Yoon Suk-yeol's martial law. History often features perplexing instances of political self-harm. Richard Nixon in the U.S. left office due to the Watergate scandal, despite achieving a monumental diplomatic breakthrough with China. The most dangerous time for a power holder is not only when their power is weak but also when they begin to believe they can do anything.

“Who would dare to stop me?”

When this thought takes root in a power holder's mind, the boundary between political judgment and personal desire can easily collapse. Thus, the most necessary person for a president is not a staff member who applauds loudly but one who says, “No.” Even in the Joseon dynasty, there were officials who spoke uncomfortable truths to the king. Machiavelli also believed that wise advisors were necessary around a ruler, warning that a ruler surrounded by flatterers would lose their judgment. It is difficult for a power holder to meet someone of higher status than themselves. Therefore, they need elders, people who are not intimidated by them, and those who challenge their judgments rather than simply echoing them. This lesson applies to President Lee Jae-myung as well.

The factors that enabled the establishment of the Lee Jae-myung administration and its initial high support can be summarized in three pillars: livelihood, pragmatism, and the president's personal political ability.

The first is livelihood. Housing, the stock market, and jobs are more than mere economic indicators to the public. A home represents marriage, family, retirement, and a ladder for social mobility. The stock market reflects the public's assets and expectations for the future. Youth employment represents hope for a generation. No matter how grand a national vision is presented, it lacks persuasiveness to a hungry, homeless, and job-insecure populace.

The second is pragmatism. Policies are not pursued simply because they are progressive or rejected because they are conservative; the approach is to adopt policies beneficial to the national interest, whether they come from Park Chung-hee or Kim Dae-jung. The inclusion of business leaders and a focus on industry and technology, along with cooperation with Japan when necessary, has been well-received by many moderates.

The third is the president's administrative capabilities and political instincts. President Lee is a politician who quickly grasps issues, understands numbers, and communicates complex matters in accessible language. His early public cabinet meetings were seen as confident, and his attention to even minor issues in citizens' lives was viewed as meticulous. The problem is that these three pillars have recently begun to shake simultaneously.

The government explains the intent behind its policies, but the public experiences the outcomes. No matter how well-intentioned the policy authorities claim to be, if housing prices rise and loans become inaccessible, making home ownership feel further away, public evaluations will change. The same applies to the stock market. Since May 27 of this year, numerous single-stock leveraged ETFs and ETNs have been launched, tracking Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix at double the rate. Leveraged products carry significant risks, including price volatility and the so-called 'negative compounding effect.'

Therefore, it is excessive to immediately conclude that “the government has caused the stock market to crash.” The stock market is influenced by numerous factors, including the global economy, interest rates, semiconductor conditions, supply and demand, and geopolitics. However, if the policy authorities have opened the door to high-risk leveraged products for individual investors, they must carefully examine the risks these products pose to young investors. For many young people, stocks are not merely a means of greed; they are the last ladder chosen to build assets when home ownership is unattainable. If more people are severely injured on that ladder, political anger is a natural outcome.

The same goes for real estate. If policies are announced and then retracted after confirming market and public backlash, a more significant problem arises than the content of the policies: the loss of predictability. Policies can be wrong, but they should not be inconsistent. Discovering and correcting mistakes is different from wavering without philosophy.

In this context, the August 31 cabinet reshuffle is significant. Specifically, it refers to the reshuffle of six ministries announced on August 30. Lee Hyung-il was nominated as the candidate for Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Economy and Finance, Kim Seung-won for Minister of Justice, Kang Shin-cheol for Minister of National Defense, Hong Ji-sun for Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport, Lee So-young for Minister of SMEs and Startups, and Yong Hye-in for Minister of Gender Equality and Family.

A cabinet reshuffle is the most powerful political message a president can send. In a situation where approval ratings are shaky, a reshuffle is particularly significant. The public interprets the list to understand what the president has reflected upon and where he intends to go. Therefore, the key question regarding this reshuffle is one:

Did the renewal demanded by the public align with the renewal presented by the president?

Kim Seung-won, nominated as Minister of Justice, has been classified as a hardliner on prosecutorial reform and has previously led a group of lawmakers demanding the dismissal of charges against President Lee, leading to controversy immediately after his nomination. While this alone does not confirm any unfair 'mission' for Kim, the message conveyed by appointments is as important as the facts. In a situation where doubts exist regarding the president's judicial issues, the appointment of someone with such a background as Minister of Justice should have prompted the president and the Blue House to anticipate the questions the public would raise.

Moreover, Kim has since been embroiled in controversy over alleged 'drug requests' related to COVID-19 treatments, as reports surfaced that he contacted the head of the Food and Drug Safety Agency to expedite related procedures. Following related complaints, the police may revisit the case. Kim's side has the right to clarify, and it should not be concluded as a crime at this stage. Additionally, new revelations about his children's past address discrepancies have emerged, and his side has acknowledged the discrepancies for educational purposes.

At this point, what matters is not partisan logic. The position of Minister of Justice demands higher morality and trust than other ministers. The president must assess the results of the confirmation hearings and the facts with a cool head. Protecting one's allies to the end is not loyalty; maintaining the trust of the public is a greater loyalty for a president.

Another point to consider regarding the August 31 reshuffle is that Kim Yong-beom, the president's policy chief, who was not initially included in the reshuffle list, resigned the very next day, September 1. At that time, accountability regarding real estate and financial policies was being raised in the political arena.

It is possible that the appointment could have been delayed by a day or that there were internal circumstances. It cannot be said that this is inherently wrong. However, it may appear oddly to the public. If it was a renewal reshuffle, should not a thorough evaluation of the overall economic policy and accountability have been conducted before sending a unified message?

Appointments are both content and performance. No matter how good the content is, if the performance is chaotic, it appears that the president's decision-making system is shaken. If there are repeated instances of policy directions changing just before or after announcements on major policies like basic pensions or real estate tax systems, the problem becomes even more significant. People begin to question not which policy is right but whether “this government is moving with conviction.” Criticism arises that the engine of governance is making strange noises, and this is ultimately why.

Judicial reform is necessary. Criticism has accumulated over the years that prosecutorial power has been excessively concentrated and has influenced politics. However, the purpose of judicial reform is not to punish the prosecutors.

It is to better protect the rights of the public.

If it deviates from this principle, judicial reform becomes merely another reorganization of power institutions. In particular, the issue of supplementary investigative powers for prosecutors is not something to be pushed solely based on partisan logic. Recent surveys have shown that opinions favoring the maintenance of supplementary investigative powers are significantly higher than those advocating for their abolition. In a July survey by Gallup Korea, 61% supported maintenance, while 23% favored abolition, and in a KSOI survey, 55.3% opposed abolition, while 27.4% supported it.

While surveys are not always the definitive answer for policies, professional institutional reforms can sometimes lead public opinion. However, when a majority of the public feels uneasy, one cannot simply say, “We are right, so follow us.” Especially, it is essential to reassess whether vulnerable groups such as women, children, the elderly, and crime victims might suffer from the shifting responsibilities between investigative agencies. The core issue is not whether it is the prosecutors or the police.

What matters is whether victims are protected.

Reform must be for the institutions, not for the public.

Not all those who placed their hopes in President Lee Jae-myung are traditional supporters of the Democratic Party. There were moderates who opposed the martial law and the Yoon Suk-yeol administration, as well as those who expected growth and pragmatism. Some young women supported him based on safety and social policies, while some men in their 30s and 40s looked for real estate and asset formation policies. In other words, the establishment of the Lee Jae-myung administration included an 'expectation coalition' that transcended traditional support bases.

These individuals are not bound by loyalty. They are gathered by expectations for results. Thus, while the influx is rapid, so is the outflow. The concern within the ruling party that the so-called 'New Lee Jae-myung' faction is departing is not to be taken lightly. Recent Realmeter surveys showing the president's approval rating among those in their 20s and 30s in Seoul has dropped to the 20% range is significant.

Young people are not leaving politics out of indifference. They depart when they judge it does not benefit their future. The same goes for moderates. There is no obligation to continue supporting someone just because they supported them once. There is no ownership over approval ratings. Public support must be earned anew every day.

Constitutional amendments are necessary. Since the 1987 Constitution, South Korea has changed significantly. The era of AI has begun, and issues such as low birth rates, regional extinction, climate change, and new fundamental rights have emerged. The structure of presidential power can also be reexamined. However, one thing must be clear in constitutional amendments.

They must be completely separated from the president's interests.

The current Article 128, Section 2 of the Constitution stipulates that amendments for extending the president's term or changing re-election rules do not apply to the sitting president at the time of the amendment. Therefore, the assertion that “if amendments are made, the current president will immediately run again for long-term rule” is not constitutionally accurate. The president also mentioned during a recent visit to France that “my term is clearly limited by the Constitution.”

Nevertheless, it is necessary to communicate this more clearly to the public. The president should not leave the fact that they cannot be a direct beneficiary of the amendments solely to legal provisions but should also clarify it politically. This is because politics does not operate solely on legal innocence. Trust is needed. If the public begins to ask, “Is this amendment for South Korea or for the president?” the amendment will lose its strength. To push for significant changes, one must first step back.

Another serious issue to reflect on in our politics is language. There is more language that insults than persuades, and rather than competing in logic, people are branded. Democratic Party supporters mock conservative citizens, and conservative supporters insult progressive citizens. Expressions that strip the human dignity from leaders of opposing factions are used. What is gained from this? While one may gain views on YouTube or applause from a strong support base, the nation becomes divided.

The recent controversy surrounding author Yoo Si-min's criticism of the president is similar. It is healthy for intellectuals who supported power to voice criticism to the president, and the president and ruling party should accept what they can from that criticism. However, the criticizing intellectual is also not free from the responsibility of language. Expressions like 'rebellion,' 'monarchy,' and 'lowest politics' should not become stigmas that define the opponent rather than illuminate the debate.

Words govern thoughts. Buddhism views human actions as a combination of body, speech, and thought, known as the three karmas (신, 구, 의). The reason for the heavy emphasis on speech karma is that lies, slander, harsh words, and deceptive language destroy communities. While wounds from a sword can heal, wounds from words can last for decades. Especially, the president's words carry weight. A president's statement becomes policy, signals to the market, and directs the actions of hundreds of thousands of civil servants. Therefore, it is more important for a president to have the ability to restrain their words than to speak abundantly. The same applies to both the ruling and opposition parties.

Politics should not be a war of words but a skill to prevent war through dialogue.

President Lee Jae-myung is a capable politician. This is acknowledged even by the opposing camp. He is quick in judgment, understands administration, and possesses political agility. However, being merely capable is not enough for a president. Virtue and moral integrity must accompany capability.

In Laozi's Dao De Jing, the Dao is not the force that forcibly grasps the world but the wisdom to know the flow of nature and to humble oneself. Water flows to lower places but ultimately forms the sea. Thus, Laozi said, 'The highest good is like water.' A president should also be like water. Rather than standing above the people to give orders, they should descend into the lives of the people.

The Doctrine of the Mean does not mean standing in the middle of left and right. It means finding the most appropriate path for the time and situation. Sometimes leftist policies are the answer, and sometimes rightist policies are the answer. What matters is the people. Pragmatism, too, becomes opportunism if it loses virtue and moral integrity. If one does whatever is convenient today and whatever is advantageous tomorrow, the public will ultimately stop believing in the leader's words.

What completes pragmatism is trust.

Ancient scriptures of humanity share a remarkable commonality. They warn against power rather than praise it. In the Bible, Jesus teaches that to be great, one must serve, finding greatness in service rather than domination. Buddhism views greed, anger, and ignorance as fundamental afflictions of humanity. When a power holder falls into greed, they privatize power; when they fall into anger, they turn opponents into enemies; and when they fall into ignorance, they believe only their judgment is correct.

Confucius stated, 政者正也 (Politics is about doing what is right). If those in power are upright, who would dare to be otherwise? The Doctrine of the Mean teaches balance, and the Dao De Jing advises humility. The Cheonbugyeong also cannot be hastily interpreted as a specific political theory, but its idea of starting from one and diversifying before returning to a single order poses meaningful questions for today's community. Finding unity amidst diversity is the role of politics.

The core issue facing the Lee Jae-myung administration is not whether approval ratings are at 37% or 43%.

It is trust.

Even if the public does not like the president, they can trust the policies, and even if they oppose the policies, they can believe the president's words. A government that can achieve this is a strong government. However, if the public begins to like the president but cannot trust his words, the administration is in danger.

Therefore, I believe a press conference is necessary for the president now. It should not be a promotional event but a place to answer questions from the public, including uncomfortable ones. He should address issues such as constitutional amendments, judicial reform, real estate, taxes, and the stock market. He should also explain why he chose the individuals in the August 31 reshuffle.

If mistakes have been made, they should be acknowledged. If policies are flawed, they should be changed, and if appointments are deemed inappropriate, they should be retracted. Is that capitulation? No.

Listening to the public in a democracy is not capitulation; it is governance.

Politicians handle power, but presidents must handle the times. Therefore, it is insufficient for a president to possess only the skills of a politician; they need the perspective of a humanist. A humanist does not see the public merely as the number 37.4%. They see the people behind that number. They see the young person unable to find a job, the young person delaying marriage due to housing prices, the breadwinner who cannot sleep at night after investing their life savings in stocks, the woman who has been a victim of sexual violence and is lost between investigative agencies, and the small business owner unable to cope with high interest rates and rent, as well as the entrepreneur hesitant to invest due to uncertainty about when government policies will change.

Ultimately, politics is about people's lives. Thus, the path of the true person is difficult. A true person does not seek applause from their own side. They see facts as they are, acknowledge what is right, and admit what is wrong. Truth begins with not turning away from facts, justice stands with principles rather than power, and freedom recognizes not only one's own freedom but also the freedom of those with differing views.

Truth, justice, and freedom.

These three are not the monopoly of any faction. Both conservatives and progressives must uphold them, and the president must uphold them even more.

President Lee Jae-myung still has ample time. There are surveys showing 37% and others showing 43%, and approval ratings can rise again. The public is discerning but also generous. If he sincerely acknowledges mistakes and changes policies, they will grant him another chance. In fact, this could be a turning point.

To do so, he must clearly redefine the priorities of governance. First, he must return to livelihood issues. Housing, taxes, the stock market, and youth employment should be reassessed based on the lives of the people, not ideology. Second, he must restore pragmatism. It is not a matter of favoring the left or the right but finding what the public truly needs. Third, judicial reform must be redesigned with the public at its center. It should not be about eliminating prosecutors or empowering the police but about who can best protect crime victims.

Fourth, the criteria for appointments must be reestablished. Rather than focusing on whether someone is a close associate or whether they are progressive or conservative, the emphasis should be on ability, morality, and public service. The allegations raised against the candidates in the August 31 reshuffle should not be shielded by partisan defenses. They should be thoroughly verified, and if deemed inappropriate, they should be withdrawn. Fifth, constitutional amendments must be separated from the president's interests. If amendments are necessary for the future of South Korea, they should be pursued, but the public must believe that they are unrelated to the president's political interests.

Sixth, he should surround himself with those who speak uncomfortable truths. Advisors who only say what the president wants to hear do not help him. The person who says “No” when the president is wrong is the one who saves him. Seventh, the dignity of language must be restored. If the president exercises restraint, the ruling party will also exercise restraint, and if the ruling party does, the support base will change as well. Politics must shift from creating enemies to coexisting with opponents.

Let us return to Mencius's 一治一亂. The world is governed and then falls into chaos. However, Mencius did not fold his arms in the face of chaos. He insisted on reestablishing benevolence and righteousness and believed that humanity has a role to play. Today is no different. Approval ratings can rise and fall, administrations can thrive or decline, and parties can win or lose elections. However, a leader's true evaluation occurs beyond those numbers. How much restraint was exercised when power was strongest, how open was the ear to criticism, how inclusive was the approach to opponents, how much was the national interest prioritized over personal interests, and how much better was South Korea made when leaving office—these are ultimately the measures of history.

The greatest lesson left by former President Yoon Suk-yeol's martial law is that the moment one believes they are powerful can be the most dangerous. The same applies to Richard Nixon's Watergate. Politicians do not only fall by being defeated by opponents; they often fall when they cannot conquer themselves.

Therefore, I urge President Lee Jae-myung again. I hope he becomes a virtuous president beyond being a capable one. I hope he becomes an inclusive president beyond being a strong one. I hope he becomes a president who leaves behind a good system rather than one who decides everything directly. I hope he becomes a president of South Korea who embraces not only those who supported him but also those who did not.

Learn from Machiavelli's coldness, but do not remain in Machiavelli. Embrace Confucius's rectitude and Mencius's benevolence, learn from Laozi's humility and the balance of the Doctrine of the Mean, and place the compassion of Buddhism and the service of the Bible at the foundation of politics. Ultimately, politics is about people. If you lose the people, you may gain power but fail, and if you gain the people, you can rise again even if your approval ratings temporarily drop.

Do not settle in times of governance. Do not resign in times of chaos. And above all, conquer yourself when you have power.

Only leaders who conquer themselves can overcome the times. The controversies surrounding the August 31 reshuffle, the conflicts over livelihood and judicial reform, and the declining approval ratings are crises for the president but also opportunities. If he can transform, this current crisis can be the starting point for greater politics rather than the beginning of decline.

I hope President Lee Jae-myung becomes a good president who remains in the hearts of the people longer than one who wins many elections. This is the advice of a true person, the hope of a humanist, and the path of truth, justice, and freedom.

Copyright ⓒ Aju Press All rights reserved.