"We will build a structural majority through a three-part grand unification and base expansion that goes beyond progressives and moderates to embrace conservatives." This phrase captures the so-called "pragmatic and unifying appointments" approach of the Lee Jae-myung government. During the Aug. 17 party convention, when the pro-Chung faction, including writer Rhyu Si-min, pointed to "unifying appointments" as the cause of core supporters drifting away, it stemmed from concerns over base expansion.
The argument is that expanding the base to include even conservatives could shake the Democratic Party's identity and drive away its traditional supporters. This ultimately connects to what has been called the "extension versus rebuilding" debate — whether to widen the Democratic Party's support base within its existing framework or to reorganize it into a new coalition of supporters.
Even after the convention, President Lee Jae-myung's approval rating has struggled to find a clear turning point for a rebound. Is the departure of core supporters becoming the deciding factor? In this respect, it is worth revisiting the "third way" that Presidential Chief of Staff Kang Hoon-sik raised at a Democratic Party lawmakers' workshop last month.
Kang's remarks were interpreted as placing greater weight on base expansion, including toward moderates, rather than on rallying core supporters, and pro-Chung figures reacted strongly, calling it "opportunistic trickery." As Kang and the presidential office did not mount any particular response, the dispute did not escalate. But why did such a strong backlash emerge against the "third way," a concept regarded almost as textbook material nearly 20 years on?
According to lawmakers who attended the workshop, Kang's lecture began not with politics but with business stories. The underlying premise was that just as a company cannot pioneer new markets by settling for its existing customers, a party cannot build a structural majority by looking only at its existing supporters. The logic was that the party must protect its core supporters while broadening its base to include moderates and reasonable conservatives.
A rough summary of the remarks follows.
- Kodak developed the world's first digital camera but was passive about the digital transition because film processing was more profitable, and it ultimately lost its market leadership.
- Ericsson, which had boasted the world's top share of the mobile phone market, also fell behind after failing to ride the wave of change represented by touchscreens and app ecosystems.
- Blockbuster, the dominant force in the video rental market, likewise refused to shift toward streaming and video-on-demand and failed to adapt to change.
- Nike put forward a new slogan, "Why Do It," in place of its signature "Just Do It."
- At the same time, Nike made a large investment not in its biggest markets such as New York, London, Paris or Seoul, but in Portland, where the company began. It was not because it was profitable. It was to protect the company's identity.
- Strengthening identity and seeking a new start applies to power and politics as well. So it was for Britain's Labour Party and for France's Emmanuel Macron. Macron changed his party's name from "En Marche" to "Renaissance" and declared a party that produces results rather than merely talks. We too must protect our identity while beginning new change.
According to attendees, the core message of the workshop lecture was that a party, like a company, will fall behind if it fails to adapt to the changes of the times.
Kang Hoon-sik Emphasizes Nike's 'Why Do It'
Kang is said to have emphasized the Nike case several times in particular. For the older generation, "Just Do It" signifies an era when people did as they were told, while "Why Do It" refers to the sensibility of a new generation that, when given a task, asks "why do we have to do this?"
The assessment is that the remarks ultimately carried the awareness that the Democratic Party must first consider agendas that the younger generation can sufficiently relate to and support. Indeed, among the lawmakers who attended, reactions emerged such as "it was a CEO-style lecture rarely seen at conventional party workshops" and "it made us think about how the Democratic Party should upgrade itself while maintaining its identity." Some even said they wanted to get a copy of Kang's PowerPoint materials.
But in political circles, it was the phrase "third way" rather than this underlying awareness that was amplified and reproduced. Admittedly, the reference to Britain's Labour Party did provide an opening for controversy. But looking back over the history of liberal governments, the third way itself is not an unfamiliar concept.
Former President Kim Dae-jung: 'Democracy and the Market Economy Are Two Wheels of a Cart'
When British sociologist Anthony Giddens, considered a brain behind Prime Minister Tony Blair, published "The Third Way" in 1998, it drew considerable popularity in Korea as well. At the time, amid the national crisis of the foreign exchange crisis, former President Kim Dae-jung stressed that "democracy and the market economy are two wheels of a cart." He pursued democracy and welfare while not rejecting the market economy, and he did not turn away from the currents of openness and globalization. This is why some say that Kim's own concern with pulling together labor and capital, growth and distribution, was the starting point of a Korean-style third way.
The Roh Moo-hyun government was not greatly different. During the Participatory Government, the pursuit of the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (FTA) and the proposal of a grand coalition were representative cases in which, despite backlash from traditional supporters, the government sought both future growth engines for Korea and the possibility of political cooperation. In that sense, even if Kang mentioned the third way, it is not a greatly unfamiliar topic within the history of liberal governments.
Why the Pro-Chung Faction Pushed Back Against the 'Third Way,' Familiar to Liberal Governments
Even so, the reason the pro-Chung faction reacted sensitively amid the convention situation was ultimately the sharp competition for party leadership. The Facebook post of Lee Sang-ho, former head of the Democratic Party's Busan Saha-B district committee and considered a behind-the-scenes power broker for former Democratic Party leader Jung Cheong-rae, reveals this perception. Lee is also a figure who gained fame as "Mickey Rourke" during the Roh Moo-hyun fan club days.
He wrote, "The party members know well what to do, so would you please step out of the party convention?" He argued, "(As for the third way,) party members all know whether it means joining hands with the likes of Lee Eon-ju, and luring opportunistic moths with badges or positions is capture in wartime and trickery in daily life." Recalling that a "legitimacy" dispute had run throughout the convention, the interpretation is that the third way ultimately means embracing the B group, the "new Lee Jae-myung."
In particular, given that the forces classified as the B group stand at the opposite pole from former leader Jung, it was judged that this could work unfavorably in the structure of the leadership competition. Also, since it was a remark made by the presidential chief of staff at a party workshop, the interpretation that it reflected President Lee Jae-myung's intent was added, amplifying the matter.
A 'Structural Majority' Different From the Political-Engineering Idea of 'Base Expansion'
Amid this, the assessment of the third way by Park Gu-yong, a philosophy professor at Chonnam National University, draws attention. Appearing on the YouTube program "Kim Eo-jun's News Factory" at the time, Park argued that the third way should not be read merely as a political-engineering concept akin to "base expansion."
Park argued, "The 'structural majority' that President Lee mentioned during his meeting with former President Moon Jae-in and Chief of Staff Kang's 'third way' should be interpreted together," adding, "It is not simply about absorbing conservatives but about the need to reach the younger generation." The meaning, he said, is not merely a strategy to win a few more percentage points of conservative voters, but to turn a new generation — one that cannot be explained by the existing progressive-conservative divide — into the Democratic Party's new majority.
Why Kang Hoon-sik's Study of 'Youth' Has Its Reasons
In fact, Kang has recently been studying "youth" as a central theme, according to reports. This stems from an awareness that a generation that lived through eras of $100 and $400 per capita income must understand the sensibility of young people living in an era of $12,000 per capita income.
A representative case that arose from not understanding that gap in sensibility was the controversy over the joint inter-Korean women's ice hockey team pushed forward ahead of the PyeongChang Winter Olympics under the Moon Jae-in government. The older generation assumed that the younger generation would also naturally sympathize with the values of inter-Korean reconciliation and peace, but young people first raised issues of fairness and opportunity. A similar case is blind hiring at public institutions, which the older generation sees as a system that enhances fairness, while among the younger generation there is a stronger perception of reverse discrimination and unfairness.
The reading is that Kang sought to convey at the party workshop an urgency that without understanding this gap in perception, one cannot represent either a new era or a new generation. Obscured by the third-way controversy, what Kang really wanted to talk about was Nike, which raised the slogan "Why Do It" rather than "Just Do It" — and yet made efforts to protect its identity by investing in Portland, where the company originated.
In the meantime, Kang has established a Youth and Future Secretariat directly under the chief of staff and begun full operations. It remains to be seen whether the Democratic Party can take the "Why Do It" road.
