Kim Min-seok Rejects Rhee's Thesis, Vows Pragmatic Course

Democratic Party leader Kim Min-seok took direct aim at the "ABC thesis" raised by writer Rhee Yu-mi-in, saying he did not think it held up. Instead, Kim said he would pursue politics aimed at building a structural majority based on his own "New ABC" framework — A for affordability, or household livelihoods; B for broadening, or expansion; and C for competence.

Speaking at a party workshop held at the Inspire Hotel in Incheon on the 27th, Kim said he would speak plainly and honestly. "The ABC thesis was what you might call a values-versus-interests separation theory, holding that some groups inside our party are driven by values and others by interests, and I do not think that is correct," he said.

Kim added that the party had just held a convention that served as a critical turning point, and that members had made their choice at that juncture. "I see that as a choice of a course, and I will run the party according to that course," he said. "Livelihood, pragmatism and expansion — that is the course of our government and the course the party has now chosen," he said, adding that the party must take the path that makes the remaining four years of the Lee Jae-myung administration a success in building a golden era.

He also stressed that regaining power would require politics directed at a structural majority. The point, he suggested, was that relying solely on rallying the traditional base makes it difficult to hold power stably under a two-party structure.

Kim placed particular emphasis on his view that a "reformist ruling party" occupies the most difficult political position of all. "Which position is the hardest? I think it is the reformist ruling party," he said, "because you are reformist, yet the target you traditionally had to fight against has disappeared." He then asked rhetorically: "We were a reformist opposition party, and we became a reformist ruling party. Can we simply carry on as we were, or does something have to change?"

He also argued that a "zero-point shift" was needed to match the times. His point was that a new perspective is required because everything — the global landscape, income levels, the diplomatic environment — has changed from the past. "It is not only our party's lawmakers who are old; a considerable number of our members are as well," he said. "If our lawmakers and members do not work to create change that makes a zero-point shift structurally possible, I believe it will be difficult to be entrusted with running the country five or 10 years from now."

Kim referred to the former party leader seven times, describing differences in their thinking. "The former leader is a leading proponent of the view that there is no moderate bloc. He sees no middle ground, only shifting 'shadowing voters,'" Kim said. "His position is that we can win on the basis of unity within our own camp."

On relations between the party and the government, Kim said the former leader held a "division-of-roles theory." "He believes it is right for the administration running the country within a reformist ruling party to sit a little closer to the economy and household livelihoods, while the party speaks up from slightly further to the left and props it up," Kim said. "By contrast, I and others who take a different view see a subtle difference — that as the force responsible for governing, the party and the government should basically maintain the reformist ruling party's line together within a broad framework."

Kim nonetheless called for tolerance over such friction, describing it as "not a question of character or of good and evil, but a difference in methodology and perception at a juncture that divides one period from another." He stressed: "This is not something that can be resolved simply by drinking a lot together or linking arms for a toast. We have to acknowledge that we stand in different places and align our direction through discussion among people of like mind."