🔍 1. The Martial Law Crisis: A Stress Test of Korean Democracy
Professor Dan Slater described the recent martial law attempt in South Korea as a “stress test” that the country passed with flying colors.
-
Core Diagnosis:
“Democracy can collapse with a single wrongful seizure of power.”
Yet, Korea did not collapse — its citizens, institutions, and National Assembly responded decisively, proving the resilience of its democratic system. -
Global Perspective:
“South Korea is not uniquely fragile — democracy itself is under threat globally.”
Korea now stands as a beacon of democratic resistance in a time of worldwide democratic backsliding.
🧠 2. Why Did 282 Political Scientists Issue a Statement?
In response to the constitutional crisis, 282 leading political scientists around the world signed a statement urging the restoration of democratic order in Korea.
-
This was not mere diplomacy — it reflected a shared stake in the global defense of democracy.
-
Slater sees this as part of a broader “solidarity among democracies,” where the Korean people’s actions resonated worldwide.
🧱 3. Structural Strengths and Latent Risks in Korean Democracy
Slater noted that while Korean democracy is institutionally strong, there remain latent risks due to the continued influence of former authoritarian elites.
-
A Trade-Off: Korea’s transition involved giving former elites a stake in the system, thus reducing their motivation to resist democratization — but this also left them in positions of potential influence.
-
Lesson:
Leaders who attempt to undermine democracy must be held accountable, but punishment should not polarize society or extend to all their supporters.
📈 4. South Korea as a Rare Case of Authoritarian Transition via Development
According to Slater’s research, South Korea is one of the few nations that successfully transitioned from authoritarianism to democracy through state-led economic development.
-
Korea’s bureaucratic developmental state created a foundation of economic equality and civic confidence, which enabled a stable democratic shift.
-
Elites had “victory confidence” and “stability confidence,” believing elections would not result in extreme or anti-development outcomes — this was critical to the democratic transition.
🏛 5. Institutional Reform: Debating Presidential vs. Parliamentary Systems
Slater welcomed the ongoing debate about institutional reform in Korea.
-
While he acknowledges the stability advantages of parliamentary systems, he cautions that no system is a cure-all.
-
The most important factor is that any reform must be deliberative, transparent, and participatory — rooted in public consensus, not elite manipulation.
💬 6. Korea’s Global Democratic Legacy
Slater emphasized:
“Korea is no longer a ‘young democracy.’ It is now setting an example for older democracies.”
He described Korea as a new lighthouse of democratic accountability, admired for its civic action and institutional response to authoritarian overreach.
✨ Conclusion: Korea’s Democratic Present and Future
This crisis revealed both the fragility and strength of democracy in Korea. Far from simply surviving the ordeal, Korea affirmed the core values of democracy through decisive civic and institutional action.
