Regression of Distributional Politics in Democratization:

A Comparative Study on Civil Society, Social Movements, and Institutional Politics in South Korea and Taiwan

CHO Hee-Yeon, Sungkonghoe Univ. S. Korea CHEN Hsin-Hsing. Shi-Hsin Univ. Taiwan

1.

Consolidated Democracies with Increasing Inequality Theoretical and conceptual frameworks Institutional politics under change Social movements and distributional politics Changes in the civil society

2.

3.

4.

5.

Consolidated Democracies with Increasing Inequality

Reforms in immediate aftermath of the fall of dictatorship under post-authoritarian administrations Failed expectation of progressive distributional politics under the Liberal administrations and popular discontent Resurgence of conservatism

F ig. 1: Indices o f Inco m e Inequality in T aiw an

0. 36 0. 34 0. 32 0.3 0. 28 0. 26 0. 24 0. 22 0.2 1964 1968 1970 1972 1974 1976 1977 1978 1979 1980 1981 1982 1983 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 7

Record High : 2001

6.5 6 5.5 5 4.5 4

Record Low: 1980

3.5 3

G ini's c onc entration c oeffic ient of inc om e s hare of highes t 20% to that of low es t 20% R atio

Declining until 1997 Crisis

Democratic reform and distributional politics

Two

components of the anti-dictatorship democratic movement Democratic reform politics

overcoming the dictatorial legacies; enhancing transparency, vertical and horizontal accountability

Distributional

politics

enhancing economic equalities mitigating various social discriminations and inequalities

Main argument
While

democratic reform politics is largely successful in S. Korea and Taiwan, there is a regression in distributional politics in both countries. Political-sociological analysis of this requires examination of interrelated developments in:

Institutional politics Social movements Civil Society

Theoretical and conceptual frameworks

Democratization as a multi-layered demonopolization Two contradictory liberalizations

Freedom for the peoplepolitical liberalization Freedom for the capitaleconomic liberalization

Democratization as contestation process between two "liberated" forces Contestation over socio-economic inequality depends on:

Configuration of institutional politics Configuration of social movements Hegemony within the civil society

Dual process of democratization

Political liberalization Regime of developmen t and dictatorship Liberation from repression and expansion of autonomy

Empowerment of people and CS(fortune of political liberalization)

Social movements

Institutional politics In the new democracy

Hegemony in the civil society

Economic liberalization

Empowerment of market(disaster liberalization

capital and of economic

Expansion of the market autonomy and economic opening and liberalization

Contesting Forces in Distributional Politics

Maximalist vs. minimalist visions of democracy

Maximalist

Democracy as merely institutional arrangements, or Hollow out of democracy Favored by establishment Democratization in all social domains socialization of democracy Favored by the formerly suppressed people Intrinsic in the idealistic character of democracy

Minimalist

Institutional Politics under Change

Commonalities between South Korea and Taiwan Democratic Reform in Hegemonic Position Political lag and pressure for democratic reform in post-authoritarian period Neoliberalization of political liberals The Third-Wave and Neoliberal developmentalism
second wavenational liberation, decolonization third wave globalization, neoliberalism

Institutional politics in S. Korea

Reforms initiated under post-authoritarian governments IMF directives implemented by the Kim Dae-jung government Strong constraints from capital and market forces Positive achievemenst under the Kim Daejung government

Corruption scandals

Institutional Politics in Taiwan

Centrality of electoral politics Reforms initiated under the post-authoritarian government Reversal of the State-Business Hierarchy Ethnicity, Taiwan-China relations, and the DPP administration

Changes in the ethnicity issue Corruption scandals

Revenues of Top 100 Taiwanese Business Groups

Social movements in South Korea

Peoples

Movement viz. Civic movements Strength of the Trade-Union Movement

Table 1: Growth Rates of Labor Productivity and Real Wage in South Korea
1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 Labor Productivity (%) Real Wage (%) 6.5 7.8 1.6 14.6 6.0 9.4 3.2 7.5 3.0 8.4 5.2 7.0 4.9 6.1 6.1 6.4 4.2 6.6

Social movements in S. Korea

Social movements under the democratic administration

Radical party and pressure on the liberal parties Compromise in 1998 revision of the labor law

Casualization of work

Limitations of the Civic Movements Crisis of the Labor movement

Fragmented labor market

Social Movements in Taiwan

Distinctive characters:

Lack of distinction between old and new social movements Long-lasting movements limited to several sectors Schisms inside the movement often reflect partisan electoral politics Coalition building and structurelessness of organizations Transcending partisan politics Administrative Reforms and the committee politics Legislative reforms

State-Social Movement Interactions

Weaker and slower judicial reforms

Changes in the civil society in South Korea

Hegemony of democratic reform under postauthoritarian administrations Resurgence of conservative tendencies

Backlash toward redressing past injustices Entanglement of the liberals with corruption Neoliberal policies harm common people Failure of the reform to change the deep-rooted conservative consciousness

Changes in civil society in Taiwan

Democratic values as politically correct

2010 Foxconn controversy Pro-unification Pro-Independence politically neutral social conservatives

Three strands of conservatism

Emergence of civic organizations under postauthoritarian governments

Versatile characters of the civic organizations

Wildlife conservationists in the petrochemical controversy

Conclusions

Hegemony of democratic reforms undermined during the liberal administrations Histtory-rooted anti-bureaucratic sentiments and the neoliberalization of liberals Capacity of the social movements still exist despite conservative backlash