Democracy: Batteries Not Included

The Fine Print of Freedom

South Korea is currently embroiled in political turmoil following President Yoon Suk Yeol's brief imposition of martial law, which has drawn widespread public criticism and intensified calls for his impeachment.

Despite the opposition holding a parliamentary majority, they fell five votes short of the two-thirds needed to impeach the president. This situation has left both domestic and international observers grappling with complex emotions, including frustration, fatigue, and a steadfast commitment to democratic principles.

One thing you should know about Koreans is that we know a thing or two about protest and resistance. We often assert that protest is embedded in our DNA, a sentiment rooted in a history of resistance against oppression. Watch the Olympic medal disciplines where Korea is exceptional and consistently wins medals: archery, shooting, fencing, Judo, Taekwondo and wrestling. Get the picture?

In fact, its history of ordinary activists showing the world not to mess with Koreans isn’t limited to the events of last week. A notable example is the 1909 assassination of Itō Hirobumi, Japan's first Resident-General of Korea while it was under Japanese annexation, by independence activist An Jung-geun. This act was a significant assertion of Korean agency during a period of colonial subjugation.

To my knowledge, no imperial/colonial power had their highest ranking head of state unalived by independence activists during that era till this happened. It shocked the world.

Who Gets to Decide What Is Just and Fair? Lessons from Korea’s Resistance and Modern Parallels

This act was not only a defiance against colonial oppression but a profound challenge to the idea of imperialist "justice" that allowed one nation to dominate another under the guise of modernisation and progress.

More than a century later, the echoes of that resistance continue to resonate as we grapple with the question: Who gets to decide what is just and fair?

Korea’s history of resistance parallels modern conversations about global power dynamics. Whether it’s the ugly face of unchecked capitalism, imperialist overreach, or environmental exploitation, the question of justice remains unresolved.

From climate negotiations to labour movements, the same structures that justified colonial domination now manifest in new forms: economic systems that widen inequality, corporate greed that exploits vulnerable populations, and political powers that prioritise profit over people.

In the face of contemporary challenges, I spent some time revising the psychological factors that influence our perceptions and actions. Behavioural science offers valuable insights into how concepts like the "just world" theory, cognitive dissonance, the audience effect, and moral licensing shape our responses to political events.

1. Just World Theory: The Illusion of Fairness

The "just world" theory posits that people inherently want to believe that the world is fair and that individuals get what they deserve. E.g. They are poor because they are lazy, and I am doing well because I worked hard for it.

This belief can lead to complacency, as it fosters the assumption that systems and people within it operate with integrity. However, when confronted with political overreach or corruption, this worldview is challenged, leading to cognitive dissonance; a mental discomfort arising from holding conflicting beliefs.

· Cognitive Dissonance: Reconciling Conflicting Realities

Cognitive dissonance occurs when new information clashes with existing beliefs, compelling individuals to adjust their perceptions or rationalise the inconsistency. In the context of South Korea's political crisis, citizens who clung to the president and his party member ideology now face the unsettling reality of governmental overreach.

For many conservatives who have steadfastly and religiously supported oon and his party, the declaration of martial law (a measure that triggered tha nation’s past authoritarian regimes and trauma) has been unsettling. This action has forced some of them to reconcile their support for democratic principles with the president's authoritarian tactics. The resulting dissonance compels individuals to either adjust their perceptions of the president or rationalise the inconsistency to alleviate discomfort.

Behavioural science suggests that when the dissonance between beliefs and actions becomes too pronounced, it can lead to significant attitude changes. In this context, conservative supporters may begin to question their allegiance, potentially decreasing their support for the president and increasing their participation in protests advocating for democratic integrity.

However, the extent to which this cognitive dissonance will motivate action among traditional conservative factions remains to be seen. The scale of governmental overreach and its alignment with or deviation from core conservative values will play a crucial role in determining whether these individuals choose to protest or rationalise the president's actions to maintain ideological consistency.

Understanding this psychological process is essential for comprehending the evolving political dynamics in South Korea, as citizens navigate the tension between their ideological commitments and the unfolding political reality.

2. The Audience Effect: Virtue, Visibility, and Performative Activism

Let’s face it: humans are hard-wired to care about what others think of them. Whether we’re dressing up for a protest or posting the perfect “activism selfie,” the audience effect is always at play. This phenomenon (how people alter their behaviour because they know someone’s watching) explains a lot about modern political movements. It’s why some march passionately while others are just there for the Instagram stories.

· Virtue or Visibility?

The audience effect isn’t inherently bad. The desire to be seen as virtuous or aligned with the majority can drive participation in important causes. Purists will frown and roll their eyes, and I catch myself with it sometimes. But this is how massive movements gain momentum! When people feel they’re part of something bigger, they’re more likely to join in. After all, nobody wants to be the person who stayed home while history was being made.

But here’s the catch: not all participation is created equal. For some, the goal shifts from driving change to being seen driving change. Enter performative activism, where the spotlight matters more than the cause.

You’ve seen it: someone posts a protest photo with a caption so vague it could be about anything from democracy to the new Starbucks menu. Or worse, the person whose activism ends when the cameras stop rolling. Their message isn’t “I believe in this,” but “Look at me believing in this.”

· Why It Matters

Performative activism doesn’t just dilute movements; it risks alienating those genuinely committed to the cause. When actions feel hollow or insincere, they erode trust. It’s hard to build momentum for change when half the crowd seems more interested in their follower count than the fight.

Worse, performative gestures can lull participants into a false sense of accomplishment. Sharing a hashtag or attending a rally might feel enough, but meaningful change requires sustained effort. The audience effect can trick us into thinking we’ve done more than we have, all because someone was watching.

· Authenticity Is the New Virtue Signal

Here’s the good news: the audience effect doesn’t have to be bad; it is part of being human! Activism isn’t about perfection but about progress. If used thoughtfully, it can amplify impact. Want to ensure your activism stays authentic? Here’s a starting point:

1. Ask Yourself Why: Before acting, check your motivation. Are you participating to make a difference or to be seen? If it’s the latter, dig deeper.
2. Follow Through: Real activism doesn’t stop at a single event. It’s about sustained effort—volunteering, donating, voting, and staying informed.
3. Prioritise Impact Over Optics: Would you still act if nobody could see you? If the answer is yes, you’re on the right track.

3. Moral Licensing: The Pitfall of Prior Good Deeds

Moral licensing is the phenomenon where individuals allow themselves to act in ways that are inconsistent with their values after doing something that aligns with them. For instance, someone might feel justified in disengaging from political activism after participating in a single protest, believing they've "done their part." This mindset can hinder sustained efforts toward systemic change.

· Trust vs. Mistrust: The Cost of Losing Faith

Trust is like a good pair of shoes. When it’s solid, you barely notice it’s there. But the moment it gives out, the blisters start, and suddenly, every step feels like a punishment. In leadership, trust works the same way. When people have confidence in their leaders, things run smoothly. When they don’t, the whole system starts limping.

But let’s be real: blind trust isn’t much better. Leaders make mistakes, some more monumental than others (see: history books and YouTube). Mistrust, though, can quickly turn into cynicism, and before you know it, people have opted out altogether. The cost? A society that’s too fed up to care and too disengaged to make a difference.

· Mistrust and the Wallet: The Economic Costs

When Voting Declines, So Does the Economy

Let’s talk about apathy at the ballot box. When trust in leadership takes a nosedive, voter turnout follows. Economists have found lower voter engagement is linked to slower economic growth at about 0.1% less GDP growth for every percentage point drop in turnout. A small number, sure. But scale it over time, and you’re essentially throwing money into a black hole of bad governance.

Corruption Gets Cozy

Trust issues don’t just demoralise voters, they encourage shady leaders to be more wacky. Corruption costs the global economy a staggering $2.6 trillion annually. That’s 5% of the global GDP, siphoned off by a system too broken to police itself.

Workplace Mistrust = Productivity Drain

The workplace isn’t immune. Gallup estimates disengaged employees cost the global economy $7.8 trillion a year. Turns out, when trust in leadership erodes, people stop trying to innovate and start clocking out mentally (and maybe physically). Quiet resignation, anyone?

· Mistrust and the Heart: The Social Costs

Polarisation: Pick a Side, Any Side

Mistrust breeds division, and division leads to gridlock. When people spend more time trying to win a fight over each other more than solve problems, nothing gets done. Well, except maybe more shouting. Studies show polarised societies are less resilient, especially during crises like pandemics or climate disasters.

Health Care Hesitancy

Remember COVID-19? Mistrust in leadership turned vaccine campaigns into public relations nightmares. The result? Higher mortality rates and economic losses totalled an estimated $2.3 trillion in 2021 alone. If that’s not a wake-up call, what is?

So, What’s the Fix?

Here’s the thing: trust doesn’t mean giving leaders a free pass, and mistrust doesn’t mean tuning out entirely. The balance lies in informed scepticism, keeping leaders on their toes without descending into full-blown conspiracy theorist territory.

• Transparency is Key: Demand clear, honest communication from leaders.
• Civic Engagement Isn’t Optional: Mistrust often stems from a lack of public involvement. Get involved, even if it’s just showing up to vote.
• Better Accountability Tools: Independent oversight isn’t just for auditors; it’s for all of us.

Final Word (for Now)

South Korea’s political turmoil is a not-so-gentle reminder that democracy isn’t a set-and-forget kind of deal. It demands vigilance, participation, and the occasional bombastic side-eye at those in power. Understanding the behavioural science behind why we trust, act, or throw our hands up in frustration doesn’t just help us cope. It helps us do something about it.

If history has taught us anything, justice and democracy don’t just show up because we asked nicely. They require guts, grit, and a healthy dose of critical reflection. Or, as some might call it, the art of keeping your head on straight while holding others accountable.