Despite the changing concerns surrounding every year's student council presidential election, the most critical issue is usually the same: should the student council be politically active, or should it prioritize the internal issues within the university? To understand this issue, one must understand the role SNU students played in Korea’s democratization. SNU student politics, along with that of many other Korean universities, has been dominated by political activism for a long time. Until 1987, the end of Korea's authoritarian government, it was considered to be a university student's duty to fight for democracy. SNU students’ political actions were widely respected by the public, because there were few people with a college education back then. Even after 1987, the tradition of political activism remained strong. Students considered the student council to be an organization with a mandate from the students to carry out the students' political duty. The student council would protest against layoffs, and petition for the extension of public welfare and the protection of the environment. In this year's case, there was even a student council presidential candidate who said he would change the government’s policy on North Korea. A student would not run for the student council presidency just to make a better school for the students, but to change the nation.
However, this tradition has been challenged by a new trend. The solidification of democracy has led students to question the necessity of political activism in the student council: isn’t it time that the student council focused on our own business and took care of the students instead of everyone else? The non-activists focus more on the university's internal issues, such as student welfare, dormitory life, and class evaluation: ; hence, the two major trends of student politics, activism and non-activism.
The student council presidential candidates are most likely to dismiss this kind of categorization, because labeling oneself as an activist or a non-activist will most likely lead to the loss of support from opposing voters. RYU Jeong-hwa, SNU student council president in 2004, asserted that the distinction between political activism and non-activism is meaningless. However, she was generally recognized as an activist by the voters. On one hand, it would be unfair for the candidates if they were categorized only based on whether they are activists or not. On the other hand, most students still decide which candidate to support based on this distinction. The first time a non-activist was elected SNU student council president was in 1999. Ever since, the elections have been a tight match.
The peculiarity of this year's election lies in the fact that there were no non-activist candidates running for the presidency. This is most likely because a number of issues have undermined the non-activists' political position lately. A non-activist student council created in 2009 created some scandals. In January 2009, a council member was charged with forging fake SNU cafeteria meal tickets, and in December, the student president was denounced for allegedly manipulating the election results by opening the ballots in advance (this was not proven, but the evidence against him was strong). These scandals produced a poor impression of non-activists among the general student population. Another reason is because of the widespread sentiment among students against SNU becoming a legal entity, which led to the recent protest during which students took over the university’s headquarters. Activists gained a great amount of support during the protest.
Low turnouts have most often been explained by the voters’ political apathy, but there is reason to suspect that apathy was not the main cause this time. The students have never cared more about the student council's actions than within the last few years. There were more than 2000 students who rallied against SNU becoming a legal entity when the student council called for a protest. This shows that the students are, in fact, interested in what is going on at school and what the student council is doing. Also, considering that apathy is not something that grows suddenly, this year’s sharp turnout drop makes it unlikely that apathy was the main reason.
It is more likely that the lack of a non-activist candidate was the cause. In the past when both activists and non-activist candidates ran for the presidency, those who support non-activists would vote as well as the activists, raising the turnout to the required 50%. In contrast, this year it seems that many non-activist supporters did not vote at all. A student in her senior year who requested anonymity explained her reasons for not voting."I'm not voting because I can't agree with any of the candidates. It is not because I don't care. It seems to me that all three don't care much about the students' own needs. I don't think any of them deserve the job." Another student in her junior year said something similar."I can't see what difference it will make whoever becomes the student council president. I've listened to their pledges, but I don't see what they have to do with me."
There is also an opinion that a prejudice against the activists is a reason for the low turnout. On asking if the lack of a non-activist candidate was causing the low turnout, KIM, a student who was working at one of the voting booths, answered,"Yes, it is possible that the low turnout is due to the homogeneousness of the three candidates. However, if you look into the candidates’ pledges more closely, you can see that they actually do care about the students' own needs, not just national politics. Their political activism is a bit exaggerated because of their campaign catchphrases. It is not fair to say that they do not care about the university's internal problems at all, and it is sad that some students are not voting because of such assumptions."
Whether the students' rationale for not voting is prejudiced or not, it may be time for those in student politics to accept the fact that students will not support them anymore unless they can convince them that the student council cares about improving the lives of the students. Without a university student council next term, the student activities normally managed by the university student council will be run by a joint committee of representatives from each college’s student council. However, without the support from the university that the university student council enjoyed (a large budget was appropriated for the university student council), it is hard to expect the joint committee to function as effectively as the university student council did.
Written by KIM Jaeseung, SNU English Editor, brainophone@naver.com ?
Reviewed by Eli Park Sorensen, SNU Professor of Liberal Studies, eps7257@snu.ac.kr
Proofread by Brett Johnson, SNU English Editor, morningcalm2@gmail.com