With a series of terrors toward Korean lawmakers, there are growing concerns about extremism in South Korea. The general public and the members of the both parties accused the terrorists of undermining the very basic principle of democracy. All this shows that ideological polarization has reached a dangerous level in the country, forcing us to pave the way for a healthy democracy. This raises a question : what are the root causes of all this, and how can we solve the problems?
Close look at the terrors gives a glimpse about the root causes. According to the media and the police, the perpetrator who stabbed Lee Jae Myong, the leader of the Korean Democratic Party, has been exposed to extreme content on YouTube. Many experts point out that constant exposure to extreme content led him to commit the crime. Recently, the U.S. lawmakers have convened the Big Tech's executives to hold them accountable for the negative side effects of social media, including extreme content. This highlights the fact that the U.S congress has started to see social media as a decisive factor, which poses a great threat to democracy. And the same goes to what's happening in South Korea.
Like Mark Zuckerberg, the founder of Meta, argued at the summon, Freedom of Speech matters. Tougher regulations on extreme content should not turn into crackdown on Freedom of Speech. Despite that, what happened to South Korean lawmakers underscores that the government must step in. At the same time, however, tougher regulations aren't silver bullets. We should share public opinions to understand the other side of the political spectrum. The media could play a significant role in buliding a stronger relationship among all members of society, as people get information from them. For example, Joong-Ang ilbo and Han-gyeorae, which represent Korean conservatives and liberals each, once held a campaign that analyzed each other's column. At the time, many agreed that the campaign was innovative and helped people get a sense of belonging. These days, the similar efforts are imperative.
In conclusion, tougher regulations alone aren't enough to solve the problems. Policymakers must pour effort into building a well-established system that could reduce ideological polarization. Today, many experts argue that misinformation is the main culprit of polarization. Most Trump supporters who attacked the Capital Hill on Jan.6, for example, believed disinformation on the internet and became biased to the point where it could be a grave threat to democracy. A system preventing polarization means a system preventing disinformation from spreading widely among the general public.