Sino-NK

This explainer examines the classification of South Korea’s People Power Party (PPP; 국민의힘) within the broader framework of rightist political party typologies, situating it within the mainstream right while exploring overlaps with populist and far-right tendencies. Additionally, it analyzes the recent martial law declaration by President Yoon Suk-yeol, contextualizing it within the ideological and historical tendencies of South Korea’s conservative right. By tracing the PPP’s alignment with conservative traditions and its occasional use of authoritarian or populist strategies, this piece highlights the enduring tension between democratic norms and authoritarian legacies in South Korea’s rightist politics.

Situating the PPP | South Korea’s party landscape is marked by frequent party name changes and the lack of strong programmatic linkages, reflecting a more institutionally volatile and personalized party system. The PPP, for instance, is the latest iteration of South Korea’s conservative party, evolving from its predecessors, such as the Grand National Party (GNP; 한나라당) and the Saenuri Party (새누리당). These rebrandings typically occur in response to electoral losses or scandals, aiming to distance the party from past controversies rather than signaling substantive ideological shifts. This fluidity complicates efforts to analyze South Korean parties within traditional typologies.

However, name changes ultimately do not alter the party’s ideological foundation or its role in South Korea’s political system. In sum, the People Power Party in South Korea is a mainstream right political party (see image below). As a conservative party, it operates firmly within South Korea’s democratic framework, emphasizing traditional values, market-oriented policies, and national security. Within the mainstream-right typology, the PPP aligns most closely with conservatives, reflecting its historical focus on economic liberalism, anti-communism, and preserving traditional social relations and hierarchies. While the party maintains ties to South Korea’s conservative Christian base, its broader platform encompasses a range of policy positions beyond religious conservatism.

Overlap with Populist Radical Right and Extreme Right Tendencies | Although the PPP does not qualify as a far-right party, its members occasionally adopt populist rhetoric. This is evident in its nationalist framing and strong anti-communist stances, often invoking themes that resonate with radical-right ideologies, including the polarization of national identity and anti-North Korea sentiment. The party has consistently portrayed itself as the guardian of South Korea’s sovereignty and security, framing political opposition or progressive movements as aligned with “pro-North Korean forces” [종북 세력], reflecting the nationalist element of South Korea’s political polarization — a defining feature of the country and East Asia generally, to say nothing of, as we will see, President Yoon’s declaration of martial law on 3 December.

Unlike far-right or populist radical-right parties, the PPP lacks overt nativism or systemic challenges to democracy. However, the right does not shy away entirely from nativism, often emphasizing Korean ethnicity and culture as central to national identity. This is reflected in exclusionary attitudes toward non-ethnic Korean immigrants and resistance to multicultural policies, often framed as threats to social cohesion. South Korea’s relatively small immigrant population means immigration is not such a salient issue–for now, anyway. Given the enduring role of ethnicity in defining national identity and the chauvinism evident in political attitudes and preferences for redistribution policies, the potential for a nativist backlash in the future is not difficult to envision. This potential is already apparent in controversies like the opposition to mosque construction in Daegu, where local protests and symbolic acts, such as the display of pig heads near the construction site, reveal deep-seated resistance to multiculturalism and Muslim communities.

Additionally, the PPP and broader conservative movements in South Korea maintain a culturally conservative stance on gender roles and sexual norms, echoing socially ultra-conservative positions seen in Europe’s far right. Ultra-conservative Christian groups, which support the PPP, often espouse anti-communist, anti-feminist, and anti-LGBTQ+ stances. While these movements share ideological commonalities with the global far right, they do not advocate for the overthrow of democratic institutions.¹⁾

In sum, the PPP remains best categorized as part of the mainstream right, specifically under the conservative label, albeit with occasional populist tendencies. Its policy strategies and rhetoric on national identity and security sometimes echo elements of the radical right, but it operates largely within the confines of democratic norms.

Situating the Martial Law Declaration by Yoon Suk-yeol | President Yoon Suk-yeol’s declaration of martial law, though unprecedented in contemporary South Korean politics, reflects broader tendencies within the rightist political tradition, particularly in times of perceived national crisis. There are several points to be made about this.

First, the martial law declaration underscores the authoritarian legacy of South Korea’s conservative politics. The PPP, along with its predecessor parties, traces its roots to South Korea’s military-led authoritarian regimes under figures like Park Chung-hee and Chun Doo-hwan. These regimes prioritized strong executive power, often curbing civil liberties to maintain order. While South Korea has since transitioned to a consolidated democracy, this legacy persists, with occasional calls for executive overreach in times of crisis.²⁾

Second, Yoon’s justification for martial law—combating “pro-North Korean forces”—draws on the anti-communist ideology that has historically defined the South Korean right.³⁾ Anti-communism has often served as a rallying cry for curtailing dissent and invoking extraordinary measures to address perceived threats. This dynamic is exemplified by strong public support for the National Security Act, especially from conservatives and conservative politicians, where anti-communist sentiment and security concerns continue to justify restrictions on civil liberties despite their tension with democratic principles. The martial law declaration highlights this enduring feature of conservative politics in South Korea, which frames political opposition as a security risk tied to North Korean sympathies.

Third, the declaration also reflects the use of populist rhetoric, framing the political opposition as “anti-state” and aligning them with external threats. This polarizing language mirrors strategies often seen in other rightist movements, creating a dichotomy between “loyal” citizens and perceived enemies of the state.

Lastly, while the PPP operates primarily within a democratic framework, the martial law declaration represents a notable departure from mainstream-right categorization, leaning toward tactics associated with radical right or authoritarian populist regimes. These regimes often justify democratic backsliding under the guise of protecting national security. The swift reversal of the declaration, along with widespread backlash, underscores the tension between such actions and South Korea’s established democratic institutions.

Dented But Still a Democracy | While Yoon Suk-yeol’s martial law declaration is an extreme act, it is not entirely inconsistent with the historical and ideological tendencies of South Korea’s conservative right. It reflects authoritarian and anti-communist practices deeply rooted in the PPP’s legacy foundations and aligns with broader patterns in far-right behavior. However, the decree’s swift reversal and the intense backlash it provoked, including from some in the PPP, show that such practices are completely at odds with South Korea’s democratic institutions and norms.

However, the event highlights the persistent structural issues that impede fuller democratic consolidation and certainly serves as a data point underscoring the country’s creeping autocratization. The authoritarian practices evident in Yoon’s martial law declaration did not drop out of a vacuum; they reflect a legacy of militarism and exclusionary politics. Other issues not entirely unrelated include the outsized influence of chaebols and frequent corruption scandals involving them, concerns over declining press freedom and judicial independence, and the challenge of converting civil society activism into enduring political reform, especially in the areas of civil liberties.

While the right has adapted to democratic practices, its continued reliance on centralized power and populist, exclusionary rhetoric aimed at left-leaning parties and movements undermines democratic norms. Addressing these tendencies will be crucial for overcoming structural barriers and ensuring the resilience of South Korea’s democracy.