I recall a story told by the famous Korean Buddhist monk Ven. Pomnyun when he was asked about the fate of pro-Japanese collaborators in modern Korean history. He told the audience to imagine a bright, hard-working boy who went to school every day and studied assiduously to get into law school and become a judge.
As a judge, he tried his best to be impartial and rule according to the law of the land. This meant he found some criminals innocent but had to send many to prison or the noose. So far, he's just a boy who made good. He is what any parent would want in a son ― a credit to his family, hometown and country.
Now imagine that this was a Korean boy doing all this during the Japanese occupation. Admirable in his personal qualities, yet he is considered a traitor to his own people. Now imagine that it's Aug. 16, 1945, the day after the Japanese surrender in World War II and the nominal liberation day of Korea. This previously respected judge with the authority to decide the life and death of people is now suddenly the lowest of the low, a pro-Japanese collaborator who grew fat by persecuting his own people.
Pomnyun called this a failure to recognize the zeitgeist existing then, that personal industry, smarts or even heroism are not enough if not aligned with the overriding needs and spirit of the times. Heed the spirit of the times, he admonished the questioner, if you want to find meaning and success.
But the zeitgeist quickly changed from Korea vs. Japan to democracy vs. communism in the Cold War. Koreans' zeitgeist might still have been vengeance against pro-Japanese collaborators, and unification, but the weltgeist (world spirit) wouldn't allow these local sentiments to prevail. So this disgraced judge is again picked up by the new government to serve as an arbiter of justice ― total rehabilitation.
Zeitgeist can be a fickle thing, subject to the whims of the world, unless one actively defines it instead of waiting for it to reveal itself.
I think that was the genius of former President Park Chung-hee. Although lauded and reviled in equal parts, his role in creating the modern Korean behemoth cannot be discounted. I think the key to his leadership wasn't his industrial policies or infrastructure works. I think his leadership lay in capturing and shaping the Korean zeitgeist then. His slogan, "Let's all live well for once," encapsulates the sentiment perfectly. Koreans were tired of being weak and poor. They wanted a leader who spoke to that need and provided a direction for a way out.
When he was first elected after Park Geun-hye's ouster, President Moon Jae-in seemed to be sailing into Cheong Wa Dae on the unequivocal mandate to rid Korean society of entrenched corruption and injustice. The millions of candles people lit during protests demanded nothing less than full accountability of their elected leaders. "Clean house!" they demanded, and Moon duly promised to oblige.
But now where is he? The original mandate seems to have evaporated in the fickle winds of the political times. The social consensus has given way to social dissolution over every minute detail of the government's direction and policies. Even the prosecutorial reform, the grand showpiece of the "clean house" plan, has been mired in competing and confusing narratives that have paralyzed it. It's not that Moon is necessarily doing badly as far as presidents go, but he was the candidate of the candlelight vigil. He was supposed to be the change that all Koreans could believe in.
This is where I come back to the Macron interview where he said: "My office isn't first and foremost a political or technical one. Rather, it is symbolic. I am a strong believer that modern political life must rediscover a sense for symbolism. We need to develop a kind of political heroism. I don't mean that I want to play the hero. But we need to be amenable once again to creating grand narratives."
And what's a grand narrative if not a description of the zeitgeist? It's now apparent that people wanted a political hero in Moon, a symbol to define the grand narrative for Korea in the 21st century. They weren't calling for a political or technical administrator for their presidency. They didn't want to dwell on the past, regardless of what the slogans said. They wanted a storyteller for the future. The Miracle on the Han River had long eclipsed as the defining story of our times. What is the new story that can bring people together for a common future?
That's the continuing lesson of the Moon presidency. Define the zeitgeist. Weave the grand narrative. Make it about the future, not the past.
Jason Lim (jasonlim@msn.com) is a Washington, D.C.-based expert on innovation, leadership and organizational culture.