Talk:Democratic Party of Korea/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Best Solution For Political Position Infobox

I think the best solution for the political position dispute is to go the route which the Liberal Democratic Party (Japan) page went through.

A commonly agreed upon political position (or the middle of what the party has been described as - LDP Japan has been described as centre-right and far-right, therefore they chose right-wing as the infobox position). And an extensive well-written footnote on the agreed position, with footnotes (efn's) and hyperlinks within the overall larger footnote (hyperlinks leading to factions of the party).

Though the footnote should first clearly state that the party is considered a big-tent liberal party. Like how the LDP Japan first clearly states first that "The Liberal Democratic Party is a big-tent conservative party". ZlatanSweden10 (talk) 12:37, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

I agree with that comment Lazt9312 (talk) 02:18, 18 November 2022 (UTC)

Opposition. In the LDPJ article, the source of the party's 'big tent' is presented. If DPK is a 'big tent' party, please provide the source. Mureungdowon (talk) 01:33, 19 November 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

https://raythep.mk.co.kr/newsView.php?cc=21000003&no=25391

https://www.hani.co.kr/arti/politics/politics_general/1032125.html

Sources What do you think of the addition of "National Liberalism" that I mentioned above? Lazt9312 (talk) 07:12, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Liberalism / National liberalism / Social liberalism → I agree if you write down the main ideology like this, not the 'factions'. Mureungdowon (talk) 07:50, 20 November 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

There was no mention of agreeing, but I am sorry for forcing the amendment. The Democratic Party is not so "nationalistic" compared to the PPP because nationalism is present throughout politics in Korea's political landscape. Liberalism at its core National liberalism, social conservatism, social liberalism, right-wing populism, and centrist reformism (liberal conservatism) should be recorded as internal factions. Lazt9312 (talk) 10:21, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

PPP's right-wing nationalism is not a natural nationalism, but an artificial promotion to create hostility toward North Korea and maintain its vested interests. PPP is much more racist than DPK, but they don't put nationalistic feelings on America or Japan. On the other hand, while distancing itself from racism, the DPK shows a much more consistent diplomatic nationalist inclination to its neighboring powers, including the United States, Japan, China, and Russia. Diplomatically, nationalism is usually marked by the DPK. PPP has nationalistic tendencies, but Confucian conservatism and anti-communist tendencies take precedence over nationalism. Mureungdowon (talk) 10:30, 20 November 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I'm against writing only one Liberalism on the main ideology. The DPK may be somewhat centre-right socially, but economically it is definitely a social liberal line. In Europe, 'national liberalism' has a conservative meaning, and Lee Jae-myung is a New Deal liberal, so if you write only one "Liberalism" on infobox, it can be misunderstood as an economic-liberal/cultural-liberal party like LREM in France. Mureungdowon (talk) 10:41, 20 November 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

The DPK is more socially and culturally conservative than the centre-right parties in Europe. Also, DPK is not that economically “progressive”. No one in the party advocates Social Democracy or Democratic Socialism, and it has more liberal economic policies than other centre-left parties in Europe (most notably the Swedish Social Democratic Party). Lazt9312 (talk) 11:35, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

The DPK is of course not a social democratic party. It's just social liberal party. When it comes to economic policy alone, there is essentially no big difference between Japan's CDPJ and America's Joe Biden. However, DPK is more culturally conservative than them. Mureungdowon (talk) 11:39, 20 November 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I don't think social liberalism should ever be removed from the main ideology of infobox However, the main ideology can be agreed as [A] or [B]:

*[A]: Liberalism / National liberalism / Keynesianism

*[B]: Liberalism / National liberalism / Social liberalism Mureungdowon (talk) 11:42, 20 November 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

National liberalism is strongly associated with conservative liberalism, i'm not sure about that

but definitely B, Keynesianism implies that DPK is clearly left-of-centre party and is generally rarely used Braganza (talk) 07:42, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Then I'm going to change the DPK article to [B], and you're not against this? It is true that the DPK does not support the social and cultural views of general liberal parties. Mureungdowon (talk) 10:36, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Party leader Lee Jae-myung, who belongs to the progressive side of DPK, was also progressive in 2017, but moved toward economic liberalism during the 2022 presidential election process.

He proposed easing real estate taxes and easing corporate regulations in 2022, showing a shift to the right compared to 2017.

My argument is that the Democrats are not economically “progressive” at all. The party supports a "free market economy".

However, it is true that Korean politics has a relatively progressive economic policy compared to PPP, so a little more discussion is needed. Lazt9312 (talk) 12:23, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

In fact, when I searched, there was no media article mentioning the Democratic Party as Keynesian, so plan B seems more appropriate. You agree to the writing if you write the following. main: Liberalism National liberalism (socially) Social liberalism (economically) Inner faction: social conservatism centrist reformism economic liberalism populism Progressivism (some) (Conservatives in DPK strongly support free market economy. Sources are also available on the Korean Wikipedia.) (In fact, the source only says populism, but it is not described as "left-wing populism." Because left-wing populism is considered radical, it does not fit the DPK's image.) (Inset is necessary because Progressivism has multiple sources.) Lazt9312 (talk) 12:29, 21 November 2022 (UTC)

Why don't we just delete the factions and make the ideology "Liberalism / National liberalism / Social liberalism"? (Progressivism is based on cultural liberalism, and DPK major politicians are not very culturally liberal.) Mureungdowon (talk) 13:37, 21 November 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I don't think the article should be determined by our position. Articles should be determined by source.

I also don't think the Democratic Party is "progressive". However, it is necessary to write because the source says it is progressive.

In fact, it is difficult to see the DPK as completely progressive economically, as its progressive factions have more conservative economic policies than the centre-left parties in Europe. In addition, conservatives inside the party (typically the speaker of the National Assembly) are not a minority and still have a lot of influence in the DPK. Lazt9312 (talk) 13:35, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Then I won't put "national liberalism" in the infobox. Instead, remove the "factions" as well. And make the following changes: "Liberalism | Social liberalism (footnote : The DPK is considered a "liberal" or "social-liberal" party because it advocates moderate Keynesian economic policies, opposition to PPP, liquidation of right-wing authoritarianism and political reform. However, there is controversy that the DPK does not support policies that conform to social liberalism in policy (especially on cultural issues)." Only a very FEW English sources refer to DPK as "progressive". I can hardly approve of it. It should be based on a general assessment. DPK is usually referred to as "liberal" or "social liberal" in English media. Mureungdowon (talk) 07:32, 24 November 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

As explained above, I oppose removing the insertion because there are ethnic liberal parts.

You have to keep describing the internal faction. Removing social conservatism from the faction makes the DPK appear to be culturally liberal.

So, something like this would be good:

I have two suggestions. Since I have the basis for this statement, it is correct to choose between the following statements.

[A]

liberalism

Inner faction:

social liberalism

centrist reformism

social conservatism

national liberalism

economic liberalism

[B]

mainstream:

liberalism

social liberalism

national liberalism

Inner faction:

social conservatism

economic liberalism

Progressivism

centrist reformism Lazt9312 (talk) 15:05, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

I support changing "economic liberalism" to "populism" in Plan B. Lee Jae-myung also has right-wing populist elements such as feminist attacks, and unlike Bernie Sanders, he is not a social democrat. + No English media recently described DPK as economic liberal Mureungdowon (talk) 21:21, 24 November 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

If you write such a non-mainstream ideology, there are too many things to do. If you think about it that way, you can see that there is also a "Christian right wing" inside the DPK. Chairman Kim Jin-pyo introduced the “homosexuality” healing movement as a solution to low birth rates.

-> https://www.hani.co.kr/arti/politics/politics_general/1068955.html

There are no English articles, but there are many Korean articles that say DPK conservatives are economically liberal. (See Korean Wikipedia) Lazt9312 (talk) 13:05, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

I will present the following agreement.

mainstream:

liberalism

Inner facts:

social liberalism

social conservatism

centrist reformism

National liberalism

Progressivism

In addition, the contents of the footnotes are roughly as follows.

[A]

In DPK, factions that insist on "economic liberalism" and factions that insist on "economic progressivism" coexist. Currently, the "economic liberalism" faction has the upper hand, but the "economic liberalism" faction is also new.

[B]

Explain that the DPK is more socially and culturally conservative than the Christian Democratic Party, Germany's center-right liberal conservative party

[C]

It is introduced that DPK sometimes takes nationalist or populist stances, but this is common by Korean political standards. Lazt9312 (talk) 13:13, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

we should avoid "economic progressivism" (same with "economic conservatism") because it is only used in american terminology Braganza (talk) 15:45, 25 November 2022 (UTC)

@Braganza: Lee Jae-myung is not a progressive. Lee Jae-myung was criticized by LGBT organizations for their insincere attitude when they protested to enact anti-discrimination laws. And there is a controversy that he is hostile to feminism. Since progressivism is based on cultural liberalism, it would be more appropriate for us to describe Lee as a "populist." Mureungdowon (talk) 23:33, 25 November 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

did i say that? i just referred to the proposal [A]

"economic progressivism" = economic interventionism

"economic conservatism" = economic liberalism Braganza (talk) 06:16, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

@Lazt9312: Changing "economic liberalism" to "populism" is not non-mainstream. Lee Jae-myung is described as a populist like Yoon Suk Yeol in numerous English media. Populism is a mainstream faction. Mureungdowon (talk) 20:33, 25 November 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Again, I don't think DPK or Jaemyung Lee are "progressive." But we have to set the ideology according to the source. Lazt9312 (talk) 03:31, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

Sources describing Lee Jae-myung as a "populist", or sources describing him as a "populist" along with Yoon Suk Yeols, can be found countless times just by Google search. It is a clear Fact that Lee Jae-myung is a Populism. Mureungdowon (talk) 04:26, 26 November 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

mainstream:

liberalism

Inner facts:

social liberalism

social conservatism

Christian Democracy

centrist

reformism

populism

We propose the following agreement: I will withdraw my opinion of inserting "progressiveism" into the internal faction.

As for Christian democracy, it is necessary because Christianity has a lot of influence in DPK. Lazt9312 (talk) 12:44, 26 November 2022 (UTC)

It is true that the DPK supports Keynesian economic policy. The party is not very friendly with Milton Friedman or Hayek's classic liberalism. Mureungdowon (talk) 20:32, 26 November 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Don't just label "liberalism" in mainstream ideology. Because DPK is not a liberal party like Renaissance (party). DPK is more inclined to Keynesianism than economic liberalism, but at the same time has a social conservative tendency. Mureungdowon (talk) 20:36, 26 November 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

i would support it Braganza (talk) 10:17, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

The DPK is much more Keynesian and more socially conservative, unlike the usual European liberal parties. Therefore, it is not right to write only "Liberalism" as the main ideology of DPK's infobox. Mureungdowon (talk) 10:32, 27 November 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Please cite sources during discussion.

It is said that writing liberalism in the main ideology does not represent DPK's socially and culturally conservative and economically progressive stance, but he can explain it through footnotes.

Again, Chairman Kim Jin-pyo won the support of the majority of DPK lawmakers. He is quite economically liberal.(He advocates deregulation.)

( https://m.khan.co.kr/politics/assembly/article/202105062104025 )

It makes no sense that DPK supports Keynesian policies. Currently, the DPK's economic liberal faction and the liberal faction's influence are almost identical. The current party representative also accepted economic liberalism more than in the past. Lazt9312 (talk) 13:43, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

He won the support of 89 out of 160 lawmakers and beat his progressive opponent by more than twice the margin. Lazt9312 (talk) 13:45, 27 November 2022 (UTC)

The party leader is Lee Jae-myung, and it cannot be denied that DPK's economic policy is closer to Keynesianism than economic liberalism. Moreover, the DPK has been described as a center-left in many major English media. Mureungdowon (talk) 01:50, 28 November 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Keynesianism is never used as a label, we shouldn't introduce it for a liberal party Braganza (talk) 07:06, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

The problem is that the DPK is described as "social liberal(ism)" in many reliable sources. However, the DPK is not cultural liberal enough, unlike the usual social liberal party. Mureungdowon (talk) 10:08, 28 November 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

i think the status quo is acceptable Braganza (talk) 22:22, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

Couldn't you just then add a cref/cnote saying "socially liberal within Korea's conservative political structure". Similarly to how the Justice Party in Korea has that under its political position info box, mentioning how the party is considered "left-wing" in Korea, when internationally it isn't. ZlatanSweden10 (talk) 11:38, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

Indeed, in order to establish the claim that DPK lacks cultural liberalism, social liberalism must be eliminated. Social liberalism is considered culturally more liberal than simple liberalism.

It is difficult to accept that DPK's Jaemyung Lee is a "centre leftist". The position in 2017 was center-left, and now it has turned to a moderate position.

Also, and most importantly, there is no "left wing" within the party. Within the party there are "nothing" more progressive positions (*economic and social) than the Swedish Social Democrats, the representative center-left Social Democrats.

Therefore, I think it is appropriate to agree on the above claim.

Regarding the ideology

In fact, it is widely distributed from the center right to the center left.

Therefore, it is the opinion that the political position should be written as centrist.

Just like JP, you can use footnotes to indicate that the political structure of Korea is portrayed as center-left.

I agree with ZlatanSweden10 Lazt9312 (talk) 14:22, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

The Pressian is a very left-wing biased. That is not a reliable source. Mureungdowon (talk) 21:56, 29 November 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Please justify your claim. Please do not repeat the same claim without evidence. An unsubstantiated repetition of an assertion that has already been repeated is not a valid objection. Also, since there are people who agree with my opinion, it is right that it is corrected according to my claim. When a conclusion is drawn, it is likely to be drawn according to my opinion. I will rewrite my argument again. mainstream: liberalism Inner facts: social liberalism social conservatism Christian Democracy centrist reformism populism Lazt9312 (talk) 10:30, 30 November 2022 (UTC)

Is there a direct source of Christian democracy? And I can't find most of the sources you usually present in English. Of course, DPK is a political party in South Korea, but this is the English Wikipedia.

The only part I agree with is to change "Left-wing populism" to "Populism" during the Factions. Mureungdowon (talk) 14:18, 1 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

South Korea's centre-left progressive press described Chairman Kim Jin-pyo as "conservative Christian" in an editorial in the Hankyoreh. this is enough

It can be interpreted as Christian democracy.

https://www.hani.co.kr/arti/opinion/column/1069839.html Lazt9312 (talk) 15:59, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

It is WP:SYNTH Mureungdowon (talk) 07:13, 2 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I admit I was short on explanation. I will now explain my claim through evidence. 1

. First of all, the expression Christian democracy came from a press called Pressian. ( https://www.pressian.com/pages/articles/2021042812134197683 ) The author who wrote this article graduated from the Department of Sociology and Graduate School of Yonsei University and is a reliable source. Claims that Pressian is "leftist" are unfounded. If you argue in that way, the Chosun Ilbo, JoongAng Ilbo, and Donga Ilbo, all major Korean media outlets, cannot be trusted.

2. Characteristics of Christian democracy Several sources mention a moderate social conservatism (compared to other staunch 'right-wing' political newcomers) and skeptical views on legalizing abortion and same-sex marriage. Conservatives of the DPK are skeptical of homosexuality, and Moon Jae-in, a former DPK president, also expresses his opposition to homosexuality. ( https://news.kbs.co.kr/news/view.do?ncd=3470477 )

3. Lastly, the closeness between DPK and Christianity should be considered. DPK members attended church events and argued against homosexuality. ( https://m.khan.co.kr/culture/religion/article/202202271611001 ) Lazt9312 (talk) 13:23, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

1. The sources do not refer to DPK as a Christian democrat. This phrase does not refer directly to the DPK as a Christian democracy: "미국 민주당을 비롯해 거의 모든 집권당이 리버럴이나 기독교민주주의에 속한 '중도우파' 성향이다. 물론 문재인 정부-더불어민주당도 리버벌이고 중도우파다." / It is WP:SYNTH

2. It can be described as "Social conservatism".

3. DPK and Christianity's affinity is fully reflected in the article. However, I am opposed to writing "Christian democracy" in the infobox. There is no source from which it is stated. Mureungdowon (talk) 21:06, 2 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

DPK has many characteristics of Christian democracy, so it can be seen as Christian democracy. Lazt9312 (talk) 10:38, 3 December 2022 (UTC)

Oh, please check this out: WP:SYNTH Mureungdowon (talk) 00:26, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

It is supported by sources that DPK has a social conservative element. However, it is controversial whether it necessarily means Christian democracy. As a compromise, I will put Christian democracy and the Christian left in the 'See also' session. Mureungdowon (talk) 00:44, 4 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Inserting Christian Democracy into Sessions is agreeable. However, if so, progressiveism should also be included in the session.

(https://www.sisaon.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=120710 ) ( https://www.dbpia.co.kr/journal/articleDetail?nodeId=NODE02500672 ) which adds conservatism to the session. It's the same as not being right.

Also, economic liberalism should be inserted as a faction. Kim Jin-pyo and others promote representative economic liberal policies. Lazt9312 (talk) 08:08, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

How about adding "Progressivism" to infobox instead of changing "Left-wing populism" to "Populism"? Of course, in the factions. (Lee Jae-myung is not a progressive but a populist. But Park Ji-hyun is a progressive.) Mureungdowon (talk) 21:04, 4 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I oppose the insertion of progressivism into internal sects. Instead, it would be better to explain through footnotes. Progressives such as Park Ji-hyeon are in the minority in the party, and conservatives such as Kim Jin-pyo are rather gaining more support. (Supported by majority of members of the National Assembly) Lazt9312 (talk) 10:45, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

What about the next agreement?

mainstream:

liberalism

Inner facts:

social liberalism

social conservatism

economic liberalism

centrist reformism

populism

It seems that progressivism and Christian democracy can be detailed through footnotes. The basis for economic liberalism is fully listed in DPK's Korean documents. Lazt9312 (talk) 10:47, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

Is there any evidence that the DPK is not a social liberal party? The Friedrich Naumann Foundation also refers to this party and its main politicians as left-liberal. "Social liberalism" is a mainstream ideology. The part that is not culturally liberal can be explained in footnotes. I don't agree with your proposal. Mureungdowon (talk) 10:54, 5 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

What do you disagree with? I am not claiming that I am not a Social Liberal Party. It's going to be a deficit in faction. It is difficult to agree to write progressiveism as a sect. In that way, conservatives such as Kim Jin-pyo exert more influence within the party, so there should be less conservatism. Lazt9312 (talk) 13:51, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

It is true that DPK is at least more socially progressive than PPP. Of course, it is only a relative meaning. The DPK has never promoted a social conservative view. Rather, in the context of social conservative South Korean politics, relatively progressive. Mureungdowon (talk) 01:48, 7 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

How about changing "Social conservatism" to "Conservatism" in factions, adding "Progressivism" to the faction instead, and "Left-wing populism" to "Populism"? Mureungdowon (talk) 05:28, 7 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

It seems that social conservatism is better than simple conservatism as it seems to fit the source. I am not opposed to inserting "progressiveism" inside, but economic liberalism should also be included. Lazt9312 (talk) 10:40, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

÷== Political position ==

The DPK's political position should be "Centre to Centre-left". In many mainstream English media, the DPK is described as a center-left party, while it is NEVER described as a center-right. Mureungdowon (talk) 10:32, 3 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

If there is no counterargument to this, I will add a political position. Mureungdowon (talk) 11:22, 3 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

In fact, as mentioned in the source above, there are scholars who are of the opinion that DPK is a center-right by international standards, although they are a small number of experts. ( https://www.hani.co.kr/arti/opinion/column/928445.html ) ( https://www.pressian.com/pages/articles/2021042812134197683 ) (If you do not refute this, describe the middle-left It seems difficult.) Also, the main leaders of the DPK have admitted that their party is center-right by international standards. ( https://www.joongang.co.kr/article/23048528#home )

France's LREM is also described as centre-right and center-right, but is listed as centrist because it promotes progressive (socio-culturally) policies.

Even if the Democratic Party of Korea is described as moderate and center-left (assuming), it should be recorded as centrist because it is promoting socially and culturally conservative policies. Lazt9312 (talk) 08:04, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

The first and second articles are opinion written by a left-winger. The third article is Lee Hae-chan's own argument, so it is never a reliable source. PPP politicians define themselves as "liberal", so is the PPP a liberal party? Check the WP:RS policy. Mureungdowon (talk) 08:59, 4 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

The DPK is a center-left party by South Korean political standards. The part that is not culturally liberal is explained in the footnotes. I don't think most readers will misunderstand

If the DPK's political position is simply defined as centrist, a serious error occurs. The centrist parties that reject both the DPK and PPP. Serious problems arise when marking their political positions. Political positions should not ignore relative factors because the political environment varies from country to country. Although the DPK may be a center-right party in Sweden, it is absolutely natural to consider the South Ham political standard because it is a left-wing party in South Korea. Therefore, the Centre to centre-left is absolutely right about the DPK's political position. Mureungdowon (talk) 09:07, 4 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

First of all, I would appreciate it if you would not edit the content under discussion. In principle, the existing description should be maintained in the event of a dispute.

It is not grounds that leftists wrote and cannot be trusted.

I'll explain three sources that describe the Democrats as center-right.

1. Kim Nuri, professor at Chung-Ang University (Expert) He explained that DPK is liberal conservative & center-right in international standards.

(https://www.hani.co.kr/arti/opinion/column/928445.html)

2. An article on a Korean thesis site (Reliable article in Korea) Describes the Korean political system as a "conservative two-party system".

3. Lastly, professional books written by experts were written by major Korean professors such as Hallym University, Jeju National University, and Seoul National University. (Also an expert) In this book, 'The current Democratic Party, which is often attacked as a leftist, looks at its origin and history and its current political orientation, but on a global basis, it is a conservative party or close to a liberal right-wing party' It is described.

( https://www.aladin.co.kr/shop/wproduct.aspx?ItemId=7584909 ) ( https://www.hani.co.kr/arti/opinion/column/928445.html ) Lazt9312 (talk) 13:49, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Conservative liberalism or right-liberalism

For reference, "right-wing liberalism" has the same meaning as "conservative liberalism." Lazt9312 (talk) 13:51, 4 December 2022 (UTC)

Kim Nuri is a leftist and fundamentally who views DPK as a conservative party. Is he more reliable than the New York Times or the Daily Telegraph??? He is not an expert at this door. Mureungdowon (talk) 20:57, 4 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

South Korea is a multi-party system, but it is practically close to a two-party system. In other words, the DPK is in any case a left-wing party contrasting with the PPP in South Korean politics, and the claim that it is a right-wing party is only a biased argument from those who are more progressive than the DPK. Of course, I am not talking about adding the left to the political position. Considering both international standards and South Korea's political reality, this is the case: "Centre to Centre-left". Mureungdowon (talk) 21:00, 4 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Even if the DPK is a political party in South Korea, it is an English Wikipedia. The party is not described as a conservative liberal party in any English cultural data, and, frankly, the description of centrist is now small. Many English sources describe DPK as centre-left. All the materials you bring are Korean and not English. Mureungdowon (talk) 21:10, 4 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

In fact, the claim that the source is not reliable is my own. I would appreciate it if you could provide a rationale. Lazt9312 (talk) 10:53, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm fairly new here, but wouldn't it be best to expand the "Liberalism in South Korea" page to encompass the array of ideologies and leave the "Ideology" parametre in the infobox as "Liberalism (South Korea)", unless there are some that deviate from the liberal ideology in South Korea? ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 14:48, 5 December 2022 (UTC)

I do not oppose the opinion that leaves Korea's liberalism. However, I want to display it as follows. Centrist (center-right to center-left) or the Big Tent In fact, even if the opinion of the center right is a minority, there are people who insist on it among experts. There are also similar examples, such as France's LREM, which is described as center-right and center, but also centrist because it is socially and culturally progressive. Lazt9312 (talk) 13:54, 6 December 2022 (UTC)

DPK is not centrist in South Korean political context. Therefore, I do not agree with the political position you are proposing. Mureungdowon (talk) 01:45, 7 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

In fact, the reason why I oppose the center-left stance is that the majority of DPK lawmakers supported Kim Jin-pyo, who was evaluated as more conservative than the center-right Bareunmirae Party, as the speaker of the National Assembly. Internal public opinion and rank and file members are progressive, but the party's mainstream lawmakers are not so progressive. Lazt9312 (talk) 10:49, 7 December 2022 (UTC)

If there is no objection, I will write the ideology as centrist. Please participate in the discussion. Lazt9312 (talk) 03:12, 10 December 2022 (UTC)

I object to simply writing political positions as "Centre". DPK is extremely rare in many English media to describe centrist, let alone centre-right. The "centre-right" should not be added to the political position. The DPK's political position is "Centre to centre-left". Because you would not agree with this, I am opposed to adding a political position to the infobox. Mureungdowon (talk) 07:52, 10 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Give reasons, not opinions. There is no evidence that right-of-centre sources are wrong. Lazt9312 (talk) 09:28, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

English media such as the NYT and WP describe the Democratic Party only as a "centre-left", never as a "centre-right". Mureungdowon (talk) 22:59, 18 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

There is a source that is center left, but there is also a source that sees it as center right. The conservatives within the party are more conservative than the German CDU in all respects. And even the most progressive figures in the party do not take more progressive positions than the German SPD. Lazt9312 (talk) 14:39, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Please respond to the discussion. Lazt9312 (talk) 16:15, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

German politics is not the standard of global politics. What is certain is that the DPK is a center-left by South Korean political standards. There is no need for excessive consideration of the German CDU in South Korean politics. Mureungdowon (talk) 16:21, 24 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

My argument would be to lower Social Liberalism as a faction and add National Liberalism and Liberal Conservatism to the faction. Some Korean experts evaluate DPK as liberal and conservative. Lazt9312 (talk) 03:10, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

It is only your argument that there is consensus. If the political position does not include the centre-left, I think it should be removed. Mureungdowon (talk) 01:24, 27 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Wasn't the content suggested by Mr. Mureung Dowon above in [B] to write liberalism / social liberalism / national liberalism together in the mainstream faction? Can you tell me why your opinion has changed? Lazt9312 (talk) 13:30, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Because I searched on Google and couldn't find a source that explicitly describes DPK as "national liberal". Mureungdowon (talk) 13:53, 7 February 2023 (UTC)

Then, the content that DPK combines national liberalism and social liberalism below also needs a little modification. Lazt9312 (talk) 15:02, 7 February 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

By the way, is there an expression of 'citizen nationalism' in the source of the article? National Liberal seems rather closer to national liberalism. Lazt9312 (talk) 14:36, 9 February 2023 (UTC)

Source refers to an Moon Jae-in and is referred to as "nationalist-liberal" rather than "nationalist-liberal". Considering only the sources I looked for, DPK was often described as a Korean nationalist. So 'nationalism' may be more appropriate than 'civic nationalism'. Mureungdowon (talk) 20:07, 9 February 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Just because there is something mentioned as nationalism and social liberalism, it seems to be a somewhat expanded interpretation to see it as a combination of nationalism and social liberalism. Lazt9312 (talk) 04:02, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

https://www.hani.co.kr/arti/politics/assembly/781904.html

Progressive journalist Hankyoreh also described Lee Jae-myung as Bernie Sanders. Lazt9312 (talk) 04:39, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

The source is from 2017. In addition, Ahn Hee-jung compared him to Tony Blair in the sense of centristness, who is a liberal socialist. But is Ahn Hee-jung a socialist? I think this one-dimensional comparison is pointless. Mureungdowon (talk) 06:49, 10 February 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

In fact, 'person B in country A' expresses the political form of the country. Many media refer to Kim Dae-jung as the Nelson Mandela of Korea, but that does not mean that Kim Dae-jung supports Nelson Mandela's ideology. The reason Ahn Hee-jung is described as Tony Blair is because he chose a moderate line from the mainstream center left (a party that is considered moderately progressive in the country, if not a center left). Lazt9312 (talk) 14:19, 10 February 2023 (UTC)

The problem is that DPK is a social liberal party ideologically similar to the Democratic Party of America. Lee Jae-myung is by no means Bernie Sanders. Mureungdowon (talk) 21:40, 10 February 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Kim Dae-jung is not Nelson Mandela either. There are many cases in which politicians with similar backgrounds are described as B politicians in country A. There is a saying that Lee Jae-myeong is Korea's Sanders in various sources, so if there is no reason not to write it down, you should write it down. Lazt9312 (talk) 07:45, 12 February 2023 (UTC)

It's understandable that the Bernie Sanders narrative can be misleading. I will explain it well through the article. Lazt9312 (talk) 01:38, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Opposition. (I support the status quo.) Mureungdowon (talk) 05:03, 14 February 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Again, because there is no reason not to write Even if you insist on maintaining the status quo, you can't stop making media-based narratives. Lazt9312 (talk) 12:45, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your consent. We're going to slightly shift some of the ideologies in the faction description below to decimal form, and if you don't mind, feel free to revert them. Lazt9312 (talk) 13:52, 14 February 2023 (UTC)

References

Simple Solution

I think following what this Nepalese political party did for its political position would easily be the best solution for the DPK page.

The page: Rastriya Swatantra Party

The page doesn't have a source for being big tent, but I think it's irrelevant when the party itself and its members have such diverse views (and thus diverse political positions - to which can be easily viewed with the cref/cnote). ZlatanSweden10 (talk) 13:27, 13 December 2022 (UTC)

I am against this. I think it would be better not to write down the political position in the infobox. Just like the Democratic Party (United States) article. Mureungdowon (talk) 23:00, 18 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

While I agree. The reason why I think its fine for the Democratic Party (United States) and Republican Party (United States) to have no political position in the info box, is because neither have a one in their info boxes. So if this party were not to have one, which I am fine with, I think the People Power Party (South Korea) shouldn't have one either then. ZlatanSweden10 (talk) 13:19, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Then I suggest writing down the DPK's political position like this: "Centre to Centre-left". And when it comes to political positions, you can write in footnotes that you are socially conservative than the US Democratic Party or even the German centre-right CDU. Mureungdowon (talk) 13:34, 19 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

The PPP is similar to the Republican Party, but the DPK is not much like the Democratic Party of America. DPK-mainstream feminism or positions on LGBT issues may even be more conservative than moderate US Republicans. Above all, the term "liberal" is not used in the American sense in South Korea. Blue Dog in the United States is much more culturally progressive than DPK and JP. Mureungdowon (talk) 13:40, 19 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Therefore, even if the DPK's political position is not written down, at least the PPP's political position is not problematic. The DPK is more socially conservative than the U.S. Democratic Party, and the PPP is more conservative than the U.S. Republican Party, as well as more conservative than the Japanese LDP. Mureungdowon (talk) 13:47, 19 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Even the PPP also differs from the US Republican Party. PPP conservatism is not based on classical liberalism. Rather, PPP is closely related to former military dictatorship elite politicians. On the other hand, the United States has never experienced dictatorship in history. In the United States, classical liberals are called conservatives or fiscial conservatives. In South Korea, classical liberalism and conservatism are distinct. And the term economic liberalism is much more used in South Korea than fiscial conservatism. Mureungdowon (talk) 14:00, 19 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

That is why I believe that political positions should be written in the DPK's infobox, but not in the PPP's infobox. The two articles are separate. Mureungdowon (talk) 14:00, 19 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I think it would be better not to write ideology until agreement. You agree to maintain the status quo until agreement. Lazt9312 (talk) 14:40, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Since there has been no counterargument for a long time, I will suggest a way to describe the position as centrist. I will describe it as centrist in the absence of persistent objections. LREM is also described as "centrist" and "center-right", but also centrist because it is culturally liberal. Since DPK is described as (mostly) centrist, (sometimes) centre-left, and (by some researchers) centre-right, it is correct to write it as centrist. Lazt9312 (talk) 14:42, 30 December 2022 (UTC)

I very disagree. As I said before, the DPK is not just a centrist in the context of South Korean politics, and is often described as a center-left in the English media. The fact that DPK has a social conservative element should be explained in footnotes. But the political position must be "'''centre to centre-left'''". I'm against users who describe DPK as "left-wing" but also against users who describe DPK as "centre-right". Mureungdowon (talk) 14:59, 30 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Don't add a political position to the infobox. There is yet to be any agreement on a political position. I don't want to repeat the same talking, and if you add the wrong political position to infobox I'll remove it. Mureungdowon (talk) 15:02, 30 December 2022 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

In fact, the debater is repeating the same claim without being able to refute the evidence that the experts presented by me suggested DPK as a center-right.

The reason why I write DPK as centrist is because there is a significant center-right faction within DPK. National Assembly Speaker Kim Jin-pyo won the support of a majority of DPK lawmakers, and there is also information that he took a more conservative stance than the center-right party in past surveys.

Before the agreement, I will not write about centrism or centrist to centrist left. Lazt9312 (talk) 11:48, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

( https://www.aladin.co.kr/shop/wproduct.aspx?ItemId=287119092 )

Even in the book written by a doctor from Yonsei University, there is content that mentions that DPK is a liberal conservative, center-right party by international standards.

In fact, there are quite a few scholars who claim that the DPK is a center-right by international standards. Lazt9312 (talk) 12:04, 2 January 2023 (UTC)

Personal opinion doesn't matter. International standards are also meaningless. The U.S. Democratic Party is much more socially progressive than the DPK, and the U.S. Democratic Party has socialists in the party, unlike DPK and JP. But some liberal scholars in the United States argue that the U.S. Democrats are "centre-right" or even "neoliberal" by international standards. Originally, judging the politics of a particular country is more accurate from the perspective of outsiders without political interests than from citizens of that country. Mureungdowon (talk) 23:32, 2 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Of course, this article may be an inappropriate parable because it is not related to American politics. But one thing is for sure, non-Korean outsiders never describe the DPK as center-right. Blue Dog Coalition also takes a more progressive position on many social issues than the South Korean Justice Party. Justice Party is culturally left-wing and economically center-left in South Korean political standards. Then, by South Korea's standards, it will be concluded that Blue Dog Coalition is a socially "far-left". As evidenced by this, international standards have no meaning.

In rare cases, I have also seen an English source describing DPK as left wing. However, I have never seen a single English source describing DPK as centre-right. Japanese Wikipedia even describes DPK, CDPJ, and the U.S. Democratic Party as "centre-left to left-wing" and the opposition conservative party as "centre-right to right-wing". Of course, I do not support the way Japanese Wikipedia edits. The DPK's political position is "centre to centre-left", not "centre" or "centre-right". Mureungdowon (talk) 23:55, 2 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

"left-leaning" is NOT "left-wing".

There are social democrats inside JP.

In fact, it seems difficult to come to an agreement on ideology, but why don't you just write it as the Big Tent and write that it is mainly centrist and sometimes evaluated as center-left, and some researchers argued that this party is to the right of the CDU?

In fact, the center left is right because dpk is treated as "progressive vs conservative" in the Korean political landscape. However, in practice, it has a more conservative policy than CDU. Merkel's policy is more progressive than Lee Jae-myung's. Lazt9312 (talk) 07:26, 3 January 2023 (UTC)

German politics has nothing to do with South Korean politics. I don't think mainstream European political parties are comparable because they are very culturally liberal. It is right to compare South Korean politics with those of other liberal democracies in Northeast Asia. Mureungdowon (talk) 20:42, 3 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

It is my claim that Merkel is more progressive than Jaemyung Lee, but placing DPK to the right of CDU is what many experts claim. In fact, the international perspective I am talking about is not my opinion, but the opinion of university professors (experts) such as Chung-Ang University and Seoul National University. Lazt9312 (talk) 13:26, 4 January 2023 (UTC)

It's the opinion. It is not a commonly accepted concept. I object to writing down the political position of this party in infobox. DPK operates as a center-leftist in South Korean political standards, which is why political parties in Ahn Cheol Soo and Kim Dong-yeon in the past advocated "centre" in PPP and DPK Saa. Simply writing down the DPK's political position as "centre" creates a problem with editing the political position of many of South Korea's real centrist parties. Mureungdowon (talk) 20:25, 4 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

We know that experts' opinions are recognized as credible evidence. Then, simply write the ideology as Big Tent, and in the middle Korean political landscape, it is center-left in contrast to right-wing PPP, but some researchers place DPK on the right rather than CDU.

It would be nice if it was just like this. Lazt9312 (talk) 03:22, 5 January 2023 (UTC)

I strongly disagree. The position that political position should be returned to the "centre to centre-left" that has long been maintained without problems. Don't put unagreed political positions in infobox. I will stop 'talk'ing until other users react to this problem. Mureungdowon (talk) 05:25, 5 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I agree not to write an ideology until consensus is reached. Lazt9312 (talk) 12:36, 7 January 2023 (UTC)

In fact, I don't see how writing an expert opinion as it is is a violation. It is just a translation of the words in the book written by an expert. Lazt9312 (talk) 13:59, 11 January 2023 (UTC)

I know I might be barging in, but have any of you thought about adding "syncretic" instead of where it lies across the political spectrum, while using a note to explain the parties ideology? ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 15:46, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

I do not agree with that. It's better not to add a political position than that. Currently, the mainstream in the party is Lee Jae-myung and his supporters, who are certainly center-left compared to existing Democratic Party politicians. Mureungdowon (talk) 15:50, 13 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

That may be the case now, but everything can change. One faction could be in charge and then in a couple of years another could be. Would you rather keep having to change the political spectrum it lies on, or denote that the party has various factions that lie across the political spectrum? ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 15:55, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

DPK shall be considered "centre to centre-left". There are many more socially conservative "social liberal" parties in Asia than the DPK. For example, PDI-P, similar to DPK, is socially conservative by Western standards, but internally, it is culturally liberal enough considering the conservative Asian society. The same goes for DPK. As for the diversity of ideology, conflicting 'conservatism' and 'progressivism' are written in the ideological "Factions:" within infobox. Mureungdowon (talk) 20:51, 13 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Okay :) ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 20:53, 13 January 2023 (UTC)

Regarding political stance, I think Renaissance (French political party) is a similar case. This party is considered center or centre-right, and French people consider it center-right. However, because it is culturally liberal, it is marked as centrist. So, even if dpk is also described as center and centre-left (despite experts claiming center-right), a centrist description seems appropriate because it is socially conservative. Lazt9312 (talk) 13:33, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

DPK's political stance should be written as centrist. My argument for this is as follows.

1. There is a significant center-right (right wing by international standards) presence in the DPK.

Kim Jin-pyo, the Speaker of the National Assembly, is a representative figure. Kim Jin-pyo received 89 votes out of 166 DPK lawmakers.

He has made 'theocratic advocacy', 'homosexuality treatment movement' claims, and other right-wing statements in the past. (The Hankyoreh introduced him as an extreme right-wing official and said, "'National Assembly Speaker Kim Jin-pyo' itself is the current address of the Democratic Party.")

He was placed to the right of the center-right party in Korean media polls.

2. There are several experts' claims that it is center-right by international standards. A number of experts are mentioned in the book. Because of conservative social policies, many experts also placed the DPK to the right of the CDU.

3. Finally, the harmonization of national and international standards that I mentioned above. Through the case of the French political party, I think it is reasonable to use a similar DPK as a medium. Lazt9312 (talk) 13:46, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure that because it is culturally liberal makes it a centrist party, as a majority of mainstream conservative parties in Europe are liberal, which is one of the reasons why they are "liberal conservatives". Anyway, I think they political positioning of the party should be on which factions make the majority. ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 13:50, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

In fact, I also think that there should be a change in position depending on which faction dominates. However, since it is a bit cumbersome to indicate the political position for each party representative election, why not write down the established ideology and write down the inclination of the current mainstream leadership through footnotes? Lazt9312 (talk) 14:08, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't think that is necessary, as the headers for each section indicate the ideology of each section, so there is no need to indicate in the infobox. In addition, some parties have various factions from right to left, like the LDP in Japan. To add, are there any official factions, like the LDP? ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 14:20, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

There is a case where the mainstream media classified Chairman Kim Jin-pyo as a 'conservative faction'. Lazt9312 (talk) 14:41, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Are there formal factions though, rather than informal? If not, I'm surprised there aren't. ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 14:46, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

For reference, Chairman Kim Jin-pyo took first place, but the second place candidate is also a conservative. The second-place candidate is called (Woo Sang-ho), and this candidate also exists on a spectrum similar to the center-right Bareun Party.

https://raythep.mk.co.kr/newsView.php?cc=&no=12390 Lazt9312 (talk) 14:47, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

I know that, but I'm talking about factions that have names, like Kōchikai and others in the LDP. What you've stated are, yes, factions, but not formal ones with names, like the aforementioned one. ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 14:49, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

In fact, each faction did not develop into an independent document because a large number of researchers in the Democratic Party document had little additional content.

In Korea's political landscape, factions centered on characters rather than ideological factions like the Republican Party or the Democratic Party of the United States are severe. (Compared to old American politics, the "pro-Trump clique" <--mostly called that way.)

However, there are references to factions in several documents. In Korea, there is not much discussion about ideology, so we don't mention that certain factions are centrist, centre-left, or centre-right.

친명/이재명계

https://www.dailian.co.kr/news/view/1192755/

https://newsis.com/view/?id=NISX20230105_0002148639

https://m.khan.co.kr/politics/assembly/article/202212252102005

이낙연계

https://www.newsfreezone.co.kr/news/articleView.html?idxno=433035

https://www.ytn.co.kr/_ln/0101_202211231059018784

정세균계

http://www.newstheone.com/news/articleView.html?idxno=101602 Lazt9312 (talk) 15:11, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

Right. It's a shame they aren't though :( ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 15:20, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

I am in the position that the political position should be written as centrist. (The rationale is above.) Lazt9312 (talk) 13:00, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

I support not writing down political positions, as I said above. Mureungdowon (talk) 21:24, 14 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

In fact, if there is no special reason not to write a political position, wouldn't it be better to write it in the middle? Lazt9312 (talk) 14:14, 17 January 2023 (UTC)

The political position must be "Centre to centre-left". Most Democratic Party articles by state in the United States should apply the same as CDPJ articles in Japan. I object to your claim that DPK is "Centre" and not a centre-left party, and very much to Jeff6045's claim that DPK is a "Centre-left to left-wing" party. DPK is "Centre to centre-left" party. Therefore, since opinions on political positions vary depending on the editor, political positions should not be written in infobox. Mureungdowon (talk) 22:09, 18 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

In fact, the fact that I write off my political stance as centrism can be seen clearly by looking at the example of the political party in France above. To be honest, how can DPK be a 'centre-left' when Kim Jin-pyo, who takes conservative policies, is the National Assembly Speaker? In fact, you can find many examples of this. Representatively, there is West Virginia Democratic Party, and the faction of this party is about DPK. Lazt9312 (talk) 00:51, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

There are many socialists in CDPJ. That's why it became centrist to centrist left. Of course, there are conservatives in the CDPJ as well. But also in DPK. In effect, the DPK is more of a CDPJ without the socialist faction. Lazt9312 (talk) 00:53, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

If the majority of the party is centre to centre-left, I have no qualms about it being added as a political position. Look at the LDP, it's defined as right-wing, yet the party has factions from the centre-right (historically centre-left too) to the far-right. ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 13:50, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

The reason I write the party as centrist is that there is practically no "left wing" in the party. In fact, it is also very difficult to find more progressive figures than the centre-left Social Democrats in Europe. But there are a lot of figures who are more conservative than the center-right in Europe and have a lot of support in the party. (Chairman Kim Jin-pyo won the support of the majority of the party's lawmakers.) Lazt9312 (talk) 14:06, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

God I wish they had organised factions..., then we'd know where every politician sat on the spectrum. ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 14:09, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

http://m.raythep.com/Headline/View/12390

In fact, when investigated by the Korean conservative journalist Maeil Business Newspaper, the spectrum of DPK with solid progressive as -1 and solid conservative as 1 is represented by -0.13. It sits closer to the middle ground than People Party (South Korea, 2016). (The People's Party is located at 0.15.)

In the genealogy of political parties with "Democratic" in their name, called "Democratic Party" in Korea, various factions centered on personalities are frequently replaced, and no clear faction exists. Lazt9312 (talk) 05:02, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't think Lee Jae-myung is the perfect center-left. The center-left generally means social democrats or progressives. Therefore, I think that even if Lee Jae-myung becomes the next president, his political position should be "Centre to centre-left" and not "Centre-left". Mureungdowon (talk) 05:39, 20 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

In fact, even if the progressives led by Lee Jae-myung are located in the Center to Center-Lef, center-right (socially right-wing) conservatives such as Kim Jin-pyo have a lot of influence. Even if you look at the election of the National Assembly Speaker, the progressives showed little influence in the election of the National Assembly Speaker.

( https://www.chosun.com/politics/politics_general/2022/05/24/ZPRHBXEBLJCD7AHCM2QDJSAMHU/ )

If you look at some of the articles that tell you the results of the DPK share of the National Assembly Speaker, the Republic of Korea National Assembly Speaker, and the Deputy Speaker of the National Assembly

"Rep. Kim received a majority of 89 out of a total of 166 votes in the party vote that day, and it is known that he won over Cho Jung-sik (18 votes) of the Pro-Myeong group and Woo Sang-ho (57 votes) of the 86 group." Lazt9312 (talk) 06:32, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

In fact, Lee Jae-myung has little base in the National Assembly of the Republic of Korea. Only 18 of the 180 members of the National Assembly supported the pro-Lee Jae-myung candidate. Lee Jae-myung was elected as the party representative with the support of the rank and file members. Party delegates and members of the National Assembly are quite far to the right compared to the (relatively) progressive faction such as Lee Jae-myung.

Major delegates such as the 'National Representatives Convention' reject the agenda promoted by Lee Jae-myung, who is trying to prioritize 'support of party members' rather than 'will of delegates'. (In Korean politics) The Democratic Party customarily passes the agenda proposed by the representative almost unconditionally, but this time it was exceptionally opposed. Lazt9312 (talk) 06:38, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

https://www.hani.co.kr/arti/politics/assembly/1056006.html

https://www.hankookilbo.com/News/Read/A2022082415320004196

For reference, the delegates who have the base

“The Central Committee of the Democratic Party consists of incumbent members of the National Assembly, heads of regional and local governments, chairpersons of non-parliamentary regions, and advisory groups.” is. Lazt9312 (talk) 06:40, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

In fact, I want to label DPK's spectrum as 'centrist' through the multiple grounds and arguments above. In fact, it looks similar to LREM and there are quite a few similar cases. Lazt9312 (talk) 14:18, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Can anyone please come to an agreement? Lazt9312 (talk) 13:24, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

If we have the numbers of where the reps. sit in the party along the ideologies, I think there can be an agreement (at least to me). For example, 20 are centrist reformist and 30 liberal populists. ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 13:32, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

In the early days, when Lee Jae-myung went up to the party representative, most of them were pro-Lee Jae-myung (liberal populist). In fact, they were family members, but they approached in this way, saying, "We are all on the party representative's side, and we are all friends and family." I am very close with my friends (centrist reformers) and my friends. Moon Jae-in and Lee Jae-myeong met and both said that our divisions are 99% the same.

https://www.ytn.co.kr/_ln/0101_202208300541154989

In fact, when viewed broadly, Lee Nak-yeon and Jeong Se-gyun, who seem pro-Moon Jae-in, are also seen as pan-parents, but in reality they are somewhat distant from their parents and are more economically liberal and conservative. So they cooperate with the conservatives and interfere with the alliance of pro-moon & pro-myeong. Lazt9312 (talk) 13:42, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

https://www.newsis.com/view/?id=NISX20221215_0002123999

https://www.newdaily.co.kr/site/data/html/2022/12/16/2022121600098.html

Some media in Korea claim that when Lee Jae-myung was first elected, if more than 100 lawmakers approached in the way that 'we are all on the side of the pro-myeong (liberal populist) party representative', the prosecution's investigation of the current representative (there is controversy over whether this is justified. ), because the party is severely divided, there is a view that the number of people is gradually decreasing, and now there are few left (20 people) who are firmly pro-Lee. Lazt9312 (talk) 13:46, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Currently, there are 170 members of the National Assembly.

There are practically 30 to 40 people in the wide-pro Lee Jae-myung faction. Prior to 2017, they took a 'firm center left' position (Korea standard). However, in the 2017 primary, they moved from centrist to 'centre left', and in the 2022 primary, they moved from a de facto international standard to a centrist position. (Currently, Lee's social policy is more conservative than Merkel's.)

There are 60 to 70 members of the broad-pro Moon Jae-in faction, some of whom claim to be both pro-Lee Jae-myung and pro-Moon Jae-in. About 20 to 30 people (Moon Jae-in is also friendly with Lee Jae-myeong and said that their factions are 99% the same.) However, in a broad sense, Lee Nak-yeon and Jeong Sye-gyun, who are classified as pro-Moon Jae-in, are in fact difficult to see as family, and can also be seen as independent factions. . They are critical of Lee Jae-myeong and occupy 50 to 60 lawmakers.

The rest of the conservative faction DPK (represented by Kim Jin-pyo) was also historically quite conservative during the 'New Politics Alliance for Democracy', and most of the people who led the party at that time are now affiliated with the PPP. Currently, there are about 20 to 30 conservatives, but they are exerting great influence with the support of the Lee Nak-yeon / Jeong Sye-gyun factions. The rest represent very non-mainstream ideologies, such as a minority of progressives, 'classical liberalism' and 'national conservatism', which are called 'young faction'. The liberal faction is represented by Park Yong-jin, and the classical liberal faction is represented by Geum Tae-seop, all of whom are very few. Lazt9312 (talk) 14:01, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Any other comments? Lazt9312 (talk) 08:44, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Nope and thank you for explaining to me the factions within the party :) ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 12:29, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Can I then describe my political stance as 'centrist'? (Do you agree?) Lazt9312 (talk) 12:53, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

I certainly agree with it :) ValenciaThunderbolt (talk) 12:54, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, thanks for the great discussion. Lazt9312 (talk) 03:51, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Very much against it. The party is generally described as a center-left. Reuters France24 The political position should be "Centre to centre-left", not "Centre". Mureungdowon (talk) 05:24, 26 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

In fact, that's why I gave the case of Renaissance (French political party) above. This party is also described as centre-right and centrist, but in fact (because it is socio-culturally liberal) centrist. Even assuming that DPK is also portrayed as center and centre-left, it should be centrist (because it is socio-culturally conservative). In fact, since a number of researchers have already placed DPK on the right side of the CDU, it seems that there is enough content to see with centrism.

(Add: France 24 has a strange link) Lazt9312 (talk) 08:11, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

See WP:SYNTH. Just because there are a few sources that the DPK is close to the center-right of Germany or France, it does not mean that it is the center-right in the context of South Korean politics. In the context of South Korean politics, DPK is rather perceived as a leftist. I can bring countless reliable English sources that DPK is a center-left party. DPK's political position should be defined as "Centre to centre-left". Mureungdowon (talk) 08:50, 26 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

The source of France 24 works normally. The source is as follows: "A heavyweight figure in the ruling centre-left Democratic party, Park ran South Korea's sprawling capital -- home to almost a fifth of the national population -- for nearly a decade." (Park means 박원순.) Mureungdowon (talk) 09:21, 26 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

As seen in other cases, opinions seem to have been agreed upon rather than those of Mureungdo, so it seems appropriate to maintain the centrist narrative and discuss (refer to the precedent)

Thanks for adding the source Lazt9312 (talk) 13:38, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

If there is no agreement, delete it, keep the status quo, and decide by agreement. Lazt9312 (talk) 03:47, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Okay good. I'm against writing political positions on infobox if both "centre" and "centre-left" are not included. Mureungdowon (talk) 07:31, 27 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

In fact, I understand that the fact that I am in the red with simple centristism (as Wonmu Mureung-do argued before) is stated through a footnote because the Progressive Party, which is considered to be the far left in Korea, is not internationally far left, just like the Progressive Party. Even though DPK is considered a center-left in Korea, it is not a center-left by international standards, so it would be good to write it as neutral and state through footnotes that it clearly corresponds to a center-left by Korean standards. Lazt9312 (talk) 08:09, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

In fact, as I said above, one of the reasons for using DPK as a middle ground is the comparison with the French political party LREM. LREM is considered center-right in France, but is written as center. (I agree with this statement.) In fact, even though DPK is considered center-left by Korean standards, English Wikipedia seems to be writing from an international perspective, so it is centrist. It would be better to write it as Lazt9312 (talk) 08:31, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

LREM is considered both a centre-right classical/economic-liberal and centre-left social-liberal party. However, the DPK is considered only centre-left social-liberal party, not classical/economic-liberal party. LREM is sometimes regarded as a center-left party in English media, not in French media, but DPK has never been regarded as a center-right party in English media. Mureungdowon (talk) 10:41, 28 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

It is not that English media is classified as a center-right, but as mentioned above, in the case of the Progressive Party, it does not correspond to the extreme left in international standards, so it is written as a simple leftist and

Just as the French party, which is classified as centrist and center-right, is written as centrist, DPK is also written as centrist, and it is said that it would be good to describe it as a center-left in Korean standards through footnotes. Lazt9312 (talk) 11:51, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

(As mentioned above) In fact, LREM is also not portrayed as a center-left in the mainstream media, but actually promotes progressive social policies, so just as it is written as centrist, Korea's DPK is also portrayed as a center-right in the US media, but actually promotes conservative social policies. Because it promotes, it can be written with centrism. Lazt9312 (talk) 11:53, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

The LREM is a centrist party that emerged as an alternative to France's largest right-wing party, The Republicans, and its largest major opponent, the Socialist party. But the DPK has always been a major opponent of South Korea's largest right-wing party. Therefore, LREM should be considered "centre", but DPK should be considered absolutely "centre to centre-left", and should never be considered "centre" Mureungdowon (talk) 12:42, 28 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

In the context of South Korean politics, centrist generally means a party between DPK and PPP, such as the People Party in Ahn Cheol-soo and New Wave in Kim Dong-yeon. Mureungdowon (talk) 12:44, 28 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

In fact, another basis for the argument that DPK should be written as a centrist party is that a survey by the Korean conservative media also found that DPK is closer to the centrist than Ahn Cheol-soo's People Party. If you put it that way, if the DPK is specified as centrist to center-left, then the National Party, which is farther from the center than the DPK, should be centrist to center-right.

http://m.raythep.com/Headline/View/12390

DPK: -0.13

People Party :0.15 Lazt9312 (talk) 13:33, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

It is closer to 'confirmation bias' that DPK is more conservative than Ahn Cheol-soo's People Party. The source you have now presented is that only one particular politician within the DPK is described as conservative than Ahn Cheol-soo, while the other two are described as progressive. At the time of the People Party, Ahn Cheol-soo always put forward that they were a "centrist" alternative between the two major parties. Therefore, the DPK is absolutely a 'centre to centre-left' party, and in the context of South Korean politics, it is never just a 'centre' party. Certainly, in almost all English-language media, the DPK is described as a centre-left party. We should value WP:SYNTH. There must be a "centre-left" in describing DPK's political position in infobox. Mureungdowon (talk) 06:49, 29 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Please look at the material again. Above is a table showing the political spectrum of parties, not politicians. Lazt9312 (talk) 07:33, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

I read all the contents of the source properly. DPK is not described as conservative as Ahn's PP (0.15). Rather, the source is placing DPK (-0.13) on the left more than PP through the image Rather, the source proves that DPK is absolutely a CENTRE-LEFT party. Mureungdowon (talk) 11:23, 29 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I think you didn't understand what I said above, so to say it again, Ahn Cheol-soo's political party is considered to be 0.15 DPK and -0.13. The DPK is positioned closer to the middle ground than the National Party. By the way, Ahn Cheol-soo's party is considered centrist. Then, of course, DPK, which is closer to the centrist than Ahn Cheol-soo's party, should be considered centrist. Lazt9312 (talk) 13:21, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

I do not agree with that. Rather, I believe that the DPK should be considered a centre-left, as Ahn Cheol-soo's PP is a radical 'centre' party. Since time has passed from the source, the source does not represent the current DPK, which Lee Jae-myung took the initiative. Mureungdowon (talk) 13:27, 29 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

In fact, I don't know which policy of the DPK is 'centre left'. Economic policy is also more centrist, with many conservative factions. Social policies are more conservative than those of Western Europe's centre-right parties. Lazt9312 (talk) 03:14, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

In fact, you said that the book that referred to the DPK as a center-right was not reliable. To give a similar example, The Left (Germany) also became a left-wing narrative rather than (left-extreme left) because of a book that referred to a leftist party as a center-left. Lazt9312 (talk) 08:20, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

In the DPK article infobox, the political position remained "Centre to centre-left" for about eight years. It was Jeff6045 that changed it to "Centre-left to left-wing" and this was less than a year ago. So I ended up removing the political position. The political position of the DPK article should be restored to "Centre to centre-left". I very strongly disagree with Jeff6045's view that DPK is a leftist, but I also very strongly disagree with your view that DPK is not even a center-left, but a simple centrist. DPK is a centrist party but also a centre-left party. Absolutely not a left-wing party, and not a centre-right party. Mureungdowon (talk) 09:09, 30 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

In fact, I think this document is very similar to the German Left Party document. The German Left Party has also been portrayed in various media as far-left, but has become simply left-wing by publications portraying it as centre-left. I think DPK will be a similar process. The first description of the leftist party in Germany was left-extreme left. However, because of the book grounds it has been portrayed as center-left, it has become a mere leftist. DPK is also described as center-left, but it seems that it could become center because of books that describe it as center-right. Lazt9312 (talk) 13:57, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

In that way, the DPK is a political party with an anti-Japanese nature and is called "left-wing" by mainstream Japanese media. But it is by no means the general view that DPK is a left-wing party, or that DPK is a center-right party. Mureungdowon (talk) 23:36, 30 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

In fact, even if I look for it, the Democratic Party together. There have been instances where it has been referred to as "left-leaning", but none has been referred to as "left wing". (No column, only articles) If you agree to describe DPK as a simple centrist, it would be nice to agree in a way that clearly states in the footnote that it corresponds to the "center left" by Korean standards. Lazt9312 (talk) 01:38, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

No, please check the Japanese Wikipedia. Mainstream Japanese media describe DPK as "left-wing" (左翼 or 左派). However, the English media never describe DPK as "left-wing" or "centre-right". DPK is "Centre to centre-left". Mureungdowon (talk) 01:48, 31 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

The data on the Japanese Wikipedia is not reliable. They regarded "left-leaning parties" as "left-wing parties." See the original BBC article

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-52304781 Lazt9312 (talk) 02:56, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

But it is certainly true that major Japanese media outlets refer to DPK as "left-wing" in Japanese. We must remember that both the opinion that DPK claims to be "left-wing" or the opinion that DPK claims to be "centre-right" are minorities, not general political classifications. See WP:WEIGHT. Mureungdowon (talk) 03:41, 31 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Except for the far-right Sankei newspaper (It was also expressed as pan-leftist new power in conjunction with JP, etc.), no other newspaper described the Democratic Party as a "left wing". They used the expression "leftists". Lazt9312 (talk) 04:57, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

However, Yomiuri Shimbun is not far-right. To sum up, it is mainly left-wing socialists in South Korea like Kim Nuri who claim DPK as a center-right, and only the Japanese who claim DPK as a left-wing. The general perception is that DPK is a centre-left or centrist party. Mureungdowon (talk) 06:09, 31 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Yoriumi Shimbun described the DPK as a "leftist force". This is different from "Left Wing". In fact, this type of analogy is also used for political parties like Komeito, which are also called "rights force." However, it is not called a "right wing" party. Lazt9312 (talk) 14:49, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

You said above that both centrists and centrist-leftists should enter the position. What do you think about writing the following? Centrist (center-right to center-left) Lazt9312 (talk) 13:52, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

All of the editors participating in the discussion agreed to write as a simple centrist except for you. Offer concessions or conceded agreements. In fact, since the current discussion is your counterargument to the 'agreed opinion', it is a principle to reach an agreement through discussion after describing it as a centrist, but we are waiting now. Lazt9312 (talk) 03:41, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Currently, there are only three participants in this Talk, including you and me.

ValenciaThunderbolt didn't agree with your view from the start, he expressed the possibility that you would persuade him to support it for a long time. Above all, ValenciaThunderbolt has never objected to my view. It should also be considered that the number of Talk participants is currently low. Mureungdowon (talk) 05:19, 2 February 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

So, originally, it should be written in centrist mode, but I'm waiting. I would appreciate it if you could provide a third opinion request, etc. to resolve the discussion. Lazt9312 (talk) 14:17, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

In fact, on principle, you should have already described centrism. I would like to suggest an agreement or follow the discussion solution. If you do not participate in the discussion without objection, I will do it as a rule. Lazt9312 (talk) 03:08, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

I did a Google search on the subject. "centrist Democratic Party" South Korea (About 172 search results) / "center-left Democratic Party" South Korea (About 339 search results) / "center-right Democratic Party" South Korea (About 4 search results) / "left-wing Democratic Party" South Korea (About 79 search results). The most common assessment is that DPK is a centre-left party. If you insist on "Centre" without adding centre-left in DPK's infobox, I will definitely remove the edit. I want you to stop being pushy. (See WP:WEIGHT) Mureungdowon (talk) 03:35, 3 February 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Even the third link is just three media articles referring to a similar party name in Japan and one source referring to where Lee Jae-myung stands in the image. After all, DPK is considered a 'left-wing' party in the English media, but never a 'center-right' party. Thus, the DPK's political position is absolutely "Centre to centre-left", not just "Centre". Mureungdowon (talk) 07:22, 3 February 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Some sources referring to DPK as a "left-wing". (Foreign Policy, CNN, Vox, The Telegraph) Of course I am very strongly opposed to Jeff6045 trying to erase DPK's centrist identity by making DPK's infobox "centre-left to left-wing." Therefore, I tried not to cite these sources as much as possible. But since you're agitating based on the far left view that makes no sense that DPK is a "centrist" rather than a "center-left", I had no choice but to bring data to prevent you from making any more undue edits. The DPK's political position is "Centre to centre-left", NOT "Centre". No English source describes DPK as a center-right. Mureungdowon (talk) 07:41, 3 February 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

We must therefore follow the WP:WEIGHT policy. The political position should be "centre to center-left", and the part where DPK is evaluated as center-right or left-wing should be explained through footnotes. Mureungdowon (talk) 07:46, 3 February 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I really couldn't find a "left wing" source. I wonder if there is a need to express the situation in an aggressive tone when you should have mentioned the source from the beginning?

I agree with the "centre to center left" statement. Lazt9312 (talk) 13:54, 3 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Since you agreed, I'll reflect the "Centre to centre-left" in infobox. Mureungdowon (talk) 19:42, 3 February 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I think it would be a good idea to remain "Centre to centre-left" until other participants oppose it. thanks for the discussion Lazt9312 (talk) 03:42, 4 February 2023 (UTC)

See WP:WEIGHT. The DPK is generally regarded as a "center-left" party, and "centre-right" should therefore never enter infobox. DPK is centre to centre-left political party. Mureungdowon (talk) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

References

Debate Relating to the Liberal Populist Narrative

I object to the deletion of the narrative based on the article. 'Facts' are not subject to pros and cons. If you object, write a counter statement. Do not delete the article. Lazt9312 (talk) 13:48, 14 January 2023 (UTC)

In 2017, when there were very few new forces favorable to Lee Jae-myung, he took a favorable view of American democratic socialists such as Bernie Sanders or insisted on tough social reform. At the time, the faction included former members of a Socialist anti-Military dictatorship group called 'South Korean Socialist Workers' Alliance' and left-wing progressive activists. Therefore, some left/progressive critics who view the Democratic Party conservatively also gave positive evaluations of Lee Jae-myung, who takes a progressive stance within the Democratic Party.

If you don't mention which part you have an objection to this part, I'll write it as it is. Why do you take back what you wrote based on the article?

(Lee Jae-myung is not pro-socialist, it is not anti-socialist compared to the dpk mainstream.) Lazt9312 (talk) 01:52, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

Deletion of statements without objections is prohibited. If you do not continue to present objections, we will restore them. (Description above) Lazt9312 (talk) 12:59, 15 January 2023 (UTC)

I object to adding that content. Back in the 2000s, when Lula da Silva was very popular, Barack Obama showed respect for Lula da Silva. But it doesn't matter much, so it's not written down in the Factions in the Democratic Party (United States)#Liberals article. Bernie Sanders shows respect for Winston Churchill, but that's not what the Bernie Sanders article says. Moreover, there are Democratic Socialists of America members in Joe Biden's government, but Wikipedia's related articles don't emphasize that. Because writing that down could mislead Barack Obama or Joe Biden into being a socialist. Mureungdowon (talk) 08:49, 18 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I've removed some controversial content. Since the pro-Lee Jae-myeong faction took a very progressive stance in the early days, it would be better to leave the part where progressive activists participated. Lazt9312 (talk) 14:47, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

I oppose the addition of socialist references in itself. Your editing provides a justification for Jeff6045 to claim that the DPK is a "Centre-left to left-wing" party after Lee Jae-myung became president. Even if Lee Jae-myung becomes president, the DPK is a "Centre to centre-left" party. Mureungdowon (talk) 21:54, 18 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Jeff6045 makes a ridiculous claim that DPK is a leftist party now that Lee Jae-myung has become party leader, and your editing gives the opinion a justification. But you think the DPK are the center-right party by international standards? Then there should be no mention of socialists that British-American wiki users may misunderstand in the DPK article. Because Lee Jae-myung is not a socialist. Mureungdowon (talk) 22:00, 18 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

To some extent, I understood. What do you think about leaving out the mention of socialism and leaving only experts' assessments of the move in a moderate direction? Lazt9312 (talk) 00:47, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure exactly where you're describing it. It doesn't matter what you write. Lazt9312 (talk) 14:16, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

References

김누리

That DPK is a centre-right, is as wrong a claim as that DPK is a left-wing. No source says DPK is located on the centre-right in South Korean politics.

김누리 is a very biased leftist intellectual. Moreover, the source presented is not a paper or general article, but an opinion. We don't put it in the article just because a rightist intellectual claims DPK as a left-wing party. Mureungdowon (talk) 21:07, 26 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

In fact, as far as I know, other New Labor Party documents include content that a left-wing columnist in The Guardian argued for New Labor as a center-right. I don't think it's right to rule out the claims of left-wing columnists in the mainstream media. Lazt9312 (talk) 08:12, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

New Labour does not mean the Labour Party itself. We do not write "centre-right" down in the Labour Party (UK) or Liberal Democrats (UK) article. Mureungdowon (talk) 11:48, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

In fact, since Korea's DPK lacks the contents of documents compared to foreign countries, I think the contents need to be reflected because the lines supported by each leadership are not classified as independent documents. In fact, the assertion that DPK is more conservative than CDU is made by many experts other than Kim Nuri in books and media.

https://www.hankookilbo.com/News/Read/A2022071803560004078

Representatively, in a Hankook Ilbo article, Germany's queer festival was 'different from Seoul' and mentioned the fact that the German Christian Democratic Party sent a booth but not DPK. Lazt9312 (talk) 13:28, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

The source does not state that DPK is more conservative than CDU. The only mention is that the CDU/SPD/FDP/Greens of Germany participates in Pride parade, but the DPK/PPP does not participate in Pride parade in South Korea. The centre-left parties in Malaysia and Indonesia sometimes take a more conservative view than the DPK on LGBT issues, but we do not say that they are not centre-left. See WP:SYNTH. DPK's economic policy is more like SPD. (Of course DPK is a social liberal, not a social democrat.) Kim Nuri is a radical leftist intellectual critical of DPK, so he just doesn't admit it. Mureungdowon (talk) 14:06, 27 January 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I think the columnists of the major institutional media are reliable opinions, but I am actually a bit lacking, so I supplemented the content by quoting books written by experts. Lazt9312 (talk) 01:23, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Really DPK is centrist?

I have doubts about the claim that the Democratic Party of Korea is a centrist party. The party has been characterized as a left-wing party by many foreign media outlets such as CNN, Al Jazeera, and Foreign Policy. Additionally, former President Moon Jae-in, who is from the Democratic Party, has been described as a leftist by some foreign media. Based on this evidence, I am skeptical that the Democratic Party is really a centrist party. Jeff6045 (talk) 13:43, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

See WP:CON. We can find numerous sources that describe the Democratic Party (United States) as 'Left-wing', but when we mark the political position of the Democratic Party of America's state-by-state article, we label it 'Center' or 'Center to center-left'. (Examples: Arizona Democratic Party, Democratic Party of Hawaii, New York State Democratic Committee etc) Mureungdowon (talk) 13:52, 14 April 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Unlike the Democratic Party of the United States, DPK does not have a socialist, and Lee Jae-myung is more conservative than Joe Biden, who has left-wing populist elements such as protectionist policies in terms of supporting free trade. Lee Jae-myung is a staunch supporter of free trade. Mureungdowon (talk) 13:52, 14 April 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

What if we just remove the political spectrum since there doesn't seem to be a clear source on the Democratic Party's political spectrum?

I am not sure if there is a socialist faction within the Democratic Party of Korea, but in my personal opinion, there seems to be a faction of Juche ideology. Compared to left-leaning parties in Western Europe, the Democratic Party of Korea is definitely socially conservative, but unlike any other party economically, it has a radical leftist tendency. Jeff6045 (talk) 14:18, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

See WP:CON. Among the main editors of DPK articles, Jeff is the only user questioning their political position. Currently, Jeff is the only major editor of DPK articles to deny that DPK is a "Centre to Centre-left". Do you think DPK is more left-leaning than CDPJ? Really??? Basic income is not socialist policy or radical left. Universal basic income is often supported by small social liberal parties in Europe as well. Above all, the sources you have presented are dishonest. 'CNN sources and Al Jazeera sources are just edition and opinion, not official articles. Mureungdowon (talk) 21:29, 21 April 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Removed the political spectrum of the Democratic Party of Korea from the infobox

I am deeply concerned that indicating the political spectum of the political party in this document may undermine its neutrality. Some users seem to edit this document with a political intention of using it to depict opposing parties as having a certain political inclination. As mentioned in the previous discussion, the Democratic Party of Korea is described as having a diverse political spectrum ranging from centrist to left-wing by various sources. It is not appropriate to determine the political inclination of the party based on just one source. Therefore, I have removed the political spectrum from the document's infobox. If you wish to add the political spectrum of the party to the infobox, please reach a sufficient consensus in the discussion. Thank you. Jeff6045 (talk) 15:43, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Strong opposition. It is a consensus among many users that DPK's political position is 'Centre to centre-left'. You are almost the only user who maliciously removes political positions in Infobox or even claims that DPK is a left wing party. Mureungdowon (talk) 21:28, 21 April 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I strongly agree with the example of CDPJ. Most of the "centrist to center left" parties of social liberalism in major developed countries have a large faction of social democracy and democratic socialism. There are few socialist factions in the Democratic Party, and those who are hostile to socialism also make up the majority. Lazt9312 (talk) 04:39, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

About the infobox

The purpose of the infobox is to provide a concise summary of the political party. However, the current article contains too much information in the infobox. These details pertain to additional explanations of the party's ideology or descriptions of its factions, and should be included in the body of the article rather than the infobox. Jeff6045 (talk) 16:10, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

Agreed – the factions for example should not be in the Infobox (as I feel should also be the case for all other political party articles).— Autospark (talk) 19:41, 14 April 2023 (UTC)

I will insist on maintaining the original narrative.

In the event of a dispute, it is a principle to maintain the original document and decide through discussion. Its rating of the Democratic Party as a "liberal" party has been maintained for more than a month, and its rating from moderate to center-left for more than a month.

The evidence was brought from mainstream media such as Hankook Ilbo, Hankyoreh Newspaper, and Donga Ilbo. Lazt9312 (talk) 05:18, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

I agree with User:Jeff6045 and User:Autospark. In the infobox, "liberalism" is just fine and factions should be removed. --Checco (talk) 12:28, 16 April 2023 (UTC)

Do you think we should maintain or abolish 'social liberalism' in infobox? Although Lee Jae-myung is not a social democrat, but he is interested in social welfare policies, such as respecting FDR and supporting universal basic income. Mureungdowon (talk) 21:32, 21 April 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Opposition. The 'factions' in the article have long been problem-free, with tacit consent from other users. Mureungdowon (talk) 21:32, 21 April 2023 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE 18:41, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

In fact, I wonder if the Democrats are "social" liberals. The Democratic Party takes a position closer to social conservatism than to cultural liberalism in the social and cultural arena.

This is why, in the sources I have given in the past, there is evidence that the DPK is far more socially conservative than the centrist-centre-left Social Liberal Party in other developed countries (mainly oecd member countries) and even more culturally conservative than the centre-right CDU in Germany.

In fact, I don't know which policies of the Democratic Party are center-left. Lee Jae-myung supports a "centrist to centre-left" policy, but includes a number of conservatives who support economic liberalism, such as National Assembly Speaker Kim Jin-pyo. Lazt9312 (talk) 04:37, 23 April 2023 (UTC)

Infobox: Ideology

I don't think social liberalism should be described in the infobox of the 'Democratic Party of Korea' article. Frankly, when did the Democratic Party properly take a socialiy "liberal" position? And Lee Jae-myung is a left-wing populist. Reuters --Storm598 (talk) 09:28, 16 November 2021 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE :3 F4U (they/it) 19:16, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

The DPK is a party with a very wide political position, from 'centre to centre-right' and 'centre-left to left-wing'. The Korea Herald also mentioned Lee Jae-myung as a left-wing progressive. And the current president, Moon Jae In, opposed homosexuality and maintained socialiy conservatism in South Korean society, including LGBT discrimination. Lee Jae-myung's position on feminism is honestly not social liberalism. DPK's social conservatism is never limited to some "factions."--Storm598 (talk) 10:08, 16 November 2021 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE :3 F4U (they/it) 19:16, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Nikkei Aisa also described Lee Jae-myung's policy as "radical." # --Storm598 (talk) 10:08, 16 November 2021 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE :3 F4U (they/it) 19:16, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

Lee Jae-myung's economic policy is much more radical than the Justice Party, so I think that ideology and position should be expressed like this:

• Ideology : Liberalism / Factions: / Conservative liberalism / Left-wing populism
• Political position : Centre to Centre-left (Some centre-rightists and left-wing are mixed.)

--Storm598 (talk) 09:38, 16 November 2021 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE :3 F4U (they/it) 19:16, 18 May 2023 (UTC)

I agree with this change. --Vacant0 (talk) 13:19, 16 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for giving me an agree. (However, I changed my position to not add footnotes related to the 'centre-right' and 'left-wing'. This is because Lee Jae-myung is not a socialist or social democratic, so even if 'left-wing populism' is correct in ideology, it is difficult to regard his political position as 'left-wing'.)--Storm598 (talk) 09:47, 17 November 2021 (UTC) WP:SOCKSTRIKE :3 F4U (they/it) 19:16, 18 May 2023 (UTC)