A chameleon, changing colors, sits atop an old 'conservative party' sign, while masks labeled 'centrism,' 'reform,' and 'expansion' lie discarded in front. This symbolically depicts the reality of conservative politics, which has repeatedly changed its colors in the name of centrism and expanding its voter base. [Photo=Hanmi Ilbo Graphics]

A Facebook post by Joo Hyun-chul, a foreign press spokesperson for the People Power Party, struck at the very heart of the conservative political sphere. While his phrasing was blunt, his critical insight was precise. He pointed out that the "call for a change of signboard," which is once again raising its head within the People Power Party, is the very core of the malaise that has ruined conservatism to this point.

It is easy to envision the scene that some People Power Party lawmakers are secretly calculating. They worry that the image of Representative Jang Dong-hyuk is a burden, that mainstream media dislikes him, and that he appears too hardline. Their calculation is that they could overcome this crisis by installing a new face that appears appropriately soft, appropriately centrist, and appropriately immune to attack.

That is chameleon conservative politics.

They change their colors when the situation changes. They change their colors when the media attacks. They change their colors when left-wing forces apply pressure. They change their colors again when their nomination is at risk. In front of the public, they call themselves conservatives; in front of the mainstream media, they call themselves centrists; in front of party leadership, they pledge loyalty; and in the face of crisis, they fall silent.

Erasing Colors in the Name of Centrism

The political trends of Yoo Seong-min, Oh Se-hoon, Lee Jun-seok, and Han Dong-hoon—who have championed so-called centrism and reformist conservatism—are prime examples of this. Their rhetoric is largely the same: we cannot be hardline conservatives; we must move toward the center; we must expand our base; we must not fight the mainstream media; we must not appear harsh.

However, the "centrism" they advocate has been less of a strategy to persuade the public and more of a survival tactic to blur conservative battle lines and secure their own political space.

Instead of fighting head-on for the core conservative values of liberal democracy, the rule of law, a market economy, and the ROK-U.S. alliance, they have created a "safe zone" by avoiding expressions that might upset opponents, abandoning agendas that mainstream media would attack, and distancing themselves from issues that anger their own supporters.

It is not that expanding to the center is wrong. But expansion without a center is not expansion—it is dissolution. Real expansion occurs when a party with a clear identity successfully persuades the public.

Yet, those who style themselves as centrist conservatives first erased their own colors. The result was neither centrism nor expansion; it was only the distrust of their base and chaos within the conservative party.

The People Power Party has walked the same path during every crisis. Whenever the party falters, it changes its face rather than correcting its course. Instead of holding people accountable, it invites an emergency committee chair. It has entrusted the party's fate to external figures under the guise of being a "relief pitcher."

But were they truly fighters who stood up for conservative values? Were they people who prioritized liberal democracy, the rule of law, the market economy, and the ROK-U.S. alliance over their own political lives?

Former Emergency Committee Chairman Kim Chong-in is the symbolic figure of this phenomenon. He has appeared during various crises of the conservative party. But as a result, has conservatism become stronger? Has the party’s philosophy become clearer? Has the base become more united? On the contrary, the conservative party has degenerated into one that only changes its wrapping paper before every election, a party that changes direction based on the whims of external consultants, and a party that has lost its own soul.

The Conservative Base Responded to Politicians Who Fight

Recent public opinion polls illustrate this point. In the second week of June, a Realmeter survey on party approval showed the People Power Party at 44.3% and the Democratic Party at 38.0%. While there may be differences depending on the polling agency and methodology, at least in this survey, the People Power Party outperformed the Democratic Party. What matters is not just the single number, but the trend that the conservative base has started to move again.

At one point, even the Jang Dong-hyuk leadership seemed to wobble under the pressure of calls for accountability from inside and outside the party. Following the June 3 local elections, pressure for accountability, internal calculations, and the onslaught of the mainstream media seemed to dampen the expectations of conservative supporters.

However, the trend changed when they joined the protest against the June 3 "rigged election," sparked by a shortage of ballots and the suspension of voting. The attitude of not ignoring the anger on the streets, the demands of the supporters, and the challenge against the deprivation of suffrage ignited a re-consolidation of the conservative base.

It was not a soft, centrist packaging that raised the People Power Party’s approval ratings. It was not the chameleon tactics of worrying about what the mainstream media thinks. What the conservative base reacted to was the signal that the party would fight.

The reason why Reps. Na Kyung-won, Joo Jin-woo, and Shin Dong-wook are recently in the spotlight of the conservative base is in the same vein. It is not because they suddenly became "new faces." It is because they said what the conservative base wanted to hear and stood on the front lines that the base demanded.

Rep. Na Kyung-won publicly raised the need for a re-election regarding the ballot shortage crisis. Rep. Joo Jin-woo, as a member of the National Assembly special committee on suffrage infringement, delved into the Election Commission's contracting structure and issues with private contracts. Rep. Shin Dong-wook visited the National Election Commission in protest on the day of the incident to address the issue of forcing the vote count.

What these individuals share is not a flashy image or centrist packaging. It is the fact that they did not hide when faced with issues that infuriated the conservative base.

They brought the issues shouted by citizens on the streets into the National Assembly and made the incompetence of the Election Commission and the infringement of suffrage a political agenda. The conservative base reacted precisely to that.

What the public has turned its back on is not just the face of a particular leader. What the public is angry about is a conservative party that refuses to fight.

It is a conservatism that shrinks away even when the administration and left-wing forces shake the foundations of constitutional values, remains silent when the election system and rule of law are questioned, and only crunches numbers in Yeouido while supporters scream on the streets. It is a "well-being" conservatism that pretends to be tough in front but hides in the back when a real crisis arrives.

The Resolve to Call it a 'June 3 Rigged Election'

Politics is not just about image. This is especially true for conservative politics. Conservatism is politics that has something to protect.

It must protect liberal democracy, the rule of law, and the market economy. It must protect the ROK-U.S. alliance and national security. It must protect the fundamental order of the country in which future generations will live.

However, if the only things conservative politicians are actually trying to protect are their own districts and nominations, then that party is no longer a conservative party. It is merely wearing the label of conservatism while acting as a party of vested interests and self-preservation. We cannot entrust the future of conservatism to politicians who fear media criticism more than public outrage, and who worry more about their next election than the collapse of constitutional values.

Now, there must be no more equivocating.

The deprivation of suffrage that occurred during the June 3 local elections is not a mere administrative error. Voters went to the polls but could not vote because there were no ballots; voting was suspended, and the basic duties of election management collapsed.

An election is not justified solely by the vote count. If citizens were not guaranteed their right to vote without interference, the very foundation of the election has already been undermined.

One should not narrow the definition of a "rigged election" to just vote-tally manipulation. An election is not rigged only if ballots are tampered with. An election that prevents people from exercising their right to vote is also a rigged election. If the freedom, fairness, equality, and substantive opportunity to vote are destroyed, there is no reason not to call it a rigged election.

The People Power Party must speak with confidence: the June 3 local election suffrage deprivation crisis was a rigged election.

Demanding a parliamentary investigation, a special prosecutor, the preservation of evidence, the punishment of those responsible, and a re-election in the affected districts is not about rejecting election results—it is a procedure to restore popular sovereignty.

Away with chameleon conservative politics. The public will no longer wait for a conservative party that keeps changing its colors.

The path for conservatism to revive is clear: stop hiding like cowards, call a rigged election a rigged election, and stand at the very front of the line to reclaim the people’s suffrage.

Behind that front line stand the youth, the middle-aged who have belatedly awakened, and the old veterans who have scorched the asphalt with their own bodies.