Page 127 - kpiebook65043

สรุปการประชุมวิชาการ
สถาบันพระปกเกล้า ครั้งที่ 23 12
ประชาธิปไตยในภูมิทัศน์ใหม่

Korea. When these findings are considered together, it is logical to conclude that
the legitimacy of democracy is shallow rather than solid and democracy conflicts
with authoritarian rule in the minds of South Korean citizenry, although they live
under established democratic institutions.

Comparative studies of regime support have reported the degree to which
citizens endorse democracy over authoritarianism across countries and over time
(Foa and Mounk 2016; Inglehart and Welzel 2005; Norris 2017). However, these
studies are limited in determining the dynamic and sequential realignment of regime

support in which citizens living in democracy start to prefer authoritarianism (Shin
2021). Thus, these studies fail to predict what kind of democratic deconsolidation
takes place in new democracies.

There has been scholarly consensus that South Korean democratic institutions
were settled in the late 1990s and democratic consolidation was attained at least
at the institutional level in the mid-2000s (Hahm 2008; Kim 2000). If this
consensus is correct and public demand for authoritarianism is related to

deconsolidation of an already consolidated democracy, what direction of democratic
deconsolidation is emergent in South Korea?

To answer these questions, I have constructed a typology of regime
supporters using attitudes toward democracy, strongman rule, and military rule.

The three dimensions, when combined together, can yield eight ideal types of
regime supporters. The first type is full democrats, referring to those respondents
who simultaneously support democracy and reject both strongman and military rules.
These full democrats form a group directly upholding democracy in South Korea.

The following three types are hybrids because they endorse both democracy and
authoritarianism. The three types include military rule hybrids, strongman rule
hybrids, and full hybrids. Likewise, there are three types of autocrats: military
autocrats for those rejecting democracy and accepting military rule, strongman

autocrats for those rejecting democracy and endorsing strongman rule, and full
autocrats for those rejecting democracy and supporting both authoritarian rules.
The final type is apathets, representing those who show no regime preferences.
Apathets are alienated from and indifferent to the politics of democratic

consolidation and deconsolidation. การอภิปราย