[EAI Presidential Election Panel Survey] VIII. Authoritarianism and Populism: Did the "Lesser Evil" Election Mobilize Authoritarian and Populist Voters?

1. Introduction

The 20th presidential election was marred by the stigma of being an "election of the least likeable candidates."[1]The two main candidates, Lee Jae-myung of the Democratic Party and Yoon Suk-yeol of the People Power Party, despite being outsiders or relatively non-mainstream within their respective parties, secured victory in their party primaries by mobilizing partisan supporters through their unique populist policies and extremist styles. Throughout the election campaign, many media outlets also focused on their populist and authoritarian characteristics.

The rise of such authoritarianism and populism is not unique to South Korea. Since the 1990s, the emergence of authoritarian leaders and populist movements/parties has been observed globally, including in Europe, the United States, and South America. While existing research on authoritarianism and populism has primarily focused on the supply side—political parties and elites—recent studies are increasingly focusing on the demand side, namely the 'authoritarian attitudes' and 'populist attitudes' of ordinary citizens, to explain these phenomena. This implies that behind the rise of authoritarianism and populism, there are citizens who support these authoritarian and populist leaders.

To what extent do South Korean citizens possess these authoritarian and populist tendencies? What factors shape these tendencies? And did these tendencies influence voting choices in the 20th presidential election? This report aims to briefly answer these questions. Specifically, as both tendencies can theoretically manifest across the left-right ideological spectrum, we will analyze these relationships by dividing them into left-wing authoritarianism, right-wing authoritarianism, left-wing populism, and right-wing populism.

2. Voters' Authoritarian Tendencies and the 20th Presidential Election

① Distribution of Authoritarian Tendencies

In existing research, an individual's authoritarian tendency is typically defined by three sub-concepts: 'authoritarian aggression,' which emphasizes social order and security; 'conventionalism,' which upholds tradition and conservatism; and 'authoritarian submission,' which involves obedience to authority and hierarchical order.

While scales measuring authoritarian tendencies often use multiple survey items for each sub-concept, this survey, due to limitations in the number of questions, could not conduct measurements at such a rigorous level. As a proxy variable, this analysis indirectly measured authoritarian tendencies through the question about 'preferred political system.' Respondents who chose the option 'In some situations, an authoritarian government is better than a democratic government' were considered to have high authoritarian tendencies. (All subsequent analyses applied weights based on region, gender, and age according to the sample.)

[Figure 1] Preferred Political System

The results of the second panel survey, with 1,104 respondents in total, showed that an absolute majority (62.0%) responded that 'a democratic government is always better,' indicating general support for the democratic system. However, the responses 'no difference' (14.5%) and 'in some situations, authoritarianism is better' (21.9%) also represented significant proportions. According to the operational definition used in this analysis, 21.9% of all respondents can be considered to have authoritarian tendencies.[2](1.6% who responded 'don't know/no response' were treated as missing values in subsequent analyses.)

[Figure 2] Distribution of Authoritarian Tendencies by Gender

Examining this distribution by gender, authoritarian tendencies were higher among men (25.1%) than women (19.5%). This aligns with the general observation that men tend to exhibit stronger authoritarian tendencies than women.

[Figure 3] Distribution of Authoritarian Tendencies by Generation

By generation, authoritarian tendencies were notably prominent among younger generations. While authoritarian tendencies, typically associated with right-wing conservatism, are usually higher among older generations, this survey found that they were higher among those in their 20s and 30s compared to other age groups. This appears to be related to the recent trend of conservatism among younger generations, which has been observed in other surveys as well.

[Figure 4] Distribution of Authoritarian Tendencies by Ideology

The distribution by ideological orientation shows that authoritarian tendencies were significantly higher among conservatives (scores 6-10 on an 11-point scale) than progressives (scores 0-4). The proportion of respondents who answered 'in some situations, authoritarianism is better' was 13.0% among progressives and 27.6% among conservatives, a difference of more than double. This is because, as mentioned earlier, authoritarian tendencies are deeply intertwined with conservatism. In other words, the conservative values of emphasizing tradition and upholding hierarchical social order are also connected to the concept of authoritarianism, leading to this result. Furthermore, the term 'authoritarian government' used in this question likely evokes 'right-wing authoritarian government' almost exclusively within the historical context of South Korea, which helps explain this outcome.

[Figure 5] Distribution of Authoritarian Tendencies by Partisanship

Examining by party affiliation, authoritarian tendencies were also higher among supporters of the conservative People Power Party. Among those who identified as People Power Party supporters in the first panel survey and also participated in the second panel survey, 30.7% exhibited authoritarian tendencies. In contrast, only 17.6% of Democratic Party supporters showed these tendencies, falling below the average for all respondents. Given the strong influence of ideological factors on party affiliation, this result can also be explained by the aforementioned link between authoritarianism and conservatism.

② Background of Authoritarian Tendency Formation

What factors contribute to the formation of these authoritarian tendencies? While various factors influence an individual's authoritarian tendencies, the 'perception of threat' is known to be a primary cause. The more one perceives the world as a dangerous place and feels that their in-group's values and socioeconomic status are under threat, the stronger their authoritarian tendencies become as they seek in-group cohesion and collective security.

In the context of contemporary South Korea, perceived threats to the in-group can be broadly categorized as economic hardship and the threat posed by COVID-19. That is, the worse one perceives the economic situation to be, and the more inadequate they view the government's COVID-19 response, the greater the sense of threat, potentially leading to higher authoritarian tendencies.

[Figure 6] Authoritarian Tendencies by Retrospective Evaluation of Household Economy

[Figure 7] Authoritarian Tendencies by Retrospective Evaluation of National Economy

To verify this, we examined the degree of authoritarianism based on evaluations of household and national economies over the past five years. The analysis revealed that the more negatively respondents evaluated both their household and the national economy, the higher the proportion of individuals with authoritarian tendencies. Notably, in the group that rated their situation as 'much worse,' the proportion with authoritarian tendencies exceeded 30% for both categories.

[Figure 8] Authoritarian Tendencies by Evaluation of Government's COVID-19 Response

The evaluation of the government's COVID-19 response also showed a correlation with authoritarian tendencies, consistent with existing theories. The more negatively respondents evaluated the government's COVID-19 response (scores 0-4 on an 11-point scale), the higher the proportion of individuals with authoritarian tendencies. While only 15.3% of those who evaluated the response positively (scores 6-10) exhibited authoritarian tendencies, nearly double that proportion (29.3%) showed these tendencies among those who evaluated it negatively.

③ Authoritarian Tendencies and Political Attitudes

Next, we examined the stances of individuals with high authoritarian tendencies on a series of issues. Considering the definition of authoritarianism, we hypothesized that these individuals would hold specific views on issues such as 'constitutional amendment for a presidential system,' 'North Korea security,' and 'gender quotas.' Based on the principles of upholding tradition and existing order, and prioritizing in-group security, it was expected that individuals with high authoritarian tendencies would oppose constitutional amendments (maintain the current presidential system), advocate for stronger security measures against North Korea, and oppose gender quotas.

The analysis results confirmed these expectations: the proportion of respondents supporting the maintenance of the current constitution, strengthening security against North Korea, and opposing gender quotas was higher among those with authoritarian tendencies than the average. This tendency was particularly pronounced among right-wing authoritarians, considering the strong link between authoritarianism and right-wing conservatism. Specifically, support for strengthening security against North Korea and opposing gender quotas was significantly higher than the average for conservatives (86.0% and 49.0%, respectively) compared to the overall conservative group's average (73.7% and 38.9%). This indicates that authoritarian tendencies, even after controlling for ideological factors, lead to more extreme positions on related issues.

[Table 1] Stances on Issues by Authoritarian Tendencies

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

④ Authoritarian Tendencies and Voting Choice

[Table 2] Voting Choice by Authoritarian Tendency (Unit: Person)

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

Finally, how did authoritarian tendencies influence vote choice in this election? The common overreporting of voter turnout in election surveys was also observed in this survey. A total of 96.1% of respondents reported voting, significantly exceeding the actual voter turnout of 77.1% for this presidential election. Among those who reported voting, 48.1% stated they voted for candidate Yoon Suk-yeol, and 45.2% for candidate Lee Jae-myung.

In this context, the group with authoritarian tendencies showed a higher tendency to vote for candidate Yoon Suk-yeol compared to candidate Lee Jae-myung. While 60.4% of their votes went to candidate Yoon Suk-yeol, candidate Lee Jae-myung received only 33.6% of the votes from this group. Conversely, in the group that responded that democracy is always better, the voting rate for candidate Lee Jae-myung (51.9%) was higher than that for candidate Yoon Suk-yeol (42.1%). These results appear to stem from the close relationship between authoritarian tendencies and right-wing conservatism.

[Table 3] Voting Choices by Left-Right Authoritarian Tendencies (Unit: Persons)

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

To examine this in more detail, an analysis was conducted considering ideological orientation alongside authoritarianism. The results indicated that within the progressive camp, support for candidate Lee Jae-myung slightly decreased among the group with general progressive ideology compared to the left-wing authoritarian group (from 84.2% to 82.1%), while support for candidate Yoon Suk-yeol increased (from 10.96% to 15.1%). Conversely, within the conservative camp, support for candidate Yoon increased among the right-wing authoritarian group compared to the general conservative group (from 78.1% to 83.4%). However, support for candidate Lee Jae-myung further decreased (from 16.6% to 11.0%).

The strong correlation between ideological orientation and voting choice suggests that the voting decisions in this presidential election were largely driven by voters' ideological leanings. However, authoritarian tendencies, albeit to a small extent, also exerted an additional influence on voting choices. Even when controlling for ideological variables, authoritarian tendencies were found to (slightly) increase support for the conservative candidate Yoon Suk-yeol and decrease support for the progressive candidate Lee Jae-myung.

In summary, while ideology significantly influenced voting choices, authoritarian tendencies appear to have slightly reinforced the choice for the conservative candidate, Yoon Suk-yeol.

3. Populist Tendencies of Voters and the 20th Presidential Election

① Distribution of Populist Tendencies

Populism is a multifaceted and ambiguous concept that is not defined by a single characteristic. In recent academic discourse, populism is viewed not merely as a political movement or style, but as a thought or ideology. However, rather than having a clearly defined stance like liberalism or conservatism, it is considered a collection of broad ideas that can encompass various features.

According to the most frequently cited definition by Cas Mudde, populism is defined as 'a thin-centered ideology that divides society into two homogenous and antagonistic groups: the pure people and the corrupt elite, and which posits that politics should be the expression of the will of the people.' Three key characteristics of this populism include 'people-centrism,' which asserts that the people hold ultimate sovereignty and all major state policy decisions should be made according to 'the will of the people'; 'anti-elitism,' which views established politics and political elites as corrupt; and 'Manichean dichotomies,' which frame the relationship between the people and the elite in a binary good-versus-evil structure.

[Figure 9] Distribution of Populism

While methods exist to measure these three characteristics of populism through various related survey questions, this study could not conduct a rigorous measurement due to limitations in the number of questions. As a proxy, populist tendencies were measured using one of the most widely used questions that effectively encapsulates the characteristics of populism: 'How do you feel about the statement that major policy decisions in our society should be made directly by the general public, rather than by the National Assembly or politicians?' A 5-point Likert scale was used for the response options.

The analysis revealed that a majority of respondents agreed with this statement. The combined responses of 'Agree' and 'Strongly Agree' accounted for 72.6% of the total. In contrast, the combined responses of 'Disagree' and 'Strongly Disagree' were only 9.5%. While this result from a single question cannot definitively conclude that the Korean public has high populist tendencies, it does indicate a significant level of public resentment and distrust towards elites and established politics.

Considering the measurement using a single question, the group that responded with the most extreme option, 'Strongly Agree' (31.6%), will be considered the group with populist tendencies in this analysis.[3](Subsequent analyses were conducted after treating 'Don't know/No answer' as missing values.)

[Figure 10] Distribution of Populist Tendencies by Gender

Examining these populist tendencies by gender revealed no distinct differences between men and women. While the overall distribution was similar, the overall proportion of agreement was slightly higher among women (74.4%) than men (72.3%). However, the proportion of those with populist tendencies, operationally defined in this analysis as 'Strongly Agree' responses, was slightly higher among men (33.8%) than women (30.1%).

[Figure 11] Distribution of Populist Tendencies by Generation

Generational analysis showed higher agreement rates among generations after the 20s and 30s. The combined 'Agree' and 'Strongly Agree' responses were highest among those in their 40s at 79.1%, while they were relatively lower among 18-29 year olds (64.7%) and those in their 30s (63.5%). Examining the populist tendency measured by 'Strongly Agree' also showed higher rates among those in their 40s (36.9%) and 50s (38.2%).

[Figure 12] Distribution of Populist Tendencies by Left-Right Ideology

Populism is a thin ideology that encompasses various ideas, and it acquires a practical political stance through its connection with existing left-right ideologies. In this regard, populism is not exclusive to either the left or the right; both left-wing and right-wing populism can exist. However, the results of this survey observed a significantly higher proportion of populist tendencies among the progressive group compared to the conservative group. While only 27.4% of conservatives responded 'Strongly Agree,' 41.1% of progressives selected this option.

Similarly, party affiliation showed a much higher rate of populist tendencies among supporters of the Democratic Party (40.9%) compared to those supporting the People Power Party (24.8%). This indicates that populist tendencies among the Korean public are more prevalent in the progressive camp than in the conservative camp. In other words, while theoretically both left-wing and right-wing populism can exist, in South Korea, populism appears to be more closely associated with the left than the right.

This may also be related to the personal political style of candidate Lee Jae-myung, who belongs to the progressive camp. Candidate Lee Jae-myung has garnered attention from the media and academia for his populist style and policies. Therefore, it can be inferred that his supporters tend to share and support his political style, leading to these results.

[Figure 13] Distribution of Populist Tendencies by Party Affiliation

② Background of Populist Tendency Formation

[Figure 14] Populist Tendencies by Satisfaction with Democracy

As mentioned earlier, these populist tendencies are closely linked to resentment towards established politics and anti-elitism. Particularly, considering that the recent deterioration of representativeness in representative democracy is causing an overall crisis in democracy, greater dissatisfaction with democracy in South Korea may be expressed as an opinion that 'the people should make decisions directly.'

The relationship between satisfaction with democracy and populist tendencies was examined, and the results generally supported this hypothesis. The group dissatisfied with South Korea's democracy (33.4%) showed slightly higher populist tendencies than the group satisfied with it (29.7%). However, the proportion was highest among the 'middle' group (34.4%), indicating that a clear relationship between the two variables was not observed. Further in-depth research on the formation of populist tendencies among the Korean public is warranted.

Furthermore, survey items related to the fundamental characteristics of populism, such as 'trust in government' and 'likability of politicians,' which were expected to be associated with anti-establishment and anti-elitism, did not show a clear correlation with populism. More sophisticated analyses are needed in the future to understand the origins of populist tendencies among the Korean public.

③ Populist Tendencies and Political Attitudes

[Table 4] Issue Stances by Populist Tendency

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

Next, we examined the attitudes of the populist group (respondents who answered 'Strongly Agree') on various issues. While populism commonly shares characteristics such as people-centrism, anti-elitism, and a dichotomy of good versus evil, specific issue stances vary according to left-right ideology. Generally, left-wing populism is considered to focus on economic issues like welfare, labor rights, and strengthening government's role in the market, whereas right-wing populism is thought to focus on socio-cultural issues such as nativism, anti-refugee sentiment, and anti-pluralism.

An examination of how welfare expansion, strengthening North Korea security, and opposition to women's quotas manifest within the populist group revealed that populist tendency itself did not reinforce stances on these issues. The proportion of respondents agreeing with each issue was either slightly higher than the overall respondents (welfare expansion) or actually lower (strengthening North Korea security, opposition to women's quotas). When populism was divided into left and right wings, as in existing theories, left-wing populism showed a stronger stance on the economic issue of welfare expansion, and right-wing populism on the socio-cultural issues of North Korea security and women's quotas. However, even this showed weaker support compared to the general progressive and conservative groups. In other words, unlike the previously discussed authoritarianism, a tendency towards polarization of political attitudes due to populist tendencies was not observed, and issue stances appeared to be strongly influenced by left-right ideological orientation.

④ Populist Tendency and Voting Choice

[Table 5] Voting Choice by Populist Tendency (Unit: Person)

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

Finally, an examination of the relationship between populist tendencies and voting choices revealed that among the group with populist tendencies, voting for candidate Lee Jae-myung (54.2%) was higher compared to candidate Yoon Suk-yeol (40.1%). However, as observed earlier, this result appears to stem from the fact that populist tendencies are closely associated with progressive ideology and support for the Democratic Party.

[Table 6] Voting Choices by Left-Right Populist Tendency (Unit: Persons)

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

f2e34dd1a320d063

According to [Table 6], which controls for ideological variables, while left-right ideological orientation has an absolute influence on voting choices, the populism variable appears to strengthen this tendency to some extent. Support for Lee Jae-myung slightly increased in the left-wing populist group compared to the progressive group (from 84.2% to 86.7%), while support for Yoon Suk-yeol slightly decreased in the conservative camp (from 78.1% to 72.8%).

This suggests that the populist tendencies of the Korean public are more strongly linked to left-wing progressive ideology, and that these tendencies (even after controlling for ideological variables) have had a slight influence on voting choices.

4. Conclusion

We must be cautious about over-interpreting the results, as there are limitations in measuring authoritarian and populist tendencies and this is a simple descriptive analysis that does not control for various variables. Nevertheless, the results of this analysis, which show that authoritarian and populist tendencies are observed at a considerable level and have a certain influence on voting behavior, are highly significant for us. Many scholars argue that the rise of authoritarianism and populism today is not solely the responsibility of political elites but also of the citizens who support them. This analysis, though limited in scope, suggests that South Korea may be no exception.

In recent years, South Korea has experienced deepening political polarization amidst several changes in government, and within this context, parties and politicians exhibiting more extreme and authoritarian leadership are gaining significant support. Particularly, in the primary election process, where the influence of partisan supporters is strong, candidates with more extreme stances repeatedly achieve victory. The finding that authoritarian tendencies are high among the younger generation (20s and 30s) and that populist tendencies are high among groups dissatisfied with the level of democracy foreshadows a potential exacerbation of these trends, raising concerns. In a democracy where the majority opinion and democratic norms are paramount, if the majority of the public cheers for leaders who make policy decisions and solve problems in an authoritarian rather than a democratic manner, the democratic system itself may be jeopardized. We have already witnessed the collapse of numerous nascent democracies in the former Soviet Union, Eastern Europe, Latin America, and Southeast Asia. We must bear in mind that we may not be an exception amidst the rise of authoritarianism and populism from both the top and bottom, and it is necessary to maintain continuous interest and vigilance going forward. ■

[1]As of February 15, 2022, a search for the keyword 'record-breaking unpopular presidential election' on Big Kinds, a news big data analysis service (https://www.kinds.or.kr/), over the past three months yielded a total of 397 articles from all daily newspapers and broadcasting stations.https://www.kinds.or.kr/As of February 15, 2022, a search for the keyword 'record-breaking unpopular presidential election' on Big Kinds, a news big data analysis service (https://www.kinds.or.kr/), over the past three months yielded a total of 397 articles from all daily newspapers and broadcasting stations.

[2]It is difficult to accurately gauge how high this figure is from a comparative perspective, as it is challenging to find other surveys using the same questions. A similar survey by the World Values Survey on 'strong leaders' in its 6th wave found that 47.1% of respondents in countries considered democratic by Freedom House standards agreed or strongly agreed with the statement 'A strong leader who does not bother with parliament and elections is good.' Another similar survey, conducted in 2020 for South Korea's 21st National Assembly election voter political consciousness survey, asked 'Democracy has its problems, but it is still better than any other form of government.' 20.0% of respondents responded 'somewhat disagree' or 'strongly disagree.' Considering these figures and the inclusion of a 'neutral' option in the current question, the figure of 21.9% appears substantial.

[3]In a study by Ha Sang-eung (2018) using a similar question, 'Important policies that will determine the fate of our country should be made by ordinary citizens, not politicians' (5-point scale, 1: Strongly Disagree to 5: Strongly Agree), the average response from all participants was 3.77. In a study by Vasilopoulos and Jost (2020) using France as a case study, the average for the same question was 3.7. Although our survey used the softened expression 'important policies in our society,' it yielded an average of 3.94, suggesting that populist tendencies among the Korean public were relatively strong in this presidential election.

■ Jeong Dong-junis a professor in the Department of Social Education at Inha University, where he teaches comparative politics, political processes, and political systems. He received his Ph.D. in Political Science (Comparative Politics) from the University of Florida and previously worked as a senior researcher at the Institute for Peace and Unification Studies at Seoul National University before joining Inha University. His main research interests include post-communist democratization, elections and parties, and civil society and political attitudes. He has published numerous articles in international and domestic journals, including Comparative Politics, Perspectives on Politics, and Electoral Studies.

■ Editor: Jeon Ju-hyun_EAI Researcher

Contact: 02 2277 1683 (ext. 204) | jhjun@eai.or.kr