The Democratic Party's parade of pseudo-apologies

Kim Seung-hyun

The author is an editorial writer at the JoongAng Ilbo. 

Has the Democratic Party (DP) become embroiled in a series of apology incidents? Its members repeatedly commit obvious blunders and then scramble to apologize. The pattern resembles a chain of offenses, leaving the public increasingly exasperated.

The trouble began with Gyeonggi Gov. Choo Mi-ae, who described firefighting expenditures as a “fiscal straw” to attract attention. The metaphor was offensive to firefighters who risk their lives battling flames. Yet Choo initially remained defiant, even after a firefighter died in a fire days later.

Choo focused narrowly on the distorted funding arrangement under which local governments shoulder 90 percent of the costs of nationally employed firefighters. She failed to recognize how her remarks portrayed firefighters as financial burdens. Her response was effectively, “Since you want an apology, I apologize.” That inadequate response in turn required yet another apology.

DP Rep. Boo Seung-chan joined the apology procession after trying to defend Choo. During a parliamentary audit, he asked whether firefighters were “really sucking up public funds.” Facing criticism, he insisted his remarks should be understood in context before eventually apologizing for being inconsiderate.

DP leader Kim Min-seok promptly urged Choo to apologize and offered an apology on the party's behalf. Yet a vehicle carrying Kim to pay respects to the fallen firefighter was found parked in a hospital space reserved for emergency patients. His chief of staff and a party spokesperson acknowledged an inexcusable mistake.

Kim also apologized to a singer and festivalgoers after excessive protocol arrangements interrupted a performance at a festival in North Jeolla. With so many apologies appearing in this column, I almost feel complicit in the procession.

Apologizing is not inherently wrong. Acknowledging mistakes sincerely can demonstrate courage. But the DP's apologies seem increasingly artificial, driven more by political calculations than concern for those affected.

With approval ratings for President Lee Jae Myung and the DP plunging into the 30 percent range, the rush to apologize looks like an effort to contain political damage. Firefighters, festival audiences and patients appear secondary.

The party issued warnings to Choo and Boo. Floor leader Han Byung-do expressed responsibility for party officials' conduct falling short of public expectations. But does such language genuinely resonate?

The DP appears trapped in “pseudo-apologies,” a term used by social psychologist Aaron Lazare, a former dean of the University of Massachusetts Medical School, in “On Apology” (2004).

A pseudo-apology, also called a “nonpology,” resembles an apology without genuinely accepting responsibility. Examples include “I'm sorry if I did anything wrong,” “Mistakes were made,” “I'm sorry if anyone was offended” and “I'm sorry you felt hurt.”

Each expression obscures responsibility, makes wrongdoing conditional or shifts attention toward the offended person's feelings. Choo's reluctant apology belongs somewhere in this category.

Saying officials failed to meet “public expectations” similarly obscures who bears responsibility and allows the apologizing party to define the standards of wrongdoing. Does it imply that citizens are simply too demanding?

The wording recalls the DP's earlier use of “alleged victim” to describe someone who had reported sexual harassment, an expression widely criticized for diminishing the complainant's experience.

Lazare defined an apology as an encounter in which offenders acknowledge wrongdoing and responsibility while expressing remorse or guilt to those harmed.

Without such acknowledgment, an apology can damage relationships more than remaining silent. One wonders whether politicians who truly understood this principle would have committed these mistakes in the first place.

An apology intended to comfort victims cannot be perfunctory, much less offered merely because political circumstances demand it. Genuine remorse requires recognizing the harm done, not simply managing the consequences.

The issue is not how quickly party officials can issue statements or contain controversy. It is whether they understand why their words and actions caused offense. Without that understanding, another apology will merely become another political embarrassment.

If the Democratic Party sincerely hopes to recover public support, perhaps its leaders should first learn how to apologize properly.