[Editorial] Citizen movements lack citizen faith

When the grassroots movement by the citizenry loses steam, who stands to lose most in the end? If the grassroots movement fails to thrive, who benefits? Through the "introspection and self-examination" of experts, a better light can be shed.

The debate held recently by various grassroots organizations on the ¡°Korean Grassroots Movement and Re-examination¡± provided important insight into the current situation of such movements. It provided a renewed look at the current disunion between the grassroots organizations and the citizenry.

The first and foremost was the diagnosis that the citizen society movement has become one "without the citizenry and without any countermeasures."

In other words, the movements have lost their razor-sharp edge in confronting and criticizing the government, the ruling party or the conglomerates, as they were able to in the past. However, it is fortunate that the civil society organizations themselves have recognized their loss of effectiveness.

It appears as though the citizen groups have turned their ears in agreement to the criticism and the warning of the outside observers that the citizen movements, which center around well-known public figures making statements, will hit a wall of limitation.

The civil society organizations, which vigorously and successfully called for the defeat of "unfit candidates" during the April 13 general election, lately have been unable to speak out against the various scandals of the politicians.

The source of justification and empowerment of the non-government organizations, which are considered "bothersome little guys without real authority," arise from the very morality that government and the businesses find difficult to maintain. As such, in order to set a good moral example and become the guidepost, the citizen groups must make all efforts to reject governmental support.

Should the civic groups fail to secure the necessary funding while keeping intact the freedom to speak out, and instead receive funding from the government or a company, such non-government organizations (NGOs) will jeopardize their voice against the injustices of the world.

The current crisis of the NGO movement was caused by moral crisis of the NGOs. The current inability of the citizen groups is the result of the moral hazard by the leaders of the NGOs.

The citizen movements need to abandon its old practice of having a celebrity point to social ills like displays in department store windows. It needs instead to have at the front an expert as people stand behind to rally. The civil society organizations must not ignore the criticism that they act much like a political party, writing up analysis and criticisms of various issues, and like conglomerates, selfishly focusing on increasing their size through enlisting members.

Such political involvement and practice of morally hazardous bureaucratic ways have turned the people away from the groups and have brought on the current crisis of the grassroots movement and organizations.