No one can deny the fact that generation played a decisive role in the direction of the presidential elections on December 19. Never before has the inclination of people in their 20s and 30s differed so acutely from those in their 50s and up. The term 'generation revolution' seems very natural in this situation.

However, there are dangers of this state developing to 'generation conflict,' or even 'generation antagonism' and 'ostracism.' Already there are indications that confirm our worries; people are evaluating the election results as the victory of one generation and defeat of another and bureaucrats in their 50s are feeling uneasy.

However, each generation has its characteristics and roles. The young adult generation is emotional and progressive, sometimes running risks that seem reckless, while the elder generation feels more responsibility for the group than the individual, and therefore relies on reason and prudence. To develop a healthy society, both generations must complement each other and push when the other pulls.

It is desirable for the axis of society to shift from the elder to younger generation in a natural fashion. In Korea's past, the power of the 60s collapsed because of the power of the 80s. We must not repeat the 20-year cycle of generation exchange where the new tramples over the old.

We must all seriously search for methods to narrow the much-widened gap between the generations. Sometimes, the problems that seem to have great difference according to generation are merely small differences in the usage of terms or style of approach. If we make just a little effort to understand each other, it will not be difficult to overcome these gaps.

In the elections, the Millennium Democratic Party, as part of their campaign strategy, overly used the generation confrontation aspect. Roh Moo-hyun and the party must keep this in mind and make sure that 'generation conflicts' do not become worse in the management of state affairs.

December 23, 2002