Why do democratic societies tolerate undemocratic laws? Sorting public support for the National Security Act in South Korea

This study investigates why anti-democratic laws persist in democratic societies, focusing on South Korea's National Security Act (NSA). Enacted in 1948, the NSA restricts freedom of expression and movement to deter pro-North Korea behaviour. Despite being at odds with the tenets of liberal democracy, the act remains in place. Existing public opinion data indicates modest to strong support for the law, but measurement concerns leave much to be desired. Using a choice-based conjoint, we test the impact of democratic norms and national security rationales on various policy propositions related to the NSA, including its abolition. Results show widespread support for the Act, driven by both democratic norms and security concerns. Progressives are more likely to support revisions limiting the scope of the Act on the basis that it safeguards democracy, but they agree with conservatives that it should not be abolished. This research contributes to understanding South Korea's post-democratic transition and the balance between national security and democracy more broadly.

本研究旨在探究民主社会中反民主法律何以持续存在，研究聚焦韩国《国家安全法》（National Security Act, NSA）。该法于1948年颁布，旨在通过限制言论自由与行动自由，威慑亲朝行为。尽管其与自由民主的核心原则相悖，但该法至今仍未被废止。现有民调数据显示，民众对该法的支持度从中等到强烈不等，但相关测量方法存在诸多缺陷，有待完善。本研究采用基于选择的联合分析（choice-based conjoint）方法，检验民主规范与国家安全逻辑对与《国家安全法》相关的多项政策提案（包括废除该法）的影响。研究结果显示，民众普遍支持该法，这一倾向同时受到民主规范与安全关切的驱动。进步主义者更倾向于支持限制该法适用范围的修订提案，他们认为此举可维护民主；但与保守派一致，他们同样反对废除该法。本研究有助于深化对韩国后民主转型历程的理解，同时也为更广泛层面上平衡国家安全与民主关系的议题提供了新的研究视角。