Why Did the Frontman Introduce the Risk-Bearing 'Vote'? [Squid Game Deep Dive②]

Hwang Dong-hyuk: "Inflicting Greater Frustration on Participants"
No Certainty the Game Will Continue... Encouraging Polarization
Polarization Itself Is Not the Problem... The Result of a Complex System

The biggest change in the setting of Netflix's 'Squid Game' Season 2 is the voting system. After each game ends, the participants decide whether to continue. Voting existed in Season 1 as well. However, if the game was stopped, no money could be taken home. In Season 2, the accumulated prize money can be shared.

Why did the Front Man (Lee Byung-hun) voluntarily increase the risk? Director Hwang Dong-hyuk explained, "He probably wanted to inflict greater frustration on the participants based on the idea that the desires of the outside world had grown larger."

It seems there was no certainty that the game would continue. The voting is far from the "flower of democracy." Participants must vote publicly. They have to continuously reveal their choice by attaching a sticker to the right side of their chest.

The Front Man also divided the dormitory space into 'O' and 'X' zones. He encouraged participants to cluster with those of the same inclination, fostering polarization. Participants move together with those of the same tendency when playing games, eating, or going to the restroom. As each individual's political identity strengthens, conflicts intensify.

Ultimately, the problem lies in the toxic system. It easily corrupts even good individuals. It does not force them to betray values directly but lines them up by values to betray each other.

This trend is also confirmed in realities where democratic principles operate. A representative example is the pro- and anti-impeachment rallies held in front of President Yoon Suk-yeol's residence. Conflicts escalated to extremes with participants exchanging insults and engaging in violence. It vividly shows a facet of political polarization.

Director Hwang suggests rediscovering common bonds rather than easing differences of opinion as a solution. The character who fully demonstrates this is Kang Dae-ho (Kang Ha-neul). When Park Jung-bae (Lee Seo-hwan) unexpectedly presses the 'X' button and eats alone at a distance, Kang Dae-ho approaches first and extends his hand. "Brother, Jung-bae hyung. Come over here, just." "No, I, I'm fine." "Ah, come on. Ah, okay, okay. Then go far away. Why do you keep bothering me there? Like a little shrimp."

In fact, polarization itself may not be a problem. Sometimes it can be a solution. Modern American polarization has its roots in the civil rights era. The Democratic Party accepted racial equality, and the Republican Party sought to manage the backlash from white people. The polarization that arose after progress was certainly much better than the oppression before it.

In multi-party systems, polarization is often demanded to express political differences. If there is no discussion, there is no conflict. However, it is unlikely that problems will be resolved.

Therefore, the polarization seen around us can be said to be the logical result of a complex system involving motivation, technology, identity, and political institutions. This includes capitalism and geography, politicians and political institutions, psychology, and changing demographics all intricately intertwined. Unless there is an exogenous force like war that enforces unity, the cracks we see are essentially norms.

If polarization cannot be reversed, the way forward is clear: reforming the political system so that it can function within it. It is uncertain whether Seong Gi-hun, who re-entered the game to overthrow the system from the start, will achieve results worthy of this. The surprise attack may have failed and even turned negative.

However, the series of actions cannot be simply judged as failures. The number of survivors increased compared to the previous game, and the participants' scope of thought broadened. The opinion Director Hwang originally intended to express through 'Squid Game' was probably not a solution to real political problems. It is enough as a framework to understand them.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.