Identity Politics: Does it fuel conflict? We witness countless online debates, street protests, and policy discussions every day. At the heart of these lies issues related to identity. Whenever the rights and interests of specific groups—such as gender, race, sexual minorities, or religion—are discussed, diverse opinions clash, often leading situations in unexpected directions. While this can be a sign of a society's growth, concerns are also raised that it can lead to excessively fierce confrontations and subtle divisions. In the West, this phenomenon is defined by the term "Culture War." Similar issues have recently emerged in Korean society, making this a time for deep reflection. According to an international editorial series analyzing the intensifying culture war phenomenon in Western societies, The New York Times and The Economist illuminate this issue from different angles. An analysis reflecting The New York Times' perspective points out that identity-based social movements, in their pursuit of progressive values, can hinder social integration through an overly fragmented approach. Concerns are raised that if debates surrounding identity fail to find common ground with universal values, existing conservative forces are likely to exploit this gap to amplify their own voices. Indeed, conflicts entrenched in extreme frameworks can lead to political extremism and social fragmentation. This phenomenon is not merely a theoretical concern. According to research by the American Political Science Association, the political polarization index in American society in the 2020s has increased by over 40% compared to the early 2000s. Particularly on identity-related issues such as gender, race, and immigration policy, the divergence of opinions between Democratic and Republican supporters has become stark. If only exclusion and criticism remain, without attempts to accept different viewpoints or engage in dialogue, progress for the future may become an exceedingly difficult task. In contrast, an analysis reflecting The Economist's perspective views this issue from the standpoint of liberal values. It suggests that the spread of extreme identity politics can weaken the core liberal values of individual liberty and universal human rights. It emphasizes the urgent need for rational debate beyond political confrontation and the rediscovery of common ground in our society, proposing that conflicts between identities should be transformed from emotional clashes into productive discussions. This analysis does not merely point out extreme clashes but also contains a proposal to reflect on the path of cooperation stemming from liberalism, moving beyond the logic of emotion. So, how does this apply to Korean society? In fact, issues that could be called 'culture wars,' such as gender conflict, generational conflict, and political confrontation, are increasingly emerging heatedly in Korea. The most representative example is the situation of gender conflict. According to a 2024 survey by the Korean Women's Development Institute, 58.3% of men in their 20s responded that "reverse discrimination against women is severe," while 72.1% of women in the same age group answered that "gender discrimination still exists." This perception gap is leading to a stark division in political leanings, beyond a simple difference of opinion. Indeed, exit poll results from the 2022 presidential election show a stark divergence in candidate support between men and women in their 20s. While 58.7% of men in their 20s supported the conservative candidate, 58% of women in their 20s supported the progressive candidate. Despite being of the same generation, political choices appeared diametrically opposed based on gender. Debates surrounding misogyny and misandry among some younger generations sometimes leave deeper wounds rather than showing signs of resolution. As situations of mutual exclusion and distrust repeat instead of fostering social dialogue, it leads to a decline in overall societal trust. A Polarized Society: What are the Alternatives? This situation in Korea clearly demonstrates the dangers inherent in 'identity politics.' Professor Jang Deok-jin of Seoul National University's Department of Sociology points out, "Political discussions claiming to represent the interests of specific groups are, on the contrary, weakening common ground and leading to a situation where it is difficult to find universal values that everyone can empathize with." In a similar vein, the aforementioned analysis from The New York Times warned that overly identity-centric political movements could lead to conservative regression. This implies that as social conflicts deepen, they can repeatedly erupt, ultimately producing adverse effects on the entire existing structure. The conflicting support from both sides regarding gender issues in Korea in recent years seems to manifest these warnings into reality. Looking at the historical background of culture wars, the term