 More than 40 million eligible South Korean voters will go to the polls on March 9 to elect the next president. There are two mainstream candidates in the current scenario. On one side, we have the former governor of Gyeonggi Province, the Democratic Party's Lee Jae-myung. Lee's flagship proposal is to make South Korea the first capitalist state to implement universal basic income. Lee has also proposed rapid construction of three million public housing units and promised to tax land owners to re-socialize public services after almost four decades of neoliberalism. Since last fall, the Korean Confederation of Trade Unions has pushed for a platform that includes the conversion of 50% of national housing stock into public units, socialization of healthcare, childcare and elder care, nationalization of key industries, the abolition of casual labor contracts, a job guarantee, and joint worker management control of economic transition While Lee's proposals have given him a reputation for expanding welfare services, his platform falls far short of the demands pushed by the workers' movement in the election season. The difference between the two is that the streets demand to abolish inequality, while Lee proffers up UBI as a way to avert the breakdown of capitalism. On foreign policy, Lee's positions largely reflect those of current President Moon Jae-in. Moon is best known for his efforts at an appointment with North Korea, the crowning achievement of which was the 2018 Panmunjom Declaration, in which the two Korean governments pledged to increase cooperation and establish a robust peace regime after nearly seven decades of division and civil war. Criticizing the Trump administration's approach to denuclearizing North Korea in a sweeping big deal, Lee has proposed rolling back sanctions in a phased manner, conditional to concrete denuclearization steps. However, this proposal contains a serious flaw. South Korea has no power to revoke U.S. sanctions and therefore cannot provide the economic relief or security guarantees which North Korea demands in potential denuclearization talks. Lee is a defense hawk like Moon Jae-in, who supports South Korea's plans to acquire nuclear powered submarines and establish its own space force. Despite Lee's efforts to set himself apart on international affairs, his platform contains many of the same contradictions as Moon's before him. His pursuit of an independent foreign policy might still wrangle some in Washington. Lee's goals might flounder on the structural reality of South Korea's subordination to the U.S. As long as U.S. troops remain in Peninsular and its military remains a market for U.S. defense contractors under a U.S. command structure, South Korea's ability to pursue a truly independent foreign policy will be limited. On the other side, there is the right-wing People's Power Party's Yoon Sokyeol. As a prosecutor general for President Moon, he helped convict disgraced former President Park Gun-hee. Yoon's support comes not only from conservative old guard, but also from a new social force of young men politicized by the anti-feminist backlash against South Korea's Me Too movement. He promises to lower real estate taxes and make exceptions to South Korea's recent reduction in working hours from 68 to 52 hours a week, in an attempt towards creating a happiness economy. Yoon's rally is heavily dependent on xenophobia, railing against Chinese residents of South Korea as parasites on the national health care system. Most of these residents are ethnic Koreans that form the bulk of the migrant labour force and pay more into the national health care system than they receive. Last fall, Yoon faced criticism from even within his own party for his comments about Africans. On China, Lee has emphasized the necessity of a strong relationship and criticized Yoon for using anti-China sentiment to estrange Korea-China relations and gain political interest, while Yoon presents an unacceptable option to most South Korean liberals and the more radical mass movements. This has not translated into a clear majority in support of Lee's candidacy. There is a lack of voter enthusiasm due to various scandals surrounding the candidates and their families. Additionally, bitterness over the reversals of the incumbent Moon administration has also tempered passions. Emerging victorious with the support of a candlelight coalition from the candlelight movement, the Moon Jae-in presidency disappointed many with its scandals and failed programs. Progress has been tepid and many of Moon's top promises, such as eliminating casualized labour contracts, have gone unfulfilled. In recent years, mass progressive movements in the South Korea have exerted greater influence on culture and civil society, but this has yet to translate to real political power. Though the possibility of real change seems remote to many, substantial differences remain between the candidates. Lee will not challenge capitalism, but his more independent approach towards South Korea stands on East Asian politics could prove consequential as tensions rise in the region. And if implemented, his domestic platform would alleviate conditions for millions of desperate people, at least in the short term. On the other hand, Yoon represents a more familiar path resonant with South Korea's autocratic and anti-communist history, one that would likely have great peril in store given the volatile international situation.