1920년대 초 신지식인층의 민주주의론과 그 성격 (The ‘Democracy discourse’ of the new generation of intellectuals in the early 1920s)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국역사연구회
· 수록지 정보 : 역사와 현실 / 67호 / 19 ~ 46페이지
· 저자명 : 이태훈

초록

During the early 1920s, democracy was considered as a new form of philosophy, which could support the ambitious plans hatched by the new generation of intellectuals who intended to resist the Japanese imperial authorities while also uniting the Joseon community. In the wake of all kinds of discourses that were supporting reformation of the Korean people, the intellectuals perceived democracy as a logical ideology that could be effective in the future in addressing various issues with nature either foreign or domestic. In other words, they wished to use the democratic theories to their advantages, and unite the Joseon society while fundamentally attacking the colonial ruling.
Based upon this perception, they argued that democracy was a specific notion regarding the very structure of the society based upon concepts such as freedom and equality, and not just a theory urging people’s participation in politics. They reasoned that democracy based upon freedom and equality was the most powerful weapon that the Joseon people could use against their struggle with either the Japanese imperial ruling or the imposed age of modernity. This level of progressiveness even allowed factions which would turn into Socialist factions in the following few years to join forces with the intellectuals in the early 1920s.
Yet this democracy discourse was not quite strongly established as a philosophical system that could also well respond to the terms of reality. It was rather ultimately a theory and argument constructed upon an optimistic and ideal view of the future. Therefore, it lacked a certain amount of consideration for the inherent social conflicts and colliding reality of terms. It also exhibited a reasoning with quite an abstract and naive nature that believed freedom and equality could be connected with each other through a social consciousness and determination.
All these elements served as a weakness for the democracy discourse, and relevant discussions never had the chance to evolve to the next level of being a realistic argument urging actual practice and aspiring for values like freedom and equality. Instead, in the wake of various forms of diversifications that continued among political factions, the discourse was transformed into an argument that could be labelled as a notion of Bourgeois Democracy, supporting the Bourgeois factions’ participation in politics.
Yet, on the other hand, the discourse of democracy in the early 1920s did not zero-in upon the issue of social classes that much, and was primarily interested in pursuing basic and universal virtues such as freedom and equality. So the possibility of future resurgence of the discourse or the remodification of that discourse remained as a strong possibility. The continuation and the changes the democracy discourse went through in the mid-1920s, will later be examined as well.

영어초록

During the early 1920s, democracy was considered as a new form of philosophy, which could support the ambitious plans hatched by the new generation of intellectuals who intended to resist the Japanese imperial authorities while also uniting the Joseon community. In the wake of all kinds of discourses that were supporting reformation of the Korean people, the intellectuals perceived democracy as a logical ideology that could be effective in the future in addressing various issues with nature either foreign or domestic. In other words, they wished to use the democratic theories to their advantages, and unite the Joseon society while fundamentally attacking the colonial ruling.
Based upon this perception, they argued that democracy was a specific notion regarding the very structure of the society based upon concepts such as freedom and equality, and not just a theory urging people’s participation in politics. They reasoned that democracy based upon freedom and equality was the most powerful weapon that the Joseon people could use against their struggle with either the Japanese imperial ruling or the imposed age of modernity. This level of progressiveness even allowed factions which would turn into Socialist factions in the following few years to join forces with the intellectuals in the early 1920s.
Yet this democracy discourse was not quite strongly established as a philosophical system that could also well respond to the terms of reality. It was rather ultimately a theory and argument constructed upon an optimistic and ideal view of the future. Therefore, it lacked a certain amount of consideration for the inherent social conflicts and colliding reality of terms. It also exhibited a reasoning with quite an abstract and naive nature that believed freedom and equality could be connected with each other through a social consciousness and determination.
All these elements served as a weakness for the democracy discourse, and relevant discussions never had the chance to evolve to the next level of being a realistic argument urging actual practice and aspiring for values like freedom and equality. Instead, in the wake of various forms of diversifications that continued among political factions, the discourse was transformed into an argument that could be labelled as a notion of Bourgeois Democracy, supporting the Bourgeois factions’ participation in politics.
Yet, on the other hand, the discourse of democracy in the early 1920s did not zero-in upon the issue of social classes that much, and was primarily interested in pursuing basic and universal virtues such as freedom and equality. So the possibility of future resurgence of the discourse or the remodification of that discourse remained as a strong possibility. The continuation and the changes the democracy discourse went through in the mid-1920s, will later be examined as well.

참고자료

· 없음