1946년 『世界(세카이)』를 통해 본 전시경제체제 인식과 경제민주화 모색―다카하시 마사오(高橋正雄)와 우노 고조(宇野弘蔵)의 논고를 중심으로― (Analysis of the war economy and the search for economic democratization in discussions by Masao Takahashi and Kozo Uno in Sekai in 1946)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국일본문화학회
· 수록지 정보 : 日本文化學報 / 99호 / 111 ~ 129페이지
· 저자명 : 김혜숙

초록

本稿は1946年(2月、5月)雑誌『世界』に寄稿した高橋正雄の8·15以前の戦時経済体制に対する分析と認識、宇野弘蔵の日本資本主義の変形、金融資本に対する分析および労働者中心の経済民主化への模索を中心に考察した。本稿では資本主義の民主職組織化を「経済民主化」と命名した。高橋は、日本の戦時経済体制をブハリンが規定した国家資本主義トラストであると主張した。これは金融資本と国家権力が結合したことを指す。このような観点から、戦前の日本経済について分析した。一方、宇野弘蔵は国家資本主義トラスト、統制経済の弊害としてナチス·ドイツを例に挙げ、資本主義は労働者によって民主主義的に組織化すべきであると強調した。すなわち、経済民主化である。宇野はヒルファーディングの「金融資本」概念を引用して資本の無政府性を制御するために第3者として国家が管理し均衡は労働者組織に任せるべきであると主張した。宇野は資本主義課題の解決をマルクスの資本家対労働者生産関係に見出した。しかし、彼の分析どおり日本に資本家は存在したが、日本労働者形成過程が西欧労働者形成過程と違った。 言い換えれば、経済民主化を民主主義の経験なしに西欧民主主義の方式から模索せざるを得ない限界を露呈した。

영어초록

This paper focuses on Masao Takahashi’s perceptions and analysis of the war economic system before August 15, which he contributed to the magazine Sekai in 1946 (February and May), and Kozo Uno’s study of the transformation of Japanese capitalism, analysis of financial capital, and the worker-centered search for economic democratization. This paper terms the democratic organization of capitalism “economic democratization.” Takahashi argued that Japan’s war economic system was a state capitalist trust, as defined by Bukharin to refer to the combination of financial capital and state power, and analyzed the Japanese economy during the war from this perspective. Gozo Uno cited Nazi Germany as an example of the evils of state capitalist trust and a controlled economy, and emphasized that capitalism must be democratically organized by the workers. In other words, citing Hilferding’s concept of “finance capital,” he insisted upon economic democratization and argued that in order to control the anarchy of capital, the state should manage it as a third party and leave the balance to workers’ organizations. Uno found the solution to the problems of capitalism in Marx’s concept of the relations of production of the capitalists and workers. However, according to his analysis, although capitalists existed in Japan, the process of forming Japanese workers was different from that of Western workers, thereby revealing the limitations of seeking economic democratization through Western democratic methods without democratic experience.

참고자료

· 없음