대표 개념에 따른 프랑스 사회주의의 갈등 구도 재검토: 제3공화정, 1893~1903 (A Reexamination of the Conflict Structure along the Concept of Representation (French Third Republic, 1893~1903))

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국서양사연구회
· 수록지 정보 : 서양사연구 / 61호 / 33 ~ 71페이지
· 저자명 : 노서경

초록

Everybody in this area are well aware that French socialism had been divided and in antagonistic conflict in the last decade of the nineteenth century. when the long pursued but defeated revolutionary ideal was contested by the emergence of the socalled reformists. One of their heated confrontations resulted in no agreement for their shared aspiration for unification was the Congress of Paris in December 1899. The debate was centered in particular to the thorny question of whether socialists' participation in the bourgeois government could be allowed or not.
The idea of the article was inspired by the discourse of the Congress. It made sense that there might be some other components beyond the already formulated revolution and reformism; a phenomenon which could support and urge further questions was the nearly simultaneous publication of work like Mosei Ostrogorsky, Robert Michels and André Siegfried. Those distinguished observations reflected some thing unprecedented rising in the field of politics.
Then which concept would give to our subject fair limitations affording realistic research questions? The concept of representation with many arguments and critical elaboration seems to us as suitable as attractive. There was somewhat paradoxical reasoning to be inclined to “representation”. It was not an idea positively recognized for French workers who had lived under historical oppression.
However, socialists had enough reason to demonstrate the capacities for socialist representation. Because political force could not grow up in a day, they could not but struggle with the workers' ethics and tactics for the representation.
Municipal socialism was offered as the fine place for that political space. It is true that the Nord department conducted more important roles with the disciplined working class by dint of Guesdists Mayors and municipal councils. But as the Saint-Mandet banquet in 1896 manifested, many cities and communes of France accepted socialist municipality in the narrow competitions with other republican forces. Neither did Paris municipality did not refrain the entrance of worker socialists after the latter part of 1880.
At last how they esteemed and conducted parliamentary political activity in the Chamber of Deputies, especially during the ten years before the unification of socialism became important. Dissentions among the revolutionaries and reformists was not all dissipated as for the participation in the bourgeois government, but any side took care of reform acts for the betterment of workers' conditions.
Even so, the ideological and practical differences between the two confronting parties under the consolidated capitalist regime was the concern of our investigations. It is evident that one consistently declared their opposition to bourgeois society, while the other accepted parliamentary virtue as an essential value, liberty.
But as a conclusion we might say that French socialists on either side assumed their historical task. Representation means in that case coming and going incessantly between political tactics, metaphysical effort and the everyday life of deprived proletariat.

영어초록

Everybody in this area are well aware that French socialism had been divided and in antagonistic conflict in the last decade of the nineteenth century. when the long pursued but defeated revolutionary ideal was contested by the emergence of the socalled reformists. One of their heated confrontations resulted in no agreement for their shared aspiration for unification was the Congress of Paris in December 1899. The debate was centered in particular to the thorny question of whether socialists' participation in the bourgeois government could be allowed or not.
The idea of the article was inspired by the discourse of the Congress. It made sense that there might be some other components beyond the already formulated revolution and reformism; a phenomenon which could support and urge further questions was the nearly simultaneous publication of work like Mosei Ostrogorsky, Robert Michels and André Siegfried. Those distinguished observations reflected some thing unprecedented rising in the field of politics.
Then which concept would give to our subject fair limitations affording realistic research questions? The concept of representation with many arguments and critical elaboration seems to us as suitable as attractive. There was somewhat paradoxical reasoning to be inclined to “representation”. It was not an idea positively recognized for French workers who had lived under historical oppression.
However, socialists had enough reason to demonstrate the capacities for socialist representation. Because political force could not grow up in a day, they could not but struggle with the workers' ethics and tactics for the representation.
Municipal socialism was offered as the fine place for that political space. It is true that the Nord department conducted more important roles with the disciplined working class by dint of Guesdists Mayors and municipal councils. But as the Saint-Mandet banquet in 1896 manifested, many cities and communes of France accepted socialist municipality in the narrow competitions with other republican forces. Neither did Paris municipality did not refrain the entrance of worker socialists after the latter part of 1880.
At last how they esteemed and conducted parliamentary political activity in the Chamber of Deputies, especially during the ten years before the unification of socialism became important. Dissentions among the revolutionaries and reformists was not all dissipated as for the participation in the bourgeois government, but any side took care of reform acts for the betterment of workers' conditions.
Even so, the ideological and practical differences between the two confronting parties under the consolidated capitalist regime was the concern of our investigations. It is evident that one consistently declared their opposition to bourgeois society, while the other accepted parliamentary virtue as an essential value, liberty.
But as a conclusion we might say that French socialists on either side assumed their historical task. Representation means in that case coming and going incessantly between political tactics, metaphysical effort and the everyday life of deprived proletariat.

참고자료

· 없음