중화민족론의 성격과 전개과정

이천석 경희대학교(국제캠퍼스) 국제지역연구원 2010 아태연구 Vol.17 No.3

What do mean Zhonghua minzu(中華民族)? With the advent of the Western imperialism, The world-view of chinese was shaken. it is not solely China’s world anymore. China tries to seek a national identity, and she needs the rebirth of nationalism. Because of the collapse of the Soviet bloc and the socialist system, China, composed of their various minority race, cause severe conflicts. In response, she is making efforts to restore identity of the national and the ethinic for the reestablishment of nation views and ethinic views. Like this, the grounds that Zhonghua-minzu replaces Han(Chinese) is as follows. Firstly, the necessity of the national unity is a pending issues. Secondly, it feel the need to prevent from the probability of the things to come was. To be problem for us was an historical conflict between korea and china, which named Dongbei-Gongcheng (東北工程). The ancient historical problem in this area have relevance to many race problem. Many minority races in china are possessed of the conflict with Han(Chinese). china tries to combine them, and is pursuing the identity called ‘one nation’. This paper needs to understand relations between Zhonghua-minzu with neo-Sinocentrism, and needs to grasp its nature and concept in predicting a domestic and foreign change. Accordingly, by comprehending the formed cause of Zhonghua-minzu and the process of its development, it will be useful for us to understand nature of Zhonghua-minzu. 중화민족은 어떤 의미를 지니는가? 서양 제국주의의 등장으로 중국인의 ‘천하관(天下觀)’은 뿌리째 흔들리게 되었다. 세계는 더 이상 중국만의 천하가 아니었다. 이러한 위기의식을 느낀 중국은 서구의 모델인 국민국가의 탄생을 통해 민족의 정체성을 찾고 민족주의의 전환이 필요하였다. 1980년대 이후 탈냉전과 함께 사회주의 체제의 붕괴로 인해 다민족으로 이루어진 중국은 분열이라는 위기감을 초래하게 하였다. 이에 대해 중국은 국가의 정체성뿐만 아니라 민족 정체성의 회복을 위해 국가관 및 민족관의 재조정을 시도하였다. 이처럼 오늘날 한족을 대신하여 중화민족을 주장하는 근거는 다음과 같다. 첫째로, 소수민족 문제와 관련하여 국가통합의 필요성을 절실히 느낀다는 점이다. 둘째로 향후 발생할 개연성을 사전에 차단하는데 역점을 둘 필요성이 있었다. 그 중 우리에게 문제가 된 것은 동북공정에서 보여준 한중간의 역사 갈등이었다. 이 지역의 고대 역사문제는 민족문제와 관련성이 많다. 중국내 많은 소수민족이 한족과 융화 내지 갈등소지를 함께 지니고 있다. 중국은 이들 소수민족을 통합하고, ‘하나의 민족’, ‘하나의 국가’라는 정체성 속에 살고 있다. 본 연구는 중화민족과 신중화주의 관계를 이해하고, 앞으로 중국의 대내외적 변화를 예측하는데 있어 중화민족이 가진 특성 및 개념을 이해할 필요가 있다. 따라서 중화민족이 생성된 이유와 전개과정을 파악함으로써 중화민족이 지닌 성격을 잘 파악하는데 도움이 되며, 그 활용 가치가 있다.

중국 근대 역사 교과서의 자국사 구축과정과 `중화민족`

吳炳守(Oh, Byung-Soo) 역사교육연구회 2014 역사교육 Vol.132 No.-

This paper examines the modern transition of historical studies and the impact of national history on modern Chinese textbooks in order to observe ongoing international disputes over history in East Asia today. The main subject here concerns “Zhonghua minzu,” the idea central to the depiction of Chinas national history. The search for modern historical studies between the late Qing Dynasty and early Republic of China began against a backdrop of nationalism that arose in the late Qing dynasty. Important is that the conception of such studies was influenced by Meiji Japan’s history of civilization and idea of evolution. Representative of this was Liang Qichao’s appropriation of Japanese concepts and classifications in categorizing the histories of China and East Asia in order to redefine the category of Chinese history and coin the term Zhonghua minzu. This new historiography had great bearing on the shape of new textbooks not only concentrating on the foundation, unification and conquests of a dynasty, but also illustrating its cultural heroes. It is in this process that a Sinocentric distinction between Hua and Yi, as well as historical knowledge produced by modern Japan, had seeped into Chinese textbooks. After the May Fourth Movement, Chinese intellectuals sought to describe their national history based on modern scholarly methods. For example, Gu Jiegang applied anti-traditionalist thoughts to dismantle the unitary, single-rooted nature from the origin of Zhonghua minzu and attempted to put forth a pluralistic narrative encompassing the cultures of all ethnicities. This sort of descriptive tendency held the potential to develop into diverse directions once modernity became established in the methods and system of studying Chinese history. However, the Nationalist Government of China intensified training on nationalism through a centralized education system and curriculum. The leadership of the Han Chinese and their integration of surrounding ethnicities was highlighted over the nation’s ethnic-plurality and cultural diversity. Along with mass mobilization against Japanese invasion during the period, this rationale incorporated Han Chinese into Zhonghua minzu and subsumed the history of northeastern China and the northern part of the Korean peninsula under the history of China. To conclude, modern Chinese nationalism consistently affected the development of national history that accepted the nationalist historiography of modern Japan, promoted the idea of Zhonghua minzu sufficient to assimilate minor ethnicities, and legitimated the political necessity of defending China’s borderlands against Japanese imperialism. Hence, it is necessary to understand the perception of history in China’s Northeast Project as a knowledge system formed over a lengthy process throughout modem China.

Research on the Emergence, Evolution and Identification of the Concept of “Zhonghua Minzu” (Chinese nation)

Suo Yinbu,Wu Chuke 아시아사회과학학회 2020 Jornal of Asia Social Science Vol.1 No.3

In the last years of the Qing Dynasty, the concept of “Zhonghua minzu” (Chinese nation) was formally put forward under the historical background of the simultaneous outbreak of Chinese national crisis and border crisis. And this term has gone through a long historical process from the initial nickname of the Han nationality to the final development of the concept of “national race”. With the emergence of Fei Xiaotong’s theory of unity of pluralistic society of Chinese nation, people have a better understanding and deeper interpretation of the concept of “Zhonghua minzu” (Chinese nation).

현대 중국 학계의 고구려사 연구사업의 등장 배경

박장배 한국역사연구회 2005 역사와 현실 Vol.- No.55

This essay is prepared to study the Backgrounds of Koguryo's history research in Chinese Learned World. Many Chenese scholars has regarded Koguryo's history as the part of Chinese History since 1980s. Where did this nontraditional historical view came from? Why did Many Chinese scholars change their historical view? This questions were not simple, but we can investigate the primary factors. Generally speaking, many people understand that Chinese revisionism is the products of the Unified Multinational State concept in People's Republic of China(PRC). Of course, it's a important reason. But, we need to go back to the late Qing and Republican China period and investigate the 'One China' concept. Han-chinese Liangqiqiao and Sunwen designed this imagined community. 'One China' concept has consisted of two main elements, that is, 'Zhonghua minzu' and 'Unified Multinational State'. PRC's 'One China' concept was the historical formative substance. 'Zhonghua minzu' and 'Unified Multinational State' concepts were extended in time and space. The tools of the extensions were the borderland studies and the ethno-national studies. There was 'One China' concept, but Changing mode of Chinese historical recognitions were many cases. After all, Koguryo's history was also incorporate into Chinese history. It resulted in many Koreans questions and protests. So then, why did Chinese scholars bigin the revisions of historical cognitions in 1980s? It was connected with the Economic Reform and Open Door Policy, the weakened socialist ties. And there were Chinese historical experiences in Backgrounds of Chinese revisionism. The important experience is Korean War. The Korean peninsula was the battlefield of the Chinese army. Today's China and Korea hold the ancient Koguryo's territory in common. These points strenthened the concern of Chinese scholars. The China's revisionist historical cognition is a window of understanding comtemporary China.

'통일적 다민족 국가론' 관점에서 본 동북공정

이천석(Yi, Cheon seok) 동아시아국제정치학회 2010 국제정치연구 Vol.13 No.2

It is as follows. Firstly must defend break away from a minority group in china. Second, to cut off the link between a minority group and kuajie minzu(跨界民族), it was making new history through alternative that is (called) a ‘t?ngy? du?minzu Guoji?’(統一多民族?家) as part of history work used a slogan "one china". While china carried out a minority group policy called “carrots and sticks”. but the china government feels limit to control by a minority group policy only. She requires the new alternate to firm herself control. It is in the establishment of the national identity as a form that is a "t?ngy? du?minzu Guoji?". This come from the three aspect on a crisis management of domestic and foreign, a crackdown, and a system support. Especially, It is fundamentally intended to erect the national identity and to block the segregation of a minority group. China finally proved her national identity and proceeded by the name of g?ngcheng(工程). This paper is summarized as follows. First, with a analytical framework of a ‘t?ngy? du?minzu Guoji?’, examines how apply and set up in deal with the history problem of a minority group and the national relation. Second, What’s the difference by applying a analytical framework of a ‘t?ngy? du?minzu Guoji?’ to an history of Gochosun(古朝鮮), Koguryo(高句麗), and Parhae(渤海)? Third, was The problem to apply of a ‘t?ngy? du?minzu Guoji?’ theory" that china and her academic insisted indeed justified? I try to search a close analysis over this. As stated earlier, a analytical framework of a ‘t?ngy? du?minzu Guoji?’ is able to expect availability of dealing with some g?ngcheng and a minority group matter.

내셔널 아이덴티티를 찾아서: 20세기 중국의 황제와 중화민족 만들기

천성림 ( Sung Lim Chun ) 대구사학회 2005 대구사학 Vol.81 No.-

근대 중국의 민족제국주의와 단일민족론

유용태 동북아역사재단 2009 東北亞歷史論叢 Vol.- No.23

This article investigates the perception of nation in modern China, reveals the logic of empire internalized therein, and explores the way to examine it. Both the Constitutional Monarchists including Liang Qichao and Republican Revolutionists including Sun Yatsen perceived nation as culture-nation, which is close to the concept of ethnos today. This perception, however, contrasted with the multi-ethnicity of the Qing Empire, which caused both of the groups to establish the concept of one state- nation that includes all the culture-nations within the empire’s boundary, and they regarded the assimilation and integration of various nations as natural in order to achieve one great nation. As a result, the term “the Chinese Nation(Zhonghua Minzu)” has been coined and used since 1905. Even the revolutionists, whose slogan was anti-Manchurian, made it clear before the revolution in 1911 that the revolution was not an ethnic struggle to seclude Manchurians, but a political struggle to overthrow Manchurian government. In their perception of nation, the right to form a country did not belong to culture-nation, but only to the Chinese Nation which is a state nation. Thus, the state- nation inevitably implied imperialism which aims to combine various culture-nations. This is why Liang Qichao and Sun Yatsen argued that China should implement national-imperialistic policy as Europe and America did. The Chinese Empire in the premodern era had once allowed culture-nations political autonomy on the basis of their own identity, but from now those nations had to be assimilated and integrated as one nation to form the Chinese Nation Empire. This is where national-imperialism boils down to unitary nation. Nonetheless, Chinese people did not realize that such idea had been internalized in their perception because of the influence of antiimperialistic nationalism and sino-centric imperialism in the premodern era. It is necessary to identify ethnic group, which is close to cultural nation, with nation in order to examine and disclose the internalized imperialism. The notion of state nation, which is based on popular sovereignty, used to serve as a logical basis justifying the expansion of empire, oppressing the ethnicity of minorities. It stands to reason that in the 21st century where popular sovereignty is commonplace, the notion of culture-nation, which embraces cultural diversity, will be used as an intellectual weapon to disclose and examine the repressivism of the notion of state-nation.

중국(1793-2008), 그 정체성을 묻는다

李有鎭(Lee You-jin) 중국어문학연구회 2008 중국어문학논집 Vol.0 No.50

This essay aims to examine the China's identity, with a focus on tracking and portraying key moments in China(1793-2008). China regarded itself as the center of the world, and in this concept, the world was China itself. In 1793, Great Britain sent Lord George Macartney on a diplomatic mission to the Qing dynasty. China considered the British embassy only as a tributary mission and treated it as such. Kowtow meaning submission before the emperor of China was required, but Macartney didn't perform 'three kneelings and nine head knockings' to maintain the dignity of the Britain. Also China had a sense of superiority, believing that China was self-sufficient and had nothing to gain by trading with the barbarians. But after China's defeat in the Opium War, the sense of superiority was shattered. The Opium War made China open against the will of the China, and people came to realize that China was no longer the best. China was forced to give up the tribute system and accept unequal treaty system. China became the arena of competition of imperialist powers. In the early years of the 20th century, with the prevailing theory of Social Darwinism, Chinese intellectuals sought to make China strong so as to survive on the battlefields of 'survival of the fittest'. At that time, the national survival was a matter of life and death to the Chinese. In this vein, the race matter of an 'Exhibition of the Races of Man' at Osaka in 1903 was very symbolic. For the Chinese students studying in Japan, it was a humiliating experience, because the exhibition initially planned to display the inferior races. Students lamented the fact that 'we Chinese' were going to be classified together with other six inferior races, finally they successfully opposed that plan. At that time when China's national survival had become a national obsession, Liang Qi-chao felt a responsibility of striving for national identity and survival. He especially put emphasis on solidarity that was required of Chinese people if China was to survive among many competitive nation-states. So Liang suggested the concepts of Daminzu zhuyi(大民族主義) and Zhonghua minzu(中華民族). In these concepts, the definition of 'Chinese' was expanded to include non-Han ethnicities as part of a comprehensive Chinese nation. After the 1911 Revolution, Sun Yat-sen intended to succeed to those concepts including eventual Sinicization, so as to unite all of the different ethnicities of China, mainly composed of the five major groups. It was mainly due to the realization that a narrow definition of Chinese would result in the loss of the territorial legacy of the Qing empire. Up to now, the PRC has asserted that China is unified under the name Zhonghua, and this is merely to continue the nationalistic discourse of the early years of the 20th century. Now China has the ability to host the international event, for example, 2008 Olympic is going to be held in Beijing, and Expo 2010 will be held in Shanghai. In the early years of the 21th century, China is emerging as a major world power. But the painful recollection of China's suffering at the hands of imperialist powers has continued to be a source of Chines nationalistic sentiment. So Chinese nationalism has the potential to become ultranationalism especially with regard to the territorial integrity. At the time of the Olympics, the Tibet crisis stimulates Chinese nationalism. The PRC has faced international blame over its crackdown on protests in Tibet against Chinese rule, and the Chinese are over-reactive toward outside pressures. They are driven by a sense of national urgency. Nevertheless we must know Chinese nationalism is fundamentally an imperialist ideology which in practice has led to the oppression of minority group such as Tibetans and the repression against domestic dissent in the name of national urgency. As Terrill points out, China has never abandoned the attitude as an empire. It looks like nation-building is still going on there.

China and Contemporary Korean Nationalism: Reflecting on China s NortheastProject

장동진,송경호,황민혁 한국학중앙연구원 한국학중앙연구원 2009 Korea Journal Vol.49 No.1

China’s Northeast Project (NEP), also known as the “Research Project of Northeastern China,” has unleashed national sentiment among many Korean people. Even if it originated in purely academic research, the NEP poses a grave political challenge to contemporary Korea. The Korean response to the NEP can be broadly categorized in two ways: The first is that while negative perceptions of these moves by the Chinese have prevailed in Korean society, the Korean government has been very cautious in expressing criticism of the NEP due to national interests with the Chinese government. The other point is that as time has progressed, a series of Korean self-reflections on the complex nature of nationalism in response to the NEP has emerged. With the analysis of these self-reflections, this paper attempts to address an inter-subjective nationalist perspective of history as a solution that recognizes “mutual recognition of national identity” in considering the prevailing reality of Northeastern Asian nationalism. China’s Northeast Project (NEP), also known as the “Research Project of Northeastern China,” has unleashed national sentiment among many Korean people. Even if it originated in purely academic research, the NEP poses a grave political challenge to contemporary Korea. The Korean response to the NEP can be broadly categorized in two ways: The first is that while negative perceptions of these moves by the Chinese have prevailed in Korean society, the Korean government has been very cautious in expressing criticism of the NEP due to national interests with the Chinese government. The other point is that as time has progressed, a series of Korean self-reflections on the complex nature of nationalism in response to the NEP has emerged. With the analysis of these self-reflections, this paper attempts to address an inter-subjective nationalist perspective of history as a solution that recognizes “mutual recognition of national identity” in considering the prevailing reality of Northeastern Asian nationalism.

중국식 다문화 관련 논의의 이론과 실천

이진영 숙명여자대학교 아시아여성연구원 2014 다문화사회연구 Vol.7 No.1

This paper is focusing on the trends of multiculturalism in China. Multiculturalism or western style of multi-cultural approach was introducedin China, after China entered a new period of opening to the world, theWorld Trade Organization(WTO) in the 21st century. In responding on theglobalization world-wide as well as Chinese migration across national aswell as regional borders, Chinese Communist Party(CCP) had to solve thisnew world-wide academic trend in the Chinese context. Chinese scholarswere allowed to publish articles on the multiculturalism only since 2004when a political slogan of “Harmony of Society” was announced. Therefore,multicultural approaches in China were rather politically oriented. At first,Chinese scholars considered this trend as an offense of the West to China,so that negative and politically correct, in Chinese sense, approaches wereonly found. However, Chinese scholars started to adopt multiculturalism to the Chinesecontext for political purposes. First, relationship between socialism andmulticulturalism was discussed. Multiculturalism was newly analyzed asa part of Chinese style of socialism. Second, theory of “Diversity and Unity(duoyuan yiti ),” which was invented by a famous scholar, Fei Xiaotong,was gradually combined with multiculturalism. Chinese nation (zhonghuaminzu) was newly defined. Chinese approaches to the 55 ethnic minoritiesof China were rearranged in the course of “diversity and unity” or Chinesestyle of multicultural approaches. History, nation, nationalism, education,unity, and integration were newly defined as a formation of zhonghuaminzu. Third, CCP’s achievements in the realm of ethnic minorities werepraised and justified along the line of multiculturalism. As instrumentalmeans for justification, multiculturalism became useful for the CCP. In short, distorted and politically oriented characteristics are the trendsof multiculturalism and this will be more expanded in near future forjustification of an aggressive Chinese nationalism. 이 논문은 중국에서의 ‘다문화 관련 논의’가 어떤 방식으로 진행되고 있는지를 살펴보는 시론적 연구이다. 이를 위하여 먼저 2장에서는 ‘중국 다문화 관련 논의’의 대상인 외국인 및 소수민족거주 현황을 살펴본 후 중국 내 다문화 관련 이론의 생성과 발전 현황을 개괄한다. 중국에서 다문화 접근 및 논의는 21세기 중반 들어 사실상 본격적으로 시작되었고, 학문적인 측면보다는 이데올로기나 정책적 측면에서 접근되었다. 다문화주의를 서구의 중국에 대한 정치적인 도전으로 파악학고, 대응 논리를 발전시키는 중국만의 독특한 특색을 보였다. 3장에서는 ‘다문화 관련 논의’가 수용되어 변용되는 과정을 이론적으로 고찰한다. 중국식 ‘다문화 관련 논의’는 ‘다원문화주의’로 표현된다. 또한 페이 샤오퉁의 다원일체론과결합되면서 중국식 다원문화주의의 변용이 발생한다. 다원일체에 근거하여 중화민족을새롭게 규정한 페이의 사상은 소수민족 정책은 물론, 중국의 국가 및 민족정체성과 사회통합에 이르기까지 광범위한 영향을 끼쳤다. 그 결과 사회주의와 다원문화주의의 결합이나 다원문화주의에 대한 재해석 등을 통해 다원일체론은 변용 과정을 거치게 된다. 4장에서는 정치적 슬로건으로 내세워진 조화사회(和諧社會)나 소수민족에 대한 정치적 통합, 다문화교육과 연관된 변용 과정을 통해 ‘다문화 관련 논의’가 중국에서 실제적으로 확산되고 왜곡되는 현상을 분석한다. 역사는 물론 민족주의, 문화, 교육을 재해석하면서 중국식 다원문화주의는 중국 공산당의 통치를 합리화하고, 업적과 성과를 재조명하는수단과 도구로 사용되는 현상을 분석하였다.결론적으로 중국에서는 ‘다문화 관련 논의’를 수용 초기에는 비판적, 부정적 시각에서바라보았으나 이후 중국의 통치 이데올로기는 물론 구체적인 소수민족 정책을 중화민족주의 입장에서 재해석하는데 유용한 도구로 사용하는 전향적 입장으로 변모하였다. 이런왜곡된 다문화 관점의 전개가 현재 중국의 다문화 논의의 특징이며, 점차 확장되고 있는중국의 국가민족주의를 합리화하는 도구로 ‘다문화 관련 논의’가 현재 사용되고 있다.