http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
근대 중국 아시아 인식의 문제성 ― 동아시아 평화공존을 위한 사상자원의 모색
백지운 한국중국현대문학학회 2012 中國現代文學 Vol.0 No.63
Despite the increasing cooperation and exchanges in the economy, conflicts among the East Asian countries show no signs of abating. The steep rise of China’s status in the international society makes the neighboring countries heighten their vigilance against China’s hegemonism. What kind of role China is going to play in the region is becoming a vital issue in the East Asia regional discourse. Considering this background, it is significant to reexamine the Asia concepts of the modern Chinese intellectuals. Unlike western-orientated intellectual trend in the contemporary China,there was a certain arena where Asia was a center of thinking around the early 20th century. However, it is tricky to re-evaluate the Asia concepts from today’s perspective. It is because some negative elements such as Sino-centrism and Chauvinistic nationalism are interwoven with the emancipatory idea of equal alliance beyond national boundaries in the concepts. In this way,the Asia concepts reveal a cross aspects of contradictory intellectual topography in modern China. To dig into the contradiction, I began with examining the recent two essays by Wang Xiao-ming and Qian Li-qun. These essays not only suggest the sturdy Asia thinking in the modern ear need to be restored, but also disclose the crack in it. Explaining the crack logically rather than just criticizing it will help open a productive path to discuss Asia as a plausible common thought source. As a part of this task, I explored Sun Wen’s two essays, “Pan-Asianism”and “Nationalism” out of The Three Principles of the People,focusing on the contradictory co-existence of modern nationalism,pre-modern Sino-centrism, and emancipatory regional vision of the equal alliance among weak people across nations.
중국 ‘항미원조전쟁’ 기억의 소환과 굴절―‘인민전쟁’ 개념을 중심으로
백지운 역사문제연구소 2022 역사비평 Vol.- No.140
The current Sino-US conflict brings the memory of The War to Resist US Aggression and Aid Korea (hereafter ‘The War’), which has been marginalized for many decades, back to the center of official political discourse. However, the newly returned narrative of The War faces a significant dilemma. As a trenchant event amidst the heist of the Cold War, the political gist of The War lies in the fact that it is a successor to the CCP’s ‘people’s war’ such as the Anti-Japanese War and the Liberation War. On the contrary, the narrative of The War in the 21st century no longer includes the concept of ‘people’s war’. Furthermore, it covertly reconstructs the political meaning of The War by stripping it of remnants of ‘people’s war’ and emphasizing party over people. 중국에서 항미원조전쟁은 문화대혁명과 개혁개방이라는 내적 격동과 미중 데탕트로 인한 대외 환경의 변화 속에서 반세기 동안 공식 서사의 변방에 밀려나 있었다. 최근 미중 대결 구도가 다시 형성되면서 수면 아래 잠겨 있던 항미원조전쟁의 기억이 중국의 공적 담론장으로 다시 소환되고 있다. 그러나 21세기에 귀환한 항미원조전쟁 서사는 중대한 역설에 직면해 있다. 즉 냉전의 최 고조기의 정치적 사건으로서 항미원조전쟁은 그 중대한 정치적 축이었던 ‘인민전쟁’의 의미를 굴절시키고 소거하는 방식으로 오늘의 미중대결의 정치 공간으로 회귀했던 것이다.
백지운 중앙대학교 외국학연구소 2016 외국학연구 Vol.- No.35
Unlike the German case in which West Germany unilaterally absorbed East Germany, the Cross-strait case in which both China and Taiwan have steadily developed the relationship over a long period of time may provide the Korean Peninsula with more useful references. However, the recent tense atmosphere in Cross-strait, which came to a head around the Sunflower Movement, urges us to rethink the way of the Cross-strait cooperation for the last decade. While it is true that the substantial achievement of the Cross-strait cooperation is the result of smart utilitarianism putting tricky political issues aside and placing economic cooperation in the forefront, the overall way of utilitarianism has deteriorated the emotional gap between people of both sides badly. It tells us that the so-called ‘peaceful development of Cross-strait’ is possible only when it creates certain space where civil societies from both sides can engage in the process of cooperation and reconciliation. The Cross-strait issue is a long-term issue. It is time for both sides to slow down the speedy economic-centered cooperation and look for a way to get to the integration at the emotional level in the long run. For this, comprehensive discussion on a variety of models of Cross-strait governance is required. This is the lesson we should take from the Cross-strait model when we think of the North-South Korean relationship.