1930年代(1934~38) 北滿洲 農村의 社會構成

尹輝鐸(Yoon Hwy-tak) 동양사학회 1991 東洋史學硏究 Vol.35 No.-

'포스트(Post) 동북공정' : 중국 東北邊疆戰略의 새로운 패러다임

尹輝鐸(Yoon Hwy-Tak) 역사학회 2008 역사학보 Vol.0 No.197

From a macroscopic perspective, the recent Northeast Project certainly shows a different paradigm from the precedent. In other words, the recent paradigm of the Northeast Project deviates from the traditional disputes over specific dynastic escheats and takes a direction towards building upon borderland theory systems to solidify relationships with neighboring countries of traditional periods and securing international jurisdiction in Northeastern border region. Concurrently, as the salient role of the Northeast Project shifts from centralized to regionalized role, the logic of the project is naturally expanding and deepening. Moreover, in the main three provinces of Northeastern region, historic cultural ruins are being utilized as tourism capitalin order to create economic gains. Also, these ruins are projected as a part of Chinese citizens' lives, propagating these ruins to be that of China's. The new paradigm of the Northeast Project such as this certainly is a new type that systematically amalgamates characteristics of history, economics, culture and perenniality. In this paper, this new type of Northeast Project that is being implemented will be distinguished from the traditional Northeast Project and will be called Post-Northeast Project. The "Post-Northeast Project" here does not simply mean a "Northeast Project follow-up" or an "epilogue of Northeast Project". The new paradigm mentioned in this paper fundamentally deepens the logic of Northeast Project in quality and quantity and maximizes the effect of implementation while inheriting the work and intentions of the traditional Northeast Project. Simultaneously, it signifies the Northeast borderland development strategy that has now shifted from a centralized to regionalized focus that promotes national solidarity and stability ofthe Northeastern border region by scheming the Sinofication of historic cultural ruins by extracting economic gains and taking cultural possession of the ruins

「만주국」 상업사회의 내적 구조와 민족적 특징

尹輝鐸(Yoon Hwy-Tak) 동양사학회 2009 東洋史學硏究 Vol.106 No.-

「滿洲國」의 '民族協和' 運動과 朝鮮人

尹輝鐸 ( Yoon Hwy Tak ) 한국민족운동사학회 2000 한국민족운동사연구 Vol.26 No.-

Before 「Machukuo」, Koreans in Manchuria were legally double-restricted by Chinese local authorities as well as Japanese government. They exploited and ostracized Koreans. After invasion of Japanese into Manchuria, Chinese authorities oppressed Koreans, whom is suspected to be Japanese secret agents. Korean independent struggle was also repressed by Chinese and Japanese authorities at the same time. After founding of 「Manchuku」, Koreans in Manchuria seemed to have extraterritoriality as 'subjects of the empire.' However, in fact, Koreans were treated as trivial people whom were useless any more for Japanese authorities. In 1937, as extraterritoriality of Koreans in Manchuria were abolished, they became people of 「Manchukuo」. Koreans in Manchuria experienced identity crisis as either people of 「Manchukuo」 nor Japanese. 'The Great Empire of Japanese', transformed into multinational state by imperial invasions, had discriminatory and hierarchial coercion over nationalities. Although 「Machukuo」 had ideology of 'Cooperation and Harmony among Nationalities’(民族協和), it treated Japanese as superior nationality. Koreans in Manchuria wanted to have equal rights with Japanese. However as Koreans did not have their own government and were treated as Japanese secret agents, they failed to have appropriate political power of 「Machukuo」. They were even hard to survive because of their bad economic condition as immigrants. Koreans in Manchuria had difficulties in participating ‘Cooperation and Harmony among nationalities’ committee because of language barrier and small portion of their political rights. In addition, the committee retained its discriminatory policy. Therefore, Koreans in Manchuria were alienated. It also denoted failure of 'Cooperation and Harmony among nationalities’ In conclusion, 'Cooperation and Harmony among nationalities’ as counter ideology toward colonial nationalism was, in reality, imperialistic discrimination over nationalities. As we saw identity crisis and national deprivation of Koreans in Manchuria, 'Cooperation and Harmony among nationalities’ has failed.

한·중 역사논쟁과 역사화해

윤휘탁 ( Hwy Tak Yoon ) 중국사학회 2007 中國史硏究 Vol.51 No.-

『만주국』 봉천시 각 민족의 거주환경 및 직업상의 위상

윤휘탁 ( Hwy Tak Yoon ) 중국사학회 2003 中國史硏究 Vol.24 No.-

從僞滿洲國成立흔早以前, 作爲東三省的政治要地從而起着重要作用的奉天市(現在的沈陽市)坐落于僞滿洲國的奉天省, 當時是僞滿洲國的最大城市. 僞滿洲國成立以後, 隨着新京被定僞首都, 奉天市從政治城市變成了以商工業爲中心的城市, 不僅如此, 也開始變爲消費城市及有力的物資集散市場. 僞滿洲國時期奉天市以淸朝時建的皇帝陵墓地帶的北陵地區爲首, 分爲(奉天)城內·商埠地·滿鐵附屬地·鐵西工業地區五個地區. 被城壁包圍的城內從僞滿洲國成立以前一直是奉天市的中心地, 主要居住着中國人, 位于滿鐵附屬地和城內的中間的商埠地有各國的領事館. 有着新市街地性格的滿鐵附屬地主要居住着日本人和其他外國人, 被認爲是特權區域. 鐵西工業地區是從1934年起構成的重·輕工業中心地地區. 當時朝鮮人居住在作爲新市街地的中心地的大和區內的西塔和十間房地區, 形成了朝鮮人市街. 通過民族間的職業分布情況來看, 當時朝鮮人中從事農業的僞滿洲國的下層人占相當高的比重. 與此相反, 日本人和俄羅斯人幾乎沒有. 從事商工業的比重日本人和中國人比較高朝鮮人和蒙古族還有回族非常低. 從以奉天市爲首的對僞滿洲國的國政起着重要作用的公務員·軍人·法曹人·敎育者·宗敎人·醫療인·文化藝術人等的比重來看, 日本人最高, 其次是中國系, 朝鮮人和回族特別少. 日本人作爲統治民族, 在形成僞滿洲國的統治層的公務員及自由業或商工業的人中占的比重흔高. 同時由于東淸鐵道敷設和俄羅斯革命在滿洲居住的俄羅斯人從事公務自由業的比重也흔 高. 中國系當中漢族除了公務員的外交領域, 在奉天市的各個職業中都占흔大的比重. 雖然各職業領域中處于核心地位的都是日本人掌握, 但因爲漢族在各個職業領域中分布的人數占絶大多數, 在奉天市的民族構成中處于比日本人更重要的地位. 事實上與漢族沒有太大區別的滿族也是位于漢族的下一位. 同樣是中國系, 蒙古族和回族的民族地位就흔低. 朝鮮人的社會地位就象他門從事地位相對低下的農業比重相當大的事實中可以猜出來的, 在奉天市的地位非常低. 特別是在奉天市居住的朝鮮人雖然人數和日本人差不多, 在屬于社會統治層的公務, 自由業中的朝鮮人的比重只不過是日本人的1/9, 不僅如此, 民族對比人口構成也比日本差흔多. 朝鮮人雖然象日本人一樣有着日本國籍, 但在奉天市也只不過是微乎其微的存在. 在社會與論的形成中有着重要作用的出版業中, 日本人占有壓倒一切的比重, 與此相反朝鮮人從事者幾乎沒有. 在醫療領域, 社會地位相當高的西醫也是日本人和中國系分占. 牙科醫生日本人占2/3, 中國系占1/3. 醫療領域中社會地位較高的藥劑師中日本人占比中國系占有壓倒一切的比重, 與此相反, 在補助類的領域中中國系占絶對多數的比重. 朝鮮人中貧困層的從事農業的比重較高的反面, 官職類, 自由業的比重非常低. 日本人作爲統治民族確保了타的最高地位. 中國系特別是漢族在各種職業當中占有絶對性的人數, 而且在社會地位較高的公務自由業或商工業中占有相當的比重, 所以也發揮着其民族力量. 朝鮮人人口又少, 在各種職業中占的比重也少, 在社會地位高的公務自由業中占有的比重低, 相反在地位較低的職業中占有的比重比較高, 无業者的比重也高. 從僞滿洲國奉天市的居住民族的職業間構成來看, 民族間的地位可以設是日本人--中國系--朝鮮人這樣的順序. 如上所述, 就象奉天市的民族間的職業分布事例中所反映的, 在形成僞滿洲國的흔多民族中, 隨着從職業分布的比重或社會影響力或職業的屬性中所反映的地位的高低, 民族的作用和地位也隨之不同, 但同時他們之間維持着有機的關係, 形成了奉天市的多民族生活基굴. 也就是設, 奉天市居住的各民族在根據其民族人口或作用或職業屬性的不同而形成的上下從屬關係或不平等的關係中發揮着各自的作用. 他們民族間的有機關係和這其中各民族的作用是形成僞滿洲國的代表城市之一的奉天市的基本動力.

사학부(史學部) : 중국(中國)의 동북(東北) 문화강역(文化疆域) 인식(認識) 고찰(考察) -"장백산문화론(長白山文化論)"을 중심으로

윤휘탁 ( Hwy Tak Yoon ) 한국중국학회 2007 중국학보 Vol.55 No.-

‘滿洲國’ 農村의 社會像 -‘複合民族構成體’의 視覺에서 본 植民地 農村의 斷想-

尹輝鐸 ( Yoon Hwy-tak ) 한국민족운동사학회 2001 한국민족운동사연구 Vol.27 No.-

‘Manchukuo’ was composed up of “Han Chinese”, “Manchus”, “Mongols”, “Koreans”, “Japanese”, “Moslems” and “Russians”. Therefore, ‘Manchukuo’ is a compound racial community which inter-relationships of those races were reflected. Before 1937, the important portion of the rural society in ‘Manchukuo’ is “Chinese (including of “Manchus”, “Moslems”)”and “Koreans”. However, Since 1937 colonial authorities of Japan practice theirs agrarian emigration policy to Manchuria, the component ratio of “Japanese” gradually increased in Manchirian rural society. In agricultural environments, Korean immigrants in Manchuria less than “Chinese agrarian”. For the most part of them cannot help were unable to stop being a tenant farmer of Chinese landlord. Koreans in Manchuria have the skill of cultivating a rice field. This skill guaranteed high earnings than the rest crops. In result, Chinese landlord prefers Koreans to Chinese tenants, and the former by degrees encroached upon the vested rights of the latter in tenanting farming. Besides Chinese and Koreans in mutuality disputed and had a guarrel with to farming method, collecting tenanting land from Koreans, renting of a house, cultural difference. Chinese considered Koreans in Manchuria as a puppet of Japanese imperialism. Accordingly Chinese held Koreans in Manchuria in Scorn. On the contrary, Koreans in Manchuria also distrusted Chinese landlord and looked down on Chinese. These two nations mutually kept up estranged relationships. If we have regard for the standard of living, Koreans in Manchuria cannot be rated as the second grade nation of ‘Manchukuo’. Ultimately Koreans in Manchuria were an intermediating nation between Chinese and Japanese and a nation which threw across Chinese and Japanese territory. Between Chinese and Japanese, Koreans suffered. They were not only put to a bad use but were persecuted by Chinese and Japanese.

〈滿洲國〉의 '2等 國(公)民', 그 實像과 虛像

尹輝鐸(Yoon Hwy-Tak) 역사학회 2001 역사학보 Vol.169 No.-

중국에서의 ‘滿洲(長白山) 主人論’의 表象化 작업과 의미

윤휘탁 ( Yoon Hwy Tak ) 중국사학회 2019 中國史硏究 Vol.0 No.119

Recently, in China, to make Manchuria a complete territory of China and to strengthen the mine ownership of Mt. Baekdu, the master of Changbai(長白) Mountain is claiming that it is a Chinese nation of Suishin(肅愼) tribe. In other words, this logic is that the tribes of Suishin(肅愼) have worshiped Changbai Mountain and served as a base for their daily life, so that the master of Manchuria and its core, Changbai Mountain are a Suishin nation. However, in the “Master Logic of Manchuria (Changbai Mountain)” claimed in China, it is denied that the sacred mountain consciousness of the Korean people to Baekdu(白頭) Mountain, the fact of the cult of Baekdu Mountain in the Joseon (朝鮮) Dynasty, Baekdu Mountain spreads across the border between North Korea and China and that the two countries are managing it. Therefore, this logic denies the perception and relatedness of Baekdu Mountain in neighboring countries and reveals China’s exclusive intention to monopolize Baekdu Mountain. Considering these points, the history and culture relation of neighboring countries and the ethnic sentiment are neglected in the “master logics of Manchuria (Changbai Mountain)” claimed in China. In other words, the logic reveals the color of 'the neutralization of exclusively historical culture' and ‘imperialism in the cultural territory’.