政治史 敎育內容의 再評價에 관한 硏究 : 19世紀 유럽民主主義展開過程의 比較政治學的 分析 = A Comparative Study on the Political History of Modern Europe

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The nineteenth century of Europe marked the first time that man consciously sought liberty. Rooted in earlier periods but sweeping to triumph in the nineteenth century, the ideas of liberal democracy became the basis for new political structure in a handful of European nations: England, the Scandinavian countries, the Lowlands, and more shakely, France.
The advance toward a more open, liberal society moved roughly through three stages. First, the old elites granted legal democracy. Secondly, more people in northwestern Europe achieved the privileges of political democracy. Establishment of a competitive political system and extension of the franchise ultimately promoted a greater circulation of elites. Thirdly, in the 1880's and 1890's, social democracy emerged, as the movement toward universial education, minimum social security, and the broadening of economic opportunity gained increasing impetus. Yet, this evolution in political history was confined to only parts of Europe. Other nations in the nineteenth century---Russia, Italy, Spain, Germany, the Austro-Hungarian Empire---failed to develop the full framework of a liberal polity.
In the context of comparative politics, it is necessary to analyze carefully the conditions which allowed some countries to make this leap into the building of stable liberal societies while others could not. Recent efforts in the study of modern European political history to explain this difference through comparative approach fall into four general theories: those which stress the role of economic development, those which emphasize ideology, those that look to the differences among political cultures, and those which assign pre-eminent importance to the growth of socio-economic pluralism in the nineteenth century.
Comparative approach to the nineteenth-century European history offers substantial support for the pluralistic conception of liberal polity. Three instances of the successful evolution from an authoritarian to a liberal polity---Denmark, Holland, and Switzerland---illustrate how socio-economic pluralism served as the midwife of democracy, while the cases of German, Italy, and Russian present illustrations of a liberal society's fragility. Aside from many historical factors, one can trace the failure of democracy in these three countries to two general deficiencies: first, they lacked a pluralized socio-economic order, such as that evolved by England, Denmark, Switzerland, and Netherlands. Secondly, when liberal forces " prematurely" seized power, they looked only to their own class interests rather than general welfare of the masses.
To be concluded, a comparative perspective of modern democracy would be examined. As social structure changed, the old system of values gave way to an ethic which stressed individualism at the cost of traditional hierarchical respect, the desirability of change at the expense of fatalism, the utility of individual reason over blind faith. As a plural social system emerged, so did a new system of politics. And, of course, the converse also held true: to the degree that the values in a society already involved tolerance, diversity, and pluralism, the transition to a liberal order bacame more probable in the nineteenth century.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 序 言
• 1. 問題의 提起
• 2. 論議의 方法과 目的
• Ⅱ. 유럽政治史를 보는 4개의 觀點
• 1. 經濟史的 接近
• 2. 이데오로기的 接近
• 3. 政治文化的 接近
• 4. 多元論的 接近
• Ⅲ. 實證的 事例(Ⅰ)
• 1. 덴마아크의 경우
• 2. 네델란드의 政治
• 3. 스위스의 모델
• Ⅳ. 實證的 事例(Ⅱ)
• 1. 이태리의 경우
• 2. 러시아의 경우
• 3. 獨逸의 경우
• Ⅴ. 結語-政治史의 社會學的 解釋