『시사평론』을 통해서 본 국민협회의 근대국가인식과 참정권청원론 = The thought of kookminhyophoi about modern nation and political rights

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In 1920, Gukmin Hyeobhwae was organized as the biggest pro-Japanese group in Joseon, with pro-Japanese intellectuals who had been trying to get politically organized since the military ruling period of the 1910s. They were quite acceptive of the Japanese colonial ruling, because they considered breaking free from the Japanese rule to be quite impossible, and also because they were quite hopeful of the private gains and personal rights which would be granted to them if they willingly became citizens of a powerful modem nation such as Japan.
Yet in reality, being assimilated into a powerful modem nation, and being granted the privileges usually granted to citizens of a modernized state, were two distinctively different things. The military rule that had continued for a decade since Japan's occupation of Korea proved that Joseon was nothing more than an oppressed, colonized country. So, in order to secure welfare and happiness based upon the aforementioned personal rights, and to become able to enjoy them as a modem state citizen(a status they so eagerly desired), they started to devise details which would enable such dream to come true, as a priority.
Coming into the 1920s, the Japanese authorities' policy in terms of Joseon ruling has changed, and the so-called 'Civilian ruling' commenced. At this time around, the Gukmin Hyeobhwae faction, hoping that such change in the policy environment would work to their advantage, argued that the Joseon people should be granted the right of political participation, and also the right of joining the Jung-Euiweon Parliament of Japan. They argued that with such rights granted, the merging of Japan and Joseon at the most national level would be completed, and the Joseon people's modem rights, the supposed 'objective' of the Japanese occupation of Korea in the first place, could be realized as well. And there was a practical reason behind their argument as well. Gukmin Hyeobhwae realized that since the March 1st Movement they were no longer in seize of the hegemony of power in Korea, and that they were no longer running the show. They sincerely believed that they would undoubtedly come to face a hard time once an independent political realm was established inside the Korean peninsula, especially in a separated fashion from the Japanese mother land(just as the 'argument of municipality' imagined).
Gukmin Hyeobhwae's this kind of reasoning and actions displayed a modem perception of a state, as it exhibited an attitude trying to understand the nature of that state exclusively on terms of 'personal lights'. Yet this kind of perception of state lacked certain qualities, like the idea considering individuals' free will as the most important value, or the idea that sovereign power of a state ultimately belongs to the people who are in essence political entities composing the state itself. As a result, Gukmin Hyeobhwae did not consider the Japanese imperialism, which was oppressing the Joseon people's personal freedom and rights, as an objective to be resisted and rejected. Instead, they strongly exhibited a very subordinate attitude, and an aspiration and determination to become 'modernized citizens', with the blessing of the ruling authorities in Japan. They called for stronger state-ism, and in the process created a dilemma in which they relativized the state as a tool for realizing personal and private interests, while depending whole-heartedly upon the state and betting everything upon it at the same time.
Such dilemma eventually appeared in reality. The Gukmin Hyeobhwae figures hoped for a direct connection with the state power, yet the imperialist ruling authorities had no reason to grant the colony residents the light to politically participate in the affairs of the colonial mother land. And when the Joseon Governor General office began to implement policies designed to assimilate the Joseon society more directly in the 1930s, they found themselves literally with no where e

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 서론
• 1. 국민협회 결성의 배경과 주도층의 성격
• 2. 식민지필연론과 근대지상주의적 식민지인식
• 3. 1920년대 초 조선현실인식과 참정권청원의 논리
• 결론
• 〈Abstract〉

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 김동명, "지배와 저항, 그리고 협력" 경인문화사 2006
• 2 강동진, "일제의 한국침략정책사" 한길사 1980
• 3 신주백, "일제의 새로운 식민지 지배방식과 재조일본인 및 ‘자치’세력의 대응(1919-1922)" 39 : 2001
• 4 마츠다 도시히코, "일제시기 참정권문제와 조선인" 국학자료원 2005
• 5 高羲駿, "經濟談片" 2 (2): 1923
• 6 鶴陰生, "社會運動의 變遷" (342) : 1927
• 7 鶴陰生, "社會運動의 變遷" (342) : 1927
• 8 金阿然, "朝鮮에 參政權을 附與하라" (1) : 1922
• 9 金阿然, "朝鮮에 參政權을 附與하라" (1) : 1922
• 10 松田利彦, "朝鮮總督府秘書課長と?文化政治" 國際日本文化硏究センタ 2007
• 11 金尙會, "朝鮮統治에 關한 私見(二)" (2) : 1922
• 12 金尙會, "朝鮮統治에 關한 私見(二)" (2) : 1922
• 13 金尙會, "朝鮮統治에 關한 私見(一)" (1) : 1921
• 14 尙會, "朝鮮統治에 關한 私見(一)" (1) : 1921
• 15 金尙會, "朝鮮統治私見(二)" (2) : 1921
• 16 朝鮮總督府警務局, "朝鮮治安狀況(國內編)(金正柱 편, 『朝鮮統治史料』 7)"
• 17 同光會本部, "朝鮮民情視察報告"
• 18 金丸, "朝鮮時局史觀(七)" 2 (2): 1923
• 19 金丸, "朝鮮時局史觀(七)" 2 (2): 1923
• 20 金丸, "朝鮮時局史觀(一)" (4) : 1922
• 21 金鶴陰, "時事小言" 2 (2): 1923
• 22 春山明哲, "日本植民地主義の政治的展開" 東京大學出版會 1980
• 23 金尙會, "文化政治의 根本精神 - 그것이 實際化 될 基調는 何" (5) : 1922
• 24 金尙會, "文化政治의 根本精神" (5) : 1922
• 25 金尙會, "政變과 災害" (5) : 7-, 1922
• 26 金尙會, "如似히 하야 我社會를 復活하라" (6) : 1922
• 27 金尙會, "如似히 하야 我社會를 復活하라" (6) : 1922
• 28 金尙會, "土地所有權과 小作權" (4) : 1922
• 29 金尙會, "土地所有權과 小作權" (4) : 1922
• 30 金丸, "國民協會의 本領" (341) : 1927
• 31 金丸, "國民協會의 本領" (341) : 1927
• 32 金丸, "國民協會의 本領" (341) : 1927
• 33 國民協會宣傳部, "國民協會運動史" 1931
• 34 國民協會宣傳部, "國民協會運動史"
• 35 國民協會本部, "國民協會史"
• 36 金義用, "參政權에 對한 吾人의 意識" (1) : 1922
• 37 高羲駿, "余의 新國家觀(三)" (5) : 1922
• 38 高羲駿, "余의 新國家觀" (5) : 1922
• 39 高羲駿, "余의 新國家觀" (5) : 1922
• 40 "1930년대 전반 민족주의세력의 국제정세인식과 파시즘논의" 역사문제연구소 19 : 2008
• 41 이태훈, "1920년대 초 자치청원운동과 유민회의 자치구상" 39 : 2001
• 42 "1920년대 초 신지식인층의 민주주의론과 그 성격" 한국역사연구회 67 : 2008