동아시아라는 이름 아래 변혁의 상상력은 아직 유효한가 —백영서, 『동아시아 담론의 계보와 미래: 대안체제의 길』(나남출판, 2022)—

Abstract

There are various branches of East Asian discourse, but its Korean origin derives from the ‘East Asian Alternative System Theory’ developed by the Changbi group in the early 1990s, in response to the dislocation caused by the dissolution of the Soviet Union. The theory was labeled ‘East Asian’ because at that time the concept of East Asia was doubly compelling. Firstly, it signaled the potential for change: South Korea ideologies had previously been confined by anti-communism, but in the post-Cold War era there was an opportunity for South Korea to redefine itself, independently of the Asian socialist countries to the north. Secondly, fresh attention was given to East Asia as the locus of an ancient civilization, with its own theoretical systems, long predating the Cold War. Socialism was in decline, and capitalism was perceived by some to be a temporary phenomenon. In this light, East Asia emerged as the most promising alternative to Western modernity, which had given rise to both systems. After the passage of 30 years, however, East Asian theory now seems hardly tenable, when seen in the context of the current domestic and international situations. Baek Young-seo’s work, The Genealogy and Future of East Asian Discourse (2022), raises the question of whether East Asia still holds the potential for transformation. The author delves into the colonial period, tracing the historical genealogy of East Asian discourse (Part 1). He also reevaluates the future prospects of the concepts of ‘double periphery’ and ‘composite state,’ which he considers key methodologies for establishing relationships with contemporary East Asian countries (Part 2). For East Asian discourse to remain realistically relevant, however, a dramatic change in South Korea’s domestic situation is necessary. The current ruling party in South Korea is forcing inter-Korean relations into a deadlock and is helping drive the international situation towards a new Cold War. How should East Asian discourse reinvent itself while waiting and hoping for this situation to change? To paraphrase Chantal Mouffe: East Asian discourse should cautiously prepare for an ecological divergence that bridges the needs of both ecological nature and social nature. All theories envisioning transformation inevitably go through such a phase at this juncture.