본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

탈냉전기 타이완의 ‘중국상상’과 민족주의 ― 개방담론과 귀속감을 중심으로

‘Images of China’ and Taiwanese Nationalism in the Post-Cold War Period-The Opening of Cross-Strait Relations and the Impact on Sense of Belonging

0

조회

0

다운로드

5

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류중국어와문학

초록

This study examines attempts to overcome the Cold War order in Taiwanese society and the dynamics of the post-Cold War period after 1987. The focus is on nationalism and the correlation between awareness about the newly re-emerged ‘mainland China’ and the formation of nationalism and national identity. Specifically, this paper looks into how the waishengren(外省人), benshengren(本省人)and second generation of the Oesungin understand the opening of cross-strait relations. It also considers the changes to Taiwanese identity, focusing on Chinese nationalism and Taiwanese nationalism. The crossing of the straits by the defeated Chinese nationalists in the 1940s resulted in the formation of a new nation-state and in this context nationalism is ‘justified’ as contributing to the completion of an incomplete nation. Chinese nationalism is embodied in the Taiwanese constitution, which regards mainland China as a territory of Taiwan and serves to complete the ‘incomplete nation-state’ by unifying the two countries. During the Cold War period, this was evident in the training of ‘Chinese’regardless of conflict of province origin(省籍). However, the opening of cross-strait relations triggered the collapse of this image of China as the mother culture and brought about a perception of the mainland as ‘a place to return’. At the same time, there was diversification or conversion to a ‘Taiwanese’ identity from a ‘Chinese’ one. The second generation of waishengren (外省人) is representative of this latter trend. Taiwanese nationalists have criticized Chinese nationalism in two ways. Firstly, they have criticized waishengren(外省人) for trying to hold onto privileges gained in the Cold War period through the representation of the continent as limiting the territory within Taiwan where sovereignty can be reached. Furthermore, they have attempted to established the theory of ‘one China, one Taiwan’ by claiming the ‘right of self-determination’ based on one’s birthplace. Secondly, they have criticized the ‘tributary’ (支流) theory, which is based on the idea that the majority of Taiwanese want to reunite with China, by emphasizing the differences in the anti-colonization /colonization experiences of mainland China and Taiwan. The boundaries of the nation-state and the tensions between the existing camps i.e. the nationalist ‘returners’ versus those in favour of ‘self-determination’, have been deconstructed and reshaped by the emergence of China as ‘the other’ in Taiwanese society following the opening of cross-strait relations in 1987. It is noteworthy here that both China and Taiwan share the East Asian tendency towards coping with post-colonization through ‘nationalism’ rather than other forms of ideology or identity, although the goals of the two countries are opposed in the sense that overcoming the cross-strait separation ultimately spells the end for one or the other society.

Abstract

This study examines attempts to overcome the Cold War order in Taiwanese society and the dynamics of the post-Cold War period after 1987. The focus is on nationalism and the correlation between awareness about the newly re-emerged ‘mainland China’ and the formation of nationalism and national identity. Specifically, this paper looks into how the waishengren(外省人), benshengren(本省人)and second generation of the Oesungin understand the opening of cross-strait relations. It also considers the changes to Taiwanese identity, focusing on Chinese nationalism and Taiwanese nationalism. The crossing of the straits by the defeated Chinese nationalists in the 1940s resulted in the formation of a new nation-state and in this context nationalism is ‘justified’ as contributing to the completion of an incomplete nation. Chinese nationalism is embodied in the Taiwanese constitution, which regards mainland China as a territory of Taiwan and serves to complete the ‘incomplete nation-state’ by unifying the two countries. During the Cold War period, this was evident in the training of ‘Chinese’regardless of conflict of province origin(省籍). However, the opening of cross-strait relations triggered the collapse of this image of China as the mother culture and brought about a perception of the mainland as ‘a place to return’. At the same time, there was diversification or conversion to a ‘Taiwanese’ identity from a ‘Chinese’ one. The second generation of waishengren (外省人) is representative of this latter trend. Taiwanese nationalists have criticized Chinese nationalism in two ways. Firstly, they have criticized waishengren(外省人) for trying to hold onto privileges gained in the Cold War period through the representation of the continent as limiting the territory within Taiwan where sovereignty can be reached. Furthermore, they have attempted to established the theory of ‘one China, one Taiwan’ by claiming the ‘right of self-determination’ based on one’s birthplace. Secondly, they have criticized the ‘tributary’ (支流) theory, which is based on the idea that the majority of Taiwanese want to reunite with China, by emphasizing the differences in the anti-colonization /colonization experiences of mainland China and Taiwan. The boundaries of the nation-state and the tensions between the existing camps i.e. the nationalist ‘returners’ versus those in favour of ‘self-determination’, have been deconstructed and reshaped by the emergence of China as ‘the other’ in Taiwanese society following the opening of cross-strait relations in 1987. It is noteworthy here that both China and Taiwan share the East Asian tendency towards coping with post-colonization through ‘nationalism’ rather than other forms of ideology or identity, although the goals of the two countries are opposed in the sense that overcoming the cross-strait separation ultimately spells the end for one or the other society.

참고문헌 (28)

  1. 김동춘, "우리는우리의사상을만들고있는가", 월간사회평론길, 96(7) (1996)
  2. 김경식, "독일통일과민족문제를보는몇가지시각, In 통일이후독일의문화통합과정" (2004), 연대출판부
  3. 장세진, "냉전문화론" (2010), 너머북스
  4. 박명규, "네이션과 민족: 개념사로 본 의미의 간격", 동방학지, (147), pp.27~65 (2009), 국학연구원
  5. 백원담, "냉전기아시아에서아시아주의의형성과재편, In 냉전아시아의문화풍경1" (2008), 현실문화
  6. 백지운, "동아시아 속의 향토문학", 중국현대문학, (58), pp.251~276 (2011), 한국중국현대문학학회
  7. 신승하, "당대중국" (2006), 대명출판사
  8. 지은주, "갈등의 정체성" (2008), 나남
  9. E.J. 홉스봄지음, "1780년이후의민족과민족주의" (1994), 창비
  10. 徐明珠, "報紙輿論與大陸政策關聯性之硏究―民國七十六年~七十九年間探親,學術文化, 經貿個案分析", 석사, pp.1992
  11. 楊奎松, "國民黨的‘聯共’與‘反共’" (2008), 社會科學文獻出版社
  12. "大學雜誌" (1987), 環宇出版社
  13. 王功安⋅毛磊 主編, "國共兩黨關系史" (1988), 武漢出版社
  14. 陳冠中, "下一個十年―香港的光榮年代" (2008), OXFORD
  15. 吳塵, "中共絶不可能跟你談臺獨的―對民進黨"大陸政策"的忠告" (2003), 海峽評論社
  16. 林四郞, "香港の直接選擧制はどうなるか, In 月刊 臺灣靑年 No.323" (1987), 臺灣獨立建國聯盟日本本部
  17. "面對問題肩挑歷史―大學的主張, In 大學雜誌 205號" (1987), 環宇出版社
  18. 返鄕旅行: 以李渝, 朱天文, 朱天心和駱以軍描寫臺北的小說爲例, In 中外文學, "離", pp.2005, 楊佳嫻
  19. 龍應臺, "野火集" (2004), 時報出版
  20. 林旺, "誰的國文? 誰的歷史―從國中, 高中課本看國民黨洗腦術, In 臺灣新文化 第16期" (1988), 臺灣新文化
  21. "禁書―大觀園可以使文史哲系關門的政策, In 大學雜誌 208號" (1987), 環宇出版社
  22. 牟宗三, "牟宗三論兩岸關係與臺灣認同, In 思想 13輯" (2009), 聯經出版社
  23. 張國興, "戒嚴令解除後の臺灣の勞動爭議, In 月刊 臺灣靑年, No.346" (1989), 灣獨立建國聯盟日本本部
  24. 社論, "否定‘一個中國’則否定中華民國, In 海峽評論" (1993), 海峽評論社
  25. 陳芳明, "植民地摩登:現代性與臺灣史觀" (2007), 麥田出版
  26. 楊碧川, "反美! 反美? 反美…南韓學生 最重要的民主摸索, In 新臺灣文化, 第17期" (1988), 每月叢書
  27. 魯建榮, "臺灣後植民國族認同" (2003), 麥田出版
  28. 聯合報, "中國時報", 人民日報, ~

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (12건)