본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

21세기 ‘중국’론과 제국성 ― 왕후이(汪暉)의 ‘제국-민족국가’론을 중심으로

The Discourse on China in the 21st Century and Imperiality

0

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류중국어와문학

초록

This paper analyzes the nature and meaning of the new tide of “Chinese turn” in Chinese intellectual circles that has become more pronounced since the 21st century. The new intellectual tide of the “Chinese turn” cannot be clearly summarized into a single characteristic due to the diversity of positions taken by different theorists. Therefore, through the theoretical work of Wang Hui, who represents such a tide of thought, this paper will analyze the theoretical position and intellectual foundation of the Chinese turn, as well as the implications and problems of such a research trend. Wang Hui believes that the world's current perception of China stems from the West’s dualistic view of empire versus nation-state during the Enlightenment, which established the non-Western world, especially Asia, as a negative other. Europe built its modern identity around the nation-state, and by characterizing the governance systems of Asia, including China, as imperial despotisms, it simultaneously denigrated both Asia and empire as negative opponents. Although China transitioned from a Qing Empire to a republic in the early 20th century, it did not dismantle the empire into various ethno-state units, but rather established a nation-state that reinforced the identification of the various ethnic groups within the empire. As a result, critics of China, including in the West, still believe that China’s core problem is its imperial character. Wang Hui believes that the imperial character of modern China is not negative, but rather has a historical rationality, stemming from China’s historical conditions (seeking national and ethnic independence from Western imperialist oppression) and the trend of the times during China’s modern transition. Wang Hui also believes that the Western dualism of empire and nation-state is the core logic of Western modernity, and that in order to criticize Western perceptions of modern China, it is necessary to break away from a Western-centered and modern historical perspective. To this end, Wang Hui argues that China’s modernity was not a linear process of development, but rather a process of solving new problems as the times changed, and that China’s unique characteristics led to the formation of a different modernity from the West. In other words, China’s modernity has a dual character of accepting Western modernity and critically overcoming it (modernization through criticism of modernity) under the unique circumstances of China’s time, and Chinese imperialism is the new ideology of modern China that was formed as a result. This paper analyzes Wang Hui’s theoretical attempt to reconstruct a modern China based on imperiality, and examines its implications and problems.

Abstract

This paper analyzes the nature and meaning of the new tide of “Chinese turn” in Chinese intellectual circles that has become more pronounced since the 21st century. The new intellectual tide of the “Chinese turn” cannot be clearly summarized into a single characteristic due to the diversity of positions taken by different theorists. Therefore, through the theoretical work of Wang Hui, who represents such a tide of thought, this paper will analyze the theoretical position and intellectual foundation of the Chinese turn, as well as the implications and problems of such a research trend. Wang Hui believes that the world's current perception of China stems from the West’s dualistic view of empire versus nation-state during the Enlightenment, which established the non-Western world, especially Asia, as a negative other. Europe built its modern identity around the nation-state, and by characterizing the governance systems of Asia, including China, as imperial despotisms, it simultaneously denigrated both Asia and empire as negative opponents. Although China transitioned from a Qing Empire to a republic in the early 20th century, it did not dismantle the empire into various ethno-state units, but rather established a nation-state that reinforced the identification of the various ethnic groups within the empire. As a result, critics of China, including in the West, still believe that China’s core problem is its imperial character. Wang Hui believes that the imperial character of modern China is not negative, but rather has a historical rationality, stemming from China’s historical conditions (seeking national and ethnic independence from Western imperialist oppression) and the trend of the times during China’s modern transition. Wang Hui also believes that the Western dualism of empire and nation-state is the core logic of Western modernity, and that in order to criticize Western perceptions of modern China, it is necessary to break away from a Western-centered and modern historical perspective. To this end, Wang Hui argues that China’s modernity was not a linear process of development, but rather a process of solving new problems as the times changed, and that China’s unique characteristics led to the formation of a different modernity from the West. In other words, China’s modernity has a dual character of accepting Western modernity and critically overcoming it (modernization through criticism of modernity) under the unique circumstances of China’s time, and Chinese imperialism is the new ideology of modern China that was formed as a result. This paper analyzes Wang Hui’s theoretical attempt to reconstruct a modern China based on imperiality, and examines its implications and problems.

참고문헌 (42)

  1. 가라타니 고진(柄谷行人), "제국의 구조 : 중심, 주변, 아주변" (2014), 도서출판b
  2. 거자오광(葛兆光), "이 중국에 거하라" (2012), 글항아리
  3. 다나카 히토시, "21세기 동아시아와 역사문제" (2018), 한울
  4. 몽테스키외, "법의 정신" (2007), 동서문화사
  5. 서동욱, "현대 철학과 비표상적 사유의 모험 : 현대 철학과 비표상적 사유의 모험" (2000), 문학과 지성사
  6. 안쏘니 기든스, "民族國家와 暴力" (1991), 三知院
  7. 안토니오 네그리, "제국" (2001), 이학사
  8. 에드워드 사이드, "오리엔탈리즘" (2007), 교보문고
  9. 왕후이, "근대 중국사상의 흥기(전4권)" (2024), 돌베개
  10. 왕후이, "탈정치 시대의 정치" (2013), 돌베개
  11. 왕후이, "아시아는 세계다" (2011), 글항아리
  12. 이종민, "중국 사상과 대안 근대성" (2017), 현암사
  13. 자오팅양(趙汀陽), "천하체계 : 21세기 중국의 세계 인식" (2010), 길
  14. 장웨이웨이(張維爲), "중국은 문명형 국가다" (2018), 지식공작소
  15. 전인갑, "현대중국의 제국몽" (2016), 학고방
  16. 차태근, "제국주의담론과 동아시아 근대성" (2021), 소명출판
  17. 甯應斌, "重新認識中國" (2015), 臺灣社會硏究雜誌社
  18. 汪暉, "亞洲視野 : 中國歷史的敘述" (2010), 牛津大學出版社
  19. 汪暉, "现代中国思想的兴起(全四卷)" (2004), 三联书店
  20. 趙剛, "我們需要什麼樣的中國理念" (2016), 人間
  21. Andreas Wimmer, "Nationalist exclusion and ethnic conflict : shadows of modernity" (2002), Cambridge University
  22. A. Smith, "The Cultural Foundations of Nations. Hierarchy, Covenant and Republic" (2008), Blackwell
  23. E. Balibar, "Race, nation, class: Ambiguous identities" (1991), Verso
  24. Gerard Delanty, "Inventing Europe" (1995), Palgrave Macmillan
  25. John A. Hall, "Nations, States and Empires" (2024), Polity Press
  26. Jonathan E. Hillman, "The Emperor’s New Road : China and the Project of the Century" (2020), Yale University Press
  27. Joseph W. Esherick, "Empire to Nation: Historical Perspectives on the Making of the Modern World" (2006), Rowman & Littlefield Publishers
  28. Liah Greenfeld, "Nationalism : Five Roads to Modernity" (1992), Harvard University Press
  29. Peter Perdue, "China Marches West : The Qing Conquest of Central Eurasia" (2005), The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press
  30. Tom Miller, "China’s Asian Dream : Empire Building along the New Silk Road" (2019), Zed Books
  31. W. J. F. Jenner, "The Tyranny of History: The Roots of China’s Crisis" (1992), Penguin Books
  32. 김경동, "아시아란 무엇인가? ― 인식과 정체의식", 아시아리뷰, 1(1) (2011)
  33. 송태현, "몽테스키외의 중국관 비판", 세계문학비교연구, 40 (2012)
  34. 유용태, "근대 중국의 민족제국주의와 단일민족론", 동북아역사논총, (23) (2009)
  35. 윤숙현, "민족", 국민국가, 제국, 역사학, 2023, pp.99, ~
  36. 전인갑, "제국에서 제국성 국민국가로(Ⅰ):제국의 구조와 이념", 중국학보, (65) (2012)
  37. 전인갑, "제국에서 제국성 국민국가로(Ⅱ):제국의 지배전략과 근대적 재구성", 중국학보, (66) (2012)
  38. 조경란, "중국은 ‘제국의 원리’를 제공할 수 있는가: 가라타니 고진의 『제국의 구조』에 대한 비판적 분석", 역사비평, 116(가을) (2016)
  39. 조홍식, "유럽 정체성의 형성에 관한 고찰", 국제·지역연구, 14(3) (2005)
  40. 张志强, "如何理解中国及其现代", 文化纵横, 2014(1) (2014), 文化縱橫雜誌社
  41. Kumar, K, "Nation-states as empires, empires as nation-states : two principles, one practice?", Theory and Society, 39 (2010)
  42. S. Malešević, "Empires and nation-states : Beyond the dichotomy", Thesis Eleven, 139(1) (2017)

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (15건)