Deepening and Improving Democracy : Association in South Korea

이재철 Univ. of Missouri, Columbia 2005 해외박사

The purpose of this dissertation is to examine how voluntary associations have affected the process of democratization in South Korea, one of the most influential new democracies. In other new democracies as well as long-established Western democracies, a great deal of empirical research has examined the role of associations in creating and deepening democracy. In Korea, however, relatively little research has examined how they contribute to the democratization of authoritarian politics and culture. To fill this gap in the literature on Korean democratization, this study identified the structural and cultural components of social capital. It analyzed the relationships of these components with each other and how they affect the growth of democratic citizenship. Such citizenship embodies the norms and values of democracy-in-principle and the skills required of democracy-in-practice. Theories relating social capital and democratization claim that participation in voluntary associations, especially horizontal or non-hierarchical associations, inculcates norms of reciprocity and promotes mutual trust. Such theories also claim that civic activism and interpersonal trust contribute directly to democratic citizenship. To test these theoretical claims, this study analyzed the latest waves of the Korean Democracy Barometer survey and the World Values Survey. The empirical results confirmed only one of these two theoretical claims, the one linking social capital to democratic citizenship. Specifically, the structural component of social capital motivates the Korean masses to activity in the political process and to embrace the norms of democratic behavior. Its cultural component, on the other hand, encourages them to appreciate the virtues of democracy and support democratic institutions. On the basis of these findings, this study concludes that the two components of social capital - participating in voluntary associations and trust in fellow citizens - complement each other in building a fully democratic state.

On democratic crisis and its causes : 'overlapping critical junctures' and 'recurrent legacies' from 1789 to 1991

서현준 Graduate School, Yonsei University 2024 국내박사

This dissertation analyzes the causes of democratic crisis under the perspective of historical institutionalism. It first introduces the issue of democratic crisis by presenting the objective standards for well-functioning democracy and showing that these standards are not being properly fulfilled with the empirical evidence. It then summarizes the existing arguments on the causes of democratic crisis by grouping them into the categories of ‘external’ and ‘internal’ causes, both of which are divided into the sub-categories based on the commonality of arguments. It reveals that most of current analyses on the causes of democratic crisis are predicated on a short span of time, and that they share a common premise that the anti-democratic features of democratic regimes come from the proximate external factors. To compensate the limits of existing literatures, it presents the ‘historical institutionalism’ as a theoretical framework, and explains the three main concepts of ‘historicism,’ ‘critical juncture,’ and ‘path dependence,’ together with three additional theses of ‘Long History,’ ‘Overlapping Critical Junctures,’ and ‘Recurrent Legacies’ originally suggested by this dissertation. Thereafter, by applying a new theoretical model, it conducts the historical examination of modern democracy from the period of the two great revolutions to the end of the Cold War (1789-1991). Overall, the suggested theoretical model of ‘long history,’ ‘overlapping critical junctures,’ and ‘recurrent legacies’ properly explains the historical development of modern democracy. The historical analysis reveals that the incipient anti-democratic tendencies in the early modern democracies had caused the overlapping critical junctures and the recurrent legacies in a way that hinders the development of democratic governance over the last two hundred years. As such, it concludes that the foundation of the crisis of democracy had been created from inside the democratic sphere itself. 본 연구는 민주주의 위기 현상에 대한 근본적인 원인을 역사적 제도주의의 관점으로 분석한다. 우선 ‘민주주의 위기’의 실체를 입증하기 위하여 올바른 민주주의의 기준점을 제시하고 이것이 제대로 충족되고 있지 않은 현황을 실증적으로 증명한다. 다음으로 민주주의 위기 원인을 분석하는 선행 연구들을 그 주장의 유사성에 따라 ‘외재적’ 요인과 ‘내재적’ 요인으로 구분하여 요약하고 그 한계를 밝힌다. 이에 따르면 기존 민주주의 위기에 관한 연구는 대부분 짧은 기간 동안의 역사적 분석만을 다루며 그 원인을 시간적, 공간적으로 가까운 외부 요인으로부터 찾는다는 한계를 보임을 알 수 있다. 따라서, 이러한 기존 연구의 한계점을 극복하기 위해 본 연구는 현대 정치와 사회 문제의 원인을 보다 긴 역사적 분석과 내재적 요인 분석을 통해 규명하는 것을 목적으로 하는 ‘역사적 제도주의’를 이론적 틀로써 차용한다. 이를 위해 역사적 제도주의의 핵심을 이루는 ‘역사주의,’ ‘결정적 분기점,’ ‘경로 의존성’ 세 가지 개념을 상세히 설명하고, 이를 추가로 보완하기 위해 본 연구에서 독창적으로 고안한 ‘긴 역사적 분석,’ ‘중첩된 역사적 분기점,’ ‘반복적 고착화’ 라는 세가지의 추가적인 개념을 제시한다. 본 연구는 이 같이 추가로 각색된 역사적 제도주의를 분석의 틀로 적용하여 1789년에서 1991에 이르는 지난 200년 간의 역사를 ‘근대 민주주의의 탄생 및 발전 과정’이라는 주제에 맞춰 상세히 분석한다. 분석 결과 전반적으로 본 연구에서 제안한 이론적 틀이 주장하는 바와 유사한 형태로 실제 근대 민주주의 탄생 및 발전사가 진행되어 왔음이 확인된다. 본 연구에서 진행한 역사적 분석에 따르면, 초기 형태의 근대 민주주의 국가들 내에 배태된 반민주적 경향성은 두 번의 혁명과 두 차례의 전쟁을 중첩된 역사적 분기점으로 삼아 지난 200년의 기간동안 반복적으로 고착화되어왔다. 이러한 분석에 기반하여 본 연구는 현재 관찰되는 민주주의 위기 현상의 근본적인 원인은 근대 민주주의 그 자체의 발전사로부터 찾아볼 수 있음을 주장한다.

토크빌의 민주주의를 위한 처방 : 자유의 수련기

한동철 연세대학교 대학원 2005 국내석사

Democratization was a long-cherished desire in Korea for last fifty years. In this respect, Korean democracy has passed one phase as it has established procedural democracy. In reality, however, the problems of Korean politics has not bee overcome. The fact that Korean politics is still limping raises a question about “democracy after democratization'. There are two different opinions about solving the problem of “democracy after democratization'. Some point out the ‘lack of democracy'' as a root cause for the problem. They contend that the biggest problem of Korean politics is that political democratization as procedural democracy did not expand into economic and social sphere, which should be accelerated. The so-called ‘democratization acceleration strategy'' leads to the recent debate on constitutional revision which civil society takes initiative of. On the other hand, others argue that the problem of “democracy after democratization' is due to ‘excess of democracy''. They maintain that democratization has been accomplished when procedural democracy was established and that this institutional foundation should be consolidated. This opinion also appears as ‘constitutionalism''. However, both arguments overlook the absence of ‘citizens'' who operate democracy. On the wrong debate line between ‘substantial democracy'' and ‘procedural democracy'', they fail to see the matter of formation of ‘citizen''.The reason why the formation of ‘citizen'' is important is that the politics of reality consists of interactions between political institutions and human beings that operate them. The argument of ‘procedural democracy'' is hollow as decmoratic institutions cannot be stabilized without ‘citizens''. This is why the question of “democracy after democratization' has to be centered on the project of ‘citizen making'' away from the wrong debate line.Because Tocqueville pondered upon the ‘citizen making'', his idea is still applicable to the present situation of Korea. He experienced monarchy, democratic revolution and counter-revolution. In the political history of France that democracy after democratization was not settled, Tocqueville thought over consolidation of democracy. His remedy is to form ‘citizens'' who can operate democracy. He argues, however, that the consequences of democratization are harmful to ‘citizen making''. In the paradoxical situation that the more democratized a society becomes, the more ‘citizens'' disappear, ‘citizen'' can be formed only by taming democracy. In other words, apprenticeship of freedom is essential so that people can learn how to enjoy political freedom and become ‘citizen''. Because democratization is irreversible, he proposed to form ‘citizen'' by controlling and deferring the consequences of democratization. This is the point where Tocqueville''s remedy meets with the present situation of Korean politics. 지난 50여 년 동안 한국 정치의 염원이 민주화였다면, 절차적 민주주의를 확립함으로써 한국 정치는 한 단계 발전했다고 볼 수 있다. 그러나 실상을 들여다보면 민주화가 한국 정치의 문제를 해결해 주지 못했음을 알 수 있다. 민주화가 되어도 여전히 한국 정치의 파행성은 극복되지 못 하고 있는 것이다. 이처럼 “민주화 이후의 민주주의”라는 문제의식은 민주화 이후에도 계속되는 한국 정치의 파행성에서 시작된다. 그리고 “민주화 이후의 민주주의”에 대한 해답은 크게 두 가지로 제시된다. 먼저 ‘부족한 민주주의’를 근본적 원인으로 지적하는 입장이 있다. 절차적 민주주의에 머문 정치적 민주화가 경제와 사회 영역으로 확산되지 못한 것이 한국 정치의 문제이고, 이를 위해 사회 각 부문의 민주화를 가속화해야 한다는 것이다. 이른바 ‘민주화의 가속화 전략’은 최근의 시민사회 중심의 개헌논의로까지 이어지고 있다. 다음으로 “민주화 이후의 민주주의”의 문제가 ‘과도한 민주주의’ 때문이라고 보는 입장이 있다. 절차적 민주주의의 확립으로 민주화는 완성되었으며, 이러한 제도적 기반을 공고히 해야 한다는 입장이다. 이러한 입장 역시 최근 ‘헌정주의’라는 이름으로 나타나고 있다. 그러나 “민주화 이후의 민주주의”에 대한 이러한 논의들이 빠뜨리고 있는 문제는 절차적 민주주의를 운영할 ‘시민’의 부재이다. ‘실질적 민주주의’와 ‘절차적 민주주의’라는 잘못된 논쟁 전선에서 ‘시민’의 형성이라는 문제의식이 보이지 않는 것이다.‘시민’의 형성이 “민주화 이후의 민주주의”에서 중요한 이유는 간단하다. 현실의 정치란 정치제도와 제도를 운영하는 인간 사이의 상호작용으로 구성되기 때문이다. ‘시민’의 형성 없이는 민주주의 제도를 안정적으로 지속시킬 수 없다는 점에서 ‘절차적 민주주의’의 주장은 공허하다. ‘실질적 민주주의’를 주장하는 것 역시, 민주화가 자연스럽게 ‘시민’을 만들어내지는 않는다는 점에서 설득력을 갖지 못한다. “민주화 이후의 민주주의”라는 문제의식이 잘못된 논쟁 전선을 벗어나, ‘시민 만들기’라는 기획에 집중해야 되는 이유이다.“민주화 이후의 민주주의”를 고민하는 한국의 현실이 시공간을 뛰어넘어 토크빌과 호응하는 것은 잘못된 논쟁 전선을 벗어나 ‘시민 만들기’를 고민했던 토크빌의 경험 때문이다. 토크빌은 왕정과 민주주의 혁명, 혁명의 반동 속에서 일생을 보냈다. 민주화 이후에 민주주의가 정착하지 못했던 프랑스의 정치사 속에서 토크빌은 민주주의의 공고화라는 문제의식을 키워 나간 것이다. “민주화 이후의 민주주의”에 대한 토크빌의 처방은 민주주의를 운영할 수 있는 ‘시민’을 만드는 것이었다. 그러나 토크빌은 민주화의 결과가 오히려 ‘시민’을 만드는 데 부정적이라고 생각했다. 민주화될수록 ‘시민’이 사라지는 역설적 상황에서 토크빌은 민주주의를 길들임으로써만 ‘시민’을 만들어낼 수 있다고 생각한 것이다. 즉, 정치적 자유를 향유할 수 있는 ‘시민’이 되기 위해서는 정치적 자유를 익히는 ‘자유의 수련기’가 필요하다고 본 것이다. 민주화는 거역할 수 없지만, 민주화의 결과를 통제하고 지연시킴으로써 ‘시민’을 만들고자 했던 토크빌의 처방이 한국의 현실과 만나는 지점이다.

(The) Varying Impacts of Populist Rule on Liberal Democracy in Latin America

이승호 서울대학교 대학원 2020 국내박사

Populist rule is one of the most symbolic features that have characterized modern politics in Latin America. In so far as the outcomes of populist rule in the region are studied, one of the main interests in the existing literature is its impact on the quality of liberal democracy. This thesis seeks to contribute to the existing literature on the relationship between the two variables by conducting empirical research based on a panel dataset covering 18 Latin American countries from 1991 to 2017. I find an overall negative relationship between populist rule and liberal democracy, which is a reflection of their inherent incompatibility and the populist project of maximizing the utility of the individuals forming a majority at the expense of the elite and minority. However, what has been observed across the countries in the region is that some populist presidents distort liberal democratic institutions with a high level of discretion, whereas others relatively conform to the constraints imposed by liberal democracy and have a limited impact on it. I argue that the capability of populist presidents to attack liberal democratic institutions is determined by the estimated costs of doing so incurred by a set of constraints arising from three groups in society: the informal working class; the formal working class; and the capitalist class. Each of these three groups, with class-specific socioeconomic demands, curtails populist incumbents’ room to maneuver by posing a probable threat to governability. The populist government is by nature constrained by the requirement to please the informal working class, who constitute a majority in a typical Latin American society and are willing to support the populist project only if their socioeconomic demands are met. Its policy choices are also constrained by the formal working class and the capitalist class, who possess disproportionate influences in the society and are interested in the protection of the existing political order. I identify three variables that are closely related to each of the three potential veto players to the populist project: natural resource rents, industrial employment, and financial development. Depending on the levels of these three variables, the extent to which populist presidents can actually pursue strengthening of executive power and radical institutional changes that are consistent with their populist discourse is determined. I find that the negative impact of populist rule on liberal democracy is exacerbated with a higher level of natural resource rents and lower levels of industrial employment and financial development. Finally, I complement my quantitative analysis with an examination of the experiences of a number of Latin American countries under populist rule. This study is one of the first systematic evaluations of the constraints that shape governing populists’ capability to damage liberal democratic institutions.

당위로서 직접민주주의 연구

서휘양 전북대학교 교육대학원 2019 국내석사

A study of direct democracy as what is to be In order to conclude that direct democracy is what is to be, this paper goes through five steps. The first step insists that the basic principle of democracy are in ‘equality’ and ‘immediacy’. According to ancient Athenian democracy as original form, all the citizens in Athens had been equal at directly participating in public affairs. The second step asserts that Plato’s ‘Philosopher king’ is just a disguised form of hereditary monarchy. It is evident that any hereditary monarchy destroys equality of direct participating in public affairs. The third step demonstrates that representative democracy as an alternative of hereditary monarchy is a corrupted form of direct democracy. Any representative democracy have degenerated the ideal of equalitarianism. The fourth step calls into question some merits of representative democracy. Any representative have been worshiping an intellectual elitism as just a copy of ‘philosopher king’. Lastly, the five steps shows how to approach direct democracy and to overcome representative democracy. The answer will be dependent upon ICT, civic consciousness, and shortened labor hours.

Perception of the elite community on democracy in Egypt

Shireen Essam Eldin Abdallah Youssef 서울대학교 국제대학원 2015 국내석사

The choice of the elites in this study is based upon the understanding that this important segment of the population must be taken into consideration in order to have a complete picture of Egypt’s political transition. The role of elites "intellectuals" in any society is indeed one of the crucial elements to the development of society. The Egyptian elites proved their important role when they sparked the Egyptian January revolution in 2011. Most of the new scholars were eager to know the perception of the Egyptian elite community on democracy, political system and ways of governance in one of the most famous revolutions in the Arab world, keeping in mind that the elite activists of January 25 uprising spanned to disenfranchised Egyptians, the working class, and politicized reformers. Since the demonstrations began, discussion of the political path forward has engaged not only elites, but also the ordinary citizens. The Egyptian elites' perception about the real problem concerning the democracy and political system is the weak state which is the lack of the IV role of the state institutions, in addition to the lack of consolidation and solidarity that led to the absence of democracy in Egypt. The elites believe that democracy can be reactivated only by two channels, first; the reform of the state institutions , second; raise awareness among people of concepts such as equality, freedom of speech, etc. Although the scene of democracy and political system as well as economic growth of Egypt might be gloomy currently, the Egyptian elites are optimistic that these transitional periods usually take years until the country get back to the right track with their contribution in the process of democratization.

Public Administrators' Acceptance of the Practices of Digital Democracy : A Model Explaining the Utilization of Online Policy Forums in South Korea

김찬곤 The State University of New Jersey 2005 해외박사

The Internet provides a new digital opportunity for realizing democracy in public administration, but there are wide variations in adopting and implementing practices of digital democracy among government agencies. Thus, this study raises a question: What factors determine public officials' acceptance of practices of digital democracy on government Web sites? To predict public officials' behavioral intention to use online policy forums on government Web sites, individual and organizational factors, as well as system characteristics, were examined. Individual factors include Internet attitudes, attitudes toward citizen participation, and knowledge about digital democracy. Organizational factors refer to supervisor support, information system (IS) department support, and innovation-supportive organizational culture. System characteristics of online policy forums include perceived ease of use, information quality, and perceived risk in online discussions. Between the independent and dependent variables, there is an intervening variable: public officials’ perceived usefulness of online policy forums. A survey questionnaire was administered to Korean public officials in central and local governments, and a total of 895 responses were analyzed. Path analysis indicates that three causal variables are important in predicting public officials' intentions to use online policy forums: perceived usefulness, information quality, and attitudes toward citizen participation. Perceived usefulness plays a mediating role between some predictors and behavioral intention. This study has defined four stages of digital democracy: (1) information disclosure, (2) listening/feedback, (3) online deliberation, and (4) online decision-making. In the survey, there are no differences in officials' support for practices of digital democracy between the third and fourth stages of digital democracy. This study finds that public administrators' perspectives on the future of online policy forums are affected by Internet attitudes, attitudes toward citizen participation, knowledge about digital democracy, and perceived usefulness of online policy forums. This study also finds that there are statistically significant differences in characteristics between previous users and nonusers of online policy forums, and differences in perception of information quality between officials in central and local governments. Finally, content analysis of comments from respondents reveals that complementary measures are needed in introducing new practices of digital democracy.

(A) Study on School Democracy and Citizenship Education in Germany : Implications on Citizenship Education in Korea

현숙원 경희대학교 평화복지대학원 2018 국내석사

In 2016 fall, streams of candlelight filled Gwanghwamun square, Seoul. The incident has been symbolized as a full-scale fuse of participative democracy against the corrupted government, implicated politicians, and the conglomerates. Although the heat of the candlelight ignited the concern for democracy, what cultivates citizenship which makes democracy, civil movements, and social change possible is not that broadly understood about. In this respect, this study points to education as the first and foremost generator of democracy since it cultivates civic competence. In particular, as a democracy has to be realized by actual practice and always an ongoing process, citizenship also has to be acquired from living experiences. In this context, the term ‘School Democracy’ and citizenship education are highlighting for it directly means “learning democracy at the site of education.” This study analyzes the second materials about public education in Germany and partly covers an interview with the project organizer of citizenship education, and German colleagues in UNESCO Deutsche Commission in Bonn, and Bpb about German citizenship education. Furthermore, the contents drawn from the interview with the project manager of the German political foundation about the ‘Politische Bildung’ on public and students is also included. Although this study was started due to a keen interest in the theme of citizenship for mature democracy, the writer tried to bridge this political matter to education, in particular, to school democracy, and its related concepts. In this sense, this study connects the two fields of democracy in the real-world, and school democracy in the context of public education.

MODERN TECHNOLOGY AND DEMOCRACY

손화철 Katholieke Universiteit Leuven 2005 해외박사

본 논문에서는 최근에 활발하게 제기되고 있는 기술민주화(Democratization of Technology) 이론들을, 20세기 초반에 시작된 기술철학의 역사적 맥락에서 비판적으로 검토한다. 1장과 2장에서는 기술의 민주화 이론들이 나오게 된 기술철학사적 배경들을 개괄한다. 먼저 하이데거 (Martin Heidegger), 엘룰(Jacques Ellul), 요나스 (Hans Jonas), 마르쿠제 (Herbert Marcuse) 등을 `고전적 기술철학자`로 구분하고, 이들의 기술철학적 입장과 그 입장들이 가지는 기술발전의 정치적 제어에 대한 함의를 알아본다. 2장에서는 고전적 기술철학에 반발하며 1980년대 이래 기술철학의 주류로 떠오른 소위 `경험으로의 전환 (empirical turn)`을 살펴본다. 경험으로의 전환은, 기술철학이 기술 일반에 대한 비판보다는 개별 기술에 대한 심층적 이해에 기반하여 전개되어야 한다고 주장한다. 이 흐름은 다시 사회구성주의, 기술에 대한 인식론적 접근, 정치적 접근 등으로 나누어지는데, 기술민주화 이론도 이런 맥락에서 파악되어야 한다. 3장에서는 위너 (Langdon Winner)와 스클로브 (Richard Sclove), 그리고 핀버그 (Andrew Feenberg)의 기술의 민주화 이론들을 정리해 본다. 이들은 현대 기술발전의 폐해들이 전문가들에 의해 일방적으로 주도되는 비민주적 기술발전에 있다고 보고 일반인들의 참여로 이를 해결할 수 있다고 믿는다. 위너의 기술의 정치적 이해에 영향을 받은 스클로브는 직접민주주의의 원칙을 기술발전에 적용할 것을 제안하고, 핀버그는 사회구성주의에 입각하여 대중이 기술을 민주적으록 구성할 수 있다고 주장한다. 4-6장은 3장에서 살펴본 기술의 민주화 이론들을 여러가지 각도에서 비판한다. 먼저 4장에서는 미국의 고준위 핵폐기물 처리장 건설을 둘러싼 정치적 결정과정과 인터넷과 민주주의의 상관관계를 살펴보고, 스클로브와 핀버그의 기술민주화 이론들이 이들 구체적인 사례들에 얼마나 잘 적용될 수 있는지를 검토한다. 이 과정에서, 두 사람의 기술민주화 이론은 한정된 범위 안에서 사용되는 특정 기술에는 잘 적용될 수 있지만, 많은 사람들에게 영향을 미치는 거대기술에 적용하기에는 부적합하다는 것이 밝혀진다. 5장은 기술민주화 이론에서 당연하게 받아들이는 민주주의의 개념이 기술이 초래한 전지구적 상황에 적합하지 않다는 것을 정치학자 헬드 (David Held)의 정치학 이론을 빌어 주장한다. 헬드는 기존의 민주주의 이론들이 지리적 경계와 주권의 영역이 뚜렷한 근대국가를 전제해 왔음에 주목한다. 그러나 전지구화는 이런 경계와 영역을 모호하게 만들기 때문에 이런 전제들은 더이상 유효하지 않다. 기술민주화 이론들의 설득력이 떨어지는 것은 정치학에서 심각한 문제로 대두되는 `전지구적 시대에서의 민주주의`를 전혀 고려하지 않은채 고전적 민주주의 이해에 기반하고 있기 때문이다. 한편, 헬드의 대안인 국제 민주주의 이론 (Cosmopolitan Democracy)을 기술민주화에 적용하는 데에도 무리가 있음을 밝힌다. 6장은 엘룰의 `기술의 허세 (Technological Bluff)` 개념을 바탕으로 기술민주화 이론 자체가 자율적 기술의 지속을 위한 도구로 역이용될 수 있음을 지적한다. 기술을 민주화하면 기술사회의 모든 문제들이 해결될 수 있다는 식의 주장은 현대 기술이 인간에 미친 심대한 영향을 무시한 피상적인 사고의 결과이다. 기술은 인간의 물질적인 삶의 조건을 바꾸었을 뿐 아니라 사고방식과 사회구조 전반에 변화를 가져왔기 때문이다. 앞서 살펴본 것과 같이, 기술이 초래한 전지구화가 정치환경의 심대한 변화로 이어져 민주주의 개념을 재고해야 할 필요를 낳는다는 사실은 기술사회의 문제가 그리 간단치 않음을 보여준다. 6장의 후반부에서는 앞의 논의들에 바탕해 고전적 기술철학과 경험으로의 전환을 주장하는 현대 기술철학의 대립을 재평가한다. `경험으로의 전환`이 개별기술을 강조하여 기술철학을 한단계 발전시켰다는 사실을 부인할 필요는 없고, 기술민주화의 노력을 모두 폄하할 수는 없다. 그러나 기존의 기술민주화이론들과 같이 단순화된 해결책의 제시는 자칫 기술에 대한 막연한 허상들을 오히려 증폭시키는 위험을 초래할 수 있다. 결론에서는 고전적 기술철학자들이 보여준 겸손한 현실인식과 경험으로의 전환이 강조하는 실제기술에 대한 이해를 함께 추구할 수 있는 기술철학의 바람직한 발전방안을 모색한다.

韓國에서의 自由民株主義 受容.展開에 관한 一考察

김경식 漢城大學校 行政大學院 1991 국내석사

Western Liberal Democracy, which is an ideology system consisting of essential elements such as liberty, equality, forbearance and principle of majority rule. Many of the third developing nations, postwar, tried to introduce Western Liberal Democracy. Unfortunately, it was hard to become fixed Democracy of Western Style and the market economy system at the same time. Though Republic of Korea likewise the third developing nations introduced Western Liberal Democracy as a national ideology after liberation, people in power overemphasised logic of anti-Communism in order for them to protect Liberal Democracy. The crippled operation resulted from it. Keeping in mind those kinds of circumstances, observing direction which Liberal Democracy should go forth in future and trace introduced and developed Liberal Democracy in Republic of Korea is meaningful thing in becoming fixed Liberal Democracy of Korean Style. I Liberal Democracy starting from classical Liberal Democracy in 17th century and 18th century is a kind of system which is able to demonstrate grow, and nurture potential energy and moral individuality of each person. Therefore, E. Baker said that "Dictatorship should justify its existence by achievements, however, its continued existence itself become important contribution to a Democratic form of government. Liberal Democracy through the process of historic has been kept developing Democracy of protection, Democracy of extension, and Democracy of equilibrium. In near future, it should be converted into Democracy of participation. However, a question is the way how to overcome the upper most limit which theory of Liberal Democracy contains in itself. C. B. Macpherson emphasises change of view of man is indispensable to surmounting those problems caused by between the greatest of utility and the greatest of power which Western Liberal Democracy has. II Even though Western Liberal Democracy was accepted as national ideology of Republic of Korea after liberation, in those days, all sorts of given condition was incapable in order to keep applying and developing Western Liberal Democracy under the political climate involving phenomenon of authorianism. In particular, under the tension of the cold war between the two camps of the East and the West since The Second Wold War, the Korean Peninsula being cut in two had no choice but to accept accute political system confronted with each other between the South and the North. In Republic of Korea, anti-Communism ideology took the initiative, and people grasping power jumped their thought into logic which can damage Liberal Democracy for holding anti-Communism. Namely, the regime of Lee, Seung Man Justified political situation of authorianism by holding anti-Communism as a ruling idea, and the regime of Park, Jeong Hee taken the leadership by 5·16 Military Revolution presented national security and the modernization of fatherland as ideology of moral obligation to justify for itself, denying April 19th Student Revolution which advocated overthrow and cleanse of authorianism. However, enlarged the middle classes by the modernization of fatherland, assertion of civilians requiring politicak freedom and economic equilibrium since 1980's strongly come to the fore, and aggresive challenge of the left-wing helped, taking advantage of these circumstances Society was extremely in disorder, and proclmation of Democratization came out on June. 29, 1987 while the political situation still face on uncertainty. 6.29 Proclmation is a kind of reformation measures which showed that the party in political power accepted a request of democratization of people and accomplished political develoment directed to Democratism by forming national mutual consent. III Republic of korea, above all, has difficulty in realizing Liberal Democracy harder than any other country in the world because of the state of tension with North Korea. Besides party in political power and the nation were insufficiency in a liberal mode of living in the vortex of power, and deepening the gulf between rich and poor in the process of economic growth, a portion of the nation became estranged. It appeared on the stage of social problem. Speak a word, the point of realization of our Liberal Democracy was in fact that all sorts of the given state of political reality was decifiency in the given condition being able to keep developing Liberal Democracy. However, Republic of Korea has been converting premodern social structure and social culture into modern cultural structure of present, and the nation have strong will and belief in realizing Liberal Democracy. That Republic of Korea accepted Western liberal Democracy is since half century ago. Liberal Democracy is not an exquisite ideology which has content of doctrinism. It does nothing but have the minimum content of conference of politic, economy, and social culture. Nowadays, it's the overriding view of what dismantlement and collapse of the system of socialism in Eastern Europe prove the superiority of Liberal Democracy. Now, it's a key point for liberal Democracy of Republic of Korea to solve and practice rupture and discord of society with not authorianism of surpression and exclusion but rational method of conversation and forbearance. A sovereign remedy of Liberal Democracy depends on his or her ability how to use Liberal Democracy. We should inscribe it can be differently presented bigger or smaller.