영국에서 박물관 다문화정책의 발생 배경과 이론적 논의

문근실 국립민속박물관 2011 민속학연구 Vol.0 No.28

Recently ‘multiculturalism’ has been one of the hottest issues in Korea, and as a response to that, museums, especially the national ones, have been taking action to pursue a policy of multiculturalism. However, the discussion about multiculturalism in Korean museums has not fully developed yet due to the lack of time, since the society has been undergoing dramatic changes into a multicultural society in a very short period of time. Although some studies on multiculturalism in museums have been conducted for the last 4〜5 years, there have rarely been ones introducing the background and theoretical framework of the discussion in Western societies, where the notion was originally developed. Therefore, I introduce the background and theoretical framework of the discussion in Western context, especially in the UK, in this paper. Because the notion of multiculturalism in museums has been discussed as a part of the issue of ‘social inclusion and social role of museums’ in Western context, discourse on social inclusion in museums is scrutinized: terms and definitions,backgrounds, debates and impacts. In addition, it is analyzed that why museums are suitable for such a task of disseminating awareness of multiculturalism. For the last several decades the aforementioned issues around multiculturalism in museums have been discussed vigorously in some Western countries including the UK, and through that process, the social consensus about the museum's responsibility and role in a multicultural society has been made. In Korea, however, the process of communicating with the general public about multiculturalism in museums and reaching a social agreement is now in its infancy, as the on-going transition into a multicultural society is a relatively new phenomenon in Korea compared to the Western countries. When museums implement the policy of multiculturalism without the general consensus of their visitors, some drawbacks might occur. Thus, it is needed to further develop the ideas of multiculturalism in museums in Korean context to gain social consensus regarding the museum's role and responsibility in a multicultural society, and this paper might be helpful.

다문화교육 정책의 다문화주의 유형 분석(2006-2022)

김가영,정제영,박나경,정수현 인하대학교 교육연구소 2023 교육문화연구 Vol.29 No.6

This study aims to analyse the Ministry of Education's multicultural education policy, anchored in the typologies of multiculturalism proposed by Jenks, Lee & Kanpol. From 2006 to 2022, the research examined the types and objectives of the initiatives announced by the Ministry of Education to support multicultural education. The research was based on the types of multiculturalism (conservative multiculturalism, liberal multiculturalism, critical multiculturalism) presented by Jenks, Lee & Kanpol (2001). The findings revealed First, South Korea's multicultural education policies were predominantly characterised by Conservative Multiculturalism. However, there has been a notable decline in such Conservative initiatives across governments, with a corresponding increase in Liberal and Critical Multiculturalism efforts. Second, across all governments, initiatives aimed at students were predominantly of a Conservative Multiculturalism persuasion. Thirdly, projects that focused on multicultural students emphasised access to public education, school adaptation, Korean language education and academic support. In contrast, initiatives targeting the wider student population tended to focus on promoting an understanding of multiculturalism. Several implications emerge from this research: First, there is an urgent need for South Korea's future multicultural education policies to emphasize the role of Critical Multiculturalism. Secondly, there is a need for increased focus on both liberal and critical multiculturalism in multicultural education policies aimed at students. Finally, in addition to facilitating multicultural students' access to public education and supporting their school adjustment, there is an urgent need to expand emotional support initiatives

Analysis of Multiculturalism and Policy Gaps in Korea: Is There a Third Way?

SA Deug-Whan,CHOI Il-Moon 한국글로벌문화학회 2020 글로벌문화연구 Vol.11 No.2

단일민족주의를 표방해온 한국사회가 최근 빠르게 다문화사회로 편입되면서 다문화정책이 큰 이슈로 등장하고 있다. 본 연구는 정책격차 이론을 한국의 다문화정책에 적용하여 분석하고, 이러한 정책격차 문제를 해결하기 위한 제3의 길을 모색하고자 하였다. 연구결과 한국의 다문화주의는 서구국가들과 유사하게 ‘다문화주의의 위기’에 직면하고 있다. 다문화주의의 ‘실패’로 판단할 수는 없지만, 심지어 다문화정책의 최대수혜자인 이민자들조차 한국식 다문화정책에 대한 수용성이 매우 낮음이 드러났다. 한국의 다문화정책은 보편적인 다문화주의 개념과 달리, 다문화정책이라는 공식적 명칭 하에 실제적으로는 다문화가족들에게는 동화주의를, 그리고 이주노동자에 대해서는 차별과 배제주의를 적용시켜 온 것으로 나타났다. 다문화정책에 있어서 국가의 공언된 선언과 달리 실제 정책을 추진하는 과정에서는상당한 정책격차가 존재하고 있으며, 이러한 한국 다문화정책에 있어서 격차를 해소하기 위해서는 동화주의와 다문화주의를 뛰어 넘어 제3의 대안으로서 ‘상호문화주의’가 필요하다는 주장이다. Multiculturalism has emerged as a major issue since the recent rapid integration into a multicultural society in Korea, which has long advocated single nationalism. The study analyzed the theory of policy gaps by applying it to Korea’s multicultural policy, and sought to find a third way to solve these policy gaps. According to the study, Korea’s multiculturalism is similar to that of western countries, and it faces a “multiculturalism crisis.” While it cannot be judged as a “failure” of multiculturalism, even immigrants who are the biggest beneficiaries of multiculturalism have found that the acceptance of Korean-style multiculturalism policy is very low. Unlike the concept of multiculturalism, Korea’s multiculturalism has been applied to assimilation to multicultural families and discrimination and exclusionism for migrant workers under the official name of multiculturalism. Unlike the state’s official declaration on multiculturalism, there are significant policy gaps in the process of pursuing real policies, and in order to bridge the gap in Korean multiculturalism, it has been suggested that “interculturalism” as a third alternative are necessary.

다문화주의와 거버넌스 사회통합 전략 : 캐나다 경험과 한국적 모형 모색

박진경(Jinkyoung Park) 한국정책과학학회 2012 한국정책과학학회보 Vol.16 No.1

다문화주의 정책이 그 도덕적 정당성을 획득하였음에도 불구하고 유럽에서 번지고 있는 다문화주의 반동(backlash)현상은 한국을 비롯한 후발 다문화 국가들의 정책 방향에 많은 혼선을 초래할 것으로 예상된다. 따라서 가장 안정적이고 체계적으로 다문화주의 정책을 추진하고 있는 캐나다 사례를 심층적으로 연구하여 캐나다 다문화주의에 기반한 사회통합 모델에 대한 이해와 그 성공 요인을 분석함으로써 한국의 사회통합 전략을 다문화주의에서 모색해보고자 하였다. 연구내용으로는 첫째, 캐나다에서 다문화주의의 등장배경과 그 개념적 맥락을 통해 캐나다 다문화주의가 갖는 의미와 역할을 살펴보았다. 둘째, 캐나다의 다문화주의 정책이 사회통합정책으로 변화되는 과정을 통해 시기별 특징을 설명하였다. 셋째, 다문화주의 정책에 기반한 캐나다의 사회통합 성과를 객관적 통계자료를 동원하여 다차원적으로 논의하였다. 넷째, 다문화주의와 사회통합의 성과에 영향을 미친 요인을 법률에 의한 제도적 기능과 협력적 거버넌스 구조에서 도출하여, 마지막으로 한국적 시사점을 논의하였다. Despite multiculturalism being acquired as amoral justification, late multicultural countries, such as Korea, which have to decide their direction of policy, are expected to experience a lot of confusion as the multiculturalism backlash spreads in Europe. Thus, the Canadian multiculturalism policy, which is the most stable and systematic multiculturalism policy in the world, was studied, for a better understanding of Canada's social integration model, based on multiculturalism, and for an analysis of the critical success factors. The goal was to find a social integration strategy for Korea, based on multiculturalism. The study went as follows: First, the meaning and role of Canadian multiculturalism were examined through a study of multiculturalism's background in Canada, and the context of its conception and entrance into Canadian society. Second, the processes of Canadian multiculturalism's transition into the Canadian social integration policy, were explained, with focus on the characteristics of each decade since the 1970s. Third, objective statistics were used to discuss, multidimensionally, the results of Canada's social integration, based on multiculturalism. Finally, the implications for Korea were discussed, with the success factor of Canadian multiculturalism and social integration being the provisions of Canada's institutions, in place by law, and Canada's cooperative governance structures.

다문화주의에 대한 이데올로기적 검토

진시원 숙명여자대학교 아시아여성연구원 2018 다문화사회연구 Vol.11 No.1

Multiculturalism is not one. Multiculturalism is simply not the opposite of assimilationism. Although multicultural policies are generally understood in connection with assimilation, separatism, relativism, and pluralism, multiculturalism is combined with various political ideologies to create various types of multiculturalism. For example, multiculturalism, in combination with political ideology, is diversified into conservative multiculturalism, liberal multiculturalism, communitarian multiculturalism, progressive multiculturalism, republican multiculturalism, nationalistic multiculturalism, and cosmopolitan multiculturalism. And these various types of multiculturalism reveal the similarities and differences between each other, and present a competitive ideological recognition and policy direction for multicultural society which is one of important phenomena in the era of globalization. The purpose of this paper is to analyze how multiculturalism is combined with various political ideologies to create various types of multiculturalism and to compare and analyze their contents, characteristics and multicultural policies. 다문화주의는 하나가 아니다. 다문화주의는 단순하게 동화주의의 반대말이 아니라는 것이다. 다문화주의 정책은 일반적으로 동화주의, 분리주의, 상대주의, 다원주의 등과 연계되어 이해되고 있지만, 다문화주의는 이외에도 여러 정치 이데올로기와 결합하여 다양한 유형의 다문화주의를 만들어내고 있다. 예컨대, 다문화주의는 정치 이데올로기와 결합하여 보수주의적 다문화주의, 자유주의적 다문화주의, 공동체주의적 다문화주의, 진보주의적 다문화주의, 공화주의적 다문화주의, 민족주의적 다문화주의, 세계시민주의적 다문화주의 등으로 다양화된다. 그리고 이들 다양한 유형의 다문화주의는 서로 간에 유사 점과 차이점을 드러내며 세계화 시대에 하나의 중요한 현상인 다문화 사회에 대한 서로 경쟁적인 이데올로기적 인식과 정책 방향을 제시한다. 이 논문이 연구하고자 하는 것은 다문화주의가 다양한 정치 이데올로기와 결합하여 어떠한 특정 형태의 다문화주의를 만들어내는지 분석하고 그것들의 내용과 특징과 정책을 비교⋅분석하는 것이다.

Multiculturalism in Postmodern Age

Morimichi Kato 성결대학교 다문화평화연구소 2010 다문화와 평화 Vol.4 No.1

Multiculturalism has been a hotly debated subject since the 70’of the last century. It has been approached mainly from the point of view of political philosophy such as liberalism or Marxism. This led to a debate about “Political correctness” or “ultural wars”which often gave an impression of a sterile partisan issue. In this paper we try to take a different approach of hermeneutical multiculturalism based on the hermeneutic theory of experience offered by Gadamer. The paper consists of 7sections. In the first introductory section, we point out the problem concerning the debate on multiculturalism in the United States since the 70’s. This leads to a proposal to take the issue of multiculturalism from a wider historical context. In the second section, through a historical overview we locate the genesis of multiculturalism in the end of modernity. Even though the world has been multicultural since the primordial times, the multiculturalism as an affirmation of multicultural situation is something new. In the third section, we will discuss the ethics of multiculturalism. It lies in the acknowledgement of the human condition such as temporality, historicity and frailty which was often neglected by “trong”theories of modernity. In the fourth section, we deal with the contemporary threats to multiculturalism such as the “lash of civilizations”after the 9.11Multiculturalism in Postmodern Age 147 and the standardization of education. In the fifth section, we point out the problems of globalization which lies behind the standardization, and the challenge it poses to multiculturalism. In the sixth section, we show the main feature of hermeneutical multiculturalism through the hermeneutical concepts of horizon and experience. In the finally section, we point out the role that humanities could play for multicultural education.

다문화사회와 다문화가정에서의 종교적 갈등

박승길 사단법인 한국민족연구원 2010 민족연구 Vol.0 No.42

This study aims at reconsidering the significance of Korean's multicultural society declared by late president No Moohyun since 2006 and the anticipating religious conflicts in multicultural families in our society. A multicultural society means a society getting ready to receive the multiculturalism as the realities of our main culture. The Multiculturalism originated in the policy adopted for the management of cultural diversities in the multiethnic and multiracial society. And also multiculturalism, contrasting the policy of cultural assimilation between immigrants and large majorities, is the acceptance or promotion of multiple ethnic cultures, applied to the demographic make-up of a specific place, usually at the organizational level, e.g. schools, businesses, neighborhoods, cities or nations. But these programs have caused disagreement both within immigrant communities and in the wider public. As ever public opinion in the advanced multicultural society seems divided on the issue of multiculturalism. Our country has 854,007 registered foreigners residing here for more than 90 days, or 17.2 per 1,000 people. In 1998, only 147,914 foreigners were registered as residents, or 3.1 per 1,000 people. Since the change has been rapid, our society urgently needs social preparation to ensure harmony and co-existence with foreigners. The country, however, lacks preparation in this regard. Deep-rooted beliefs in blood ties and nationalism of a homogeneous nation often result in prejudice and discrimination against foreigners Fortunately our society also began to receive the multiculturalism and government ready to set up diverse drafts to cope with the prevailing state of multicultural society. Above all progressive NGOs in our country have given their support to the government's multicutural policies. But as exposed in the conservative NGOs' counter movement to the introdused bill, °ПMulticulturallntegrated primary legislation°п, public opinion seems divided on the issue of multiculturalism. Actually different experiences lead to different interpretations and attitudes of multiculturalism. In spite of all, government must take preventive measures against anticipatable social conflicts in the multicutural society, especially religious conflicts in multicultural families. Religious belief and practice is the most firmly rooted in one's everyday life style and also conservative in his or her social action. And we can easily presuppose the religious conflicts among multicultural families. But our society deliberately assume an indifferent attitude to the religions of immigrant's. We have to fear that if our society fails to brace for multiracial families' diverse religious practices, it will suffer a huge social cost in the future. This study aims at reconsidering the significance of Korean's multicultural society declared by late president No Moohyun since 2006 and the anticipating religious conflicts in multicultural families in our society. A multicultural society means a society getting ready to receive the multiculturalism as the realities of our main culture. The Multiculturalism originated in the policy adopted for the management of cultural diversities in the multiethnic and multiracial society. And also multiculturalism, contrasting the policy of cultural assimilation between immigrants and large majorities, is the acceptance or promotion of multiple ethnic cultures, applied to the demographic make-up of a specific place, usually at the organizational level, e.g. schools, businesses, neighborhoods, cities or nations. But these programs have caused disagreement both within immigrant communities and in the wider public. As ever public opinion in the advanced multicultural society seems divided on the issue of multiculturalism. Our country has 854,007 registered foreigners residing here for more than 90 days, or 17.2 per 1,000 people. In 1998, only 147,914 foreigners were registered as residents, or 3.1 per 1,000 people. Since the change has been rapid, our society urgently needs social preparation to ensure harmony and co-existence with foreigners. The country, however, lacks preparation in this regard. Deep-rooted beliefs in blood ties and nationalism of a homogeneous nation often result in prejudice and discrimination against foreigners Fortunately our society also began to receive the multiculturalism and government ready to set up diverse drafts to cope with the prevailing state of multicultural society. Above all progressive NGOs in our country have given their support to the government's multicutural policies. But as exposed in the conservative NGOs' counter movement to the introdused bill, °ПMulticulturallntegrated primary legislation°п, public opinion seems divided on the issue of multiculturalism. Actually different experiences lead to different interpretations and attitudes of multiculturalism. In spite of all, government must take preventive measures against anticipatable social conflicts in the multicutural society, especially religious conflicts in multicultural families. Religious belief and practice is the most firmly rooted in one's everyday life style and also conservative in his or her social action. And we can easily presuppose the religious conflicts among multicultural families. But our society deliberately assume an indifferent attitude to the religions of immigrant's. We have to fear that if our society fails to brace for multiracial families' diverse religious practices, it will suffer a huge social cost in the future.

다문화가정 아동과 일반가정 아동 성격유형에 따른 다문화주의 유형 관계

최종임(Choi, JongRim),박인옥(Park, InOk) 학습자중심교과교육학회 2014 학습자중심교과교육연구 Vol.14 No.9

본 연구는 아동 성격유형에 따른 다문화주의 유형에 대해 알아보고자 두 집단 아동간의 성격 유형의 차이 및 다문화 유형의 인식을 분석하여 앞으로의 학교 현장 다문화 교육의 방향에 대해 시사점을 제시하고자 하였다. 이를 위해 다문화가정 아동 98명, 일반가정 아동 102명을 대상으로 성격유형을 조사하여 다문화 유형의 인식 차이를 분석하였다. 연구 결과 학년, 성별, 다문화관련 교육이나 활동경험 유무와 다문화주의 유형의 관계를 분석한 결과 다문화주의 유형과 성별 변인은 서로 상관관계가 없는 것으로, 다문화관련 교육이나 활동경험 중 급진적 다문화주의 유형을 보이는 학생은 존재하 지 않아 카이제곱 검정을 실시할 수 없었으며, 다문화주의 유형과 학년은 서로 유의미한 상관관계가 있는 것으로 나타났다. 학년이 높을수록 조합주의적 다문화주의 유형 인식이 높아졌다 낮아지는 경향을 보이고 있으며, 두 집단 간의 성격유형은 다문 화 가정 아동들이 내향적인(I) 성격을 일반가정의 아동들은 외향적인(E) 성격을 지니는 것을 확인할 수 있었다. 두 집단간 아동 유형에 따른 다문화주의 유형은 조합주의적 다문화주의 93명(46.5%)으로 가장 많았으며, 자유주의적 다문화주의 79명 (39.5%), 급진적 다문화주의 28명(14.0%) 순으로 나타났다. 조합주의적 다문화주의유형을 띠는 아동들 중 다문화가정 아동이 49명(50.0%), 일반가정 아동이 44명(43.1%)으로 높게 나타났다. 자유주의적 다문화주의 유형을 띤 아동들 중 다문화가 정 아동이 31명(31.6%), 일반가정 아동이 48명(47.1%)으로 일반가정 아동들의 비율이 높게 나타났으며 급진적 다문화주의 아동의 경우 다문화가정이 18명(18.4%), 일반가정이 10명(9.8%)으로 나타난 것을 확인 할 수 있었다. 끝으로 다문화 가정 아동과 일반가정 아동의 성격유형에 따른 다문화주의 유형에 대한 인식의 차이는 다문화주의 유형간의 상관관계는 없었으며 이를 다문화가정과 일반가정으로 나누어서 통계분석 한 결과 역시 두 변수간의 상관관계는 존재하지 않았다. The purpose of this study is to examine the types of multiculturalism based on children’s personality types. To attain the goal, the researcher analyzes how two groups’ children differ in terms of personality types and their recognition on the types of multiculturalism. And the study suggests implications about the future directions of school multicultural education. The researcher selects 98 multicultural family children and 102 typical family children and then investigates their personality types and analyzes how their recognition on the types of multiculturalism differs. According to the results of analyzing correlation between their grade, sex, experience in multicultural education or activity, and types of multiculturalism, there is no correlation between types of multiculturalism and the variable of sex. Regarding their experience in multicultural education or activity, there was no student showing a radical type of multiculturalism, so there was no need to perform the Chi-square test. And types of multiculturalism and grades indicated significant correlation. As their grade became higher, recognition on the corporatistic type of multiculturalism increased and then decreased. About the two groups’ personality types, multicultural family children tended to be introverted (I) while typical family children tended to be extroverted (E). Regarding the types of multiculturalism based on the two groups’ children types, the corporatistic type of multiculturalism was the most as 93 children(46.5%), and the next were liberalistic multiculturalism as 79 (39.5%) and radical multiculturalism as 28 (14.0%) in order. Among the children showing the corporatistic type of multiculturalism, multicultural family children were 49 (50.0%), and typical family children were 44 (43.1%), which were quite many. And among the children showing the liberalistic type of multiculturalism, multicultural family children were 31 (31.6%), and typical family children were 48 (47.1%); thus, typical family children were rather more. And about the children showing the radical type of multiculturalism, multicultural family children were 18 (18.4%), and typical family children were found to be 10 (9.8%). Lastly, regarding the difference of their recognition on the types of multiculturalism based on the personality types of multicultural and typical family children, there was no correlation among the types of multiculturalism. According to the results of conducting statistical analysis on them after dividing them into multicultural family and typical family, there was no correlation between the two variables, either.

The Development of Multiculturalism Discourse and Multicultural Policy in South Korea : With a Focus on the Roles of the Government and Civil Society

Yoon, In-Jin Ewha Institute for the Humanities, Ewha Womans Uni 2009 탈경계인문학 Vol.1 No.-

Since 2000, the issues of multiculturalism and multicultural society have been actively discussed and debated in Korean society. This article categorizes multiculturalism discourses in Korean society into “state-led multiculturalism” and “citizen-led multiculturalism” and examines their backgrounds, main contents, and strengths and weaknesses. To analyze the contents of “state-led multiculturalism,” this paper examines the policies and laws related to foreigners and immigrant brides as proposed by the Ministry of Justice, the Ministry of Gender Equality and Family, and the Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development. To analyze the contents of “citizen-led multiculturalism,” this paper examines the activities and viewpoints of non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that carry out multicultural programs for foreign migrant workers and foreign brides who have married Koreans. Results show that the Korean government’s multicultural policy is not a policy of multiculturalism, but rather a multiculture-oriented policy which is very assimilationist in essence. Also, the Korean government’s multicultural policy is not entirely “state-led” or “citizen-led” but more or less a “policy network” between the government and NGOs. As a policy recommendation, this paper proposes “stepwise multiculturalism” to combine the ideals of citizen-led multiculturalism and the practicality of state-led multiculturalism.

현대 한국에서의 ‘다문화’ 담론에 대한 비판적 검토

홍석준(Hong, Seok-joon) 대구가톨릭대학교 다문화연구소 2018 다문화와 인간 Vol.7 No.1·2

오늘날 한국 사회는 ‘다문화사회(multicultural society)’라고 정의될 수 있는가? 이 질문은 현대 한국 사회에서 중요한 의미를 담고 있다. 오늘날 한국 사회에는 다문화가정이 급속도로 늘어나고 있으며, 이로 인해 ‘다문화사회’ 또는 ‘다문화주의’, ‘다문화가정 또는 다문화가족’의 사회문화적 현상이라고 볼 수 있는 일이나 사건, 현상들을 일상생활의 수준에서도 쉽게 찾아볼 수 있게 되었다. 2018년 현재 한국은 200만 명 이상의 외국인이 거주하고 있는 ‘다문화사회’이다. 그 결과 ‘다문화’ 또는 ‘다문화주의(multiculturalism)’는 이제 한국인의 “일반적인 삶의 양식”의 일부로 자리 잡은 것으로 보인다. 그에 따라 국제결혼이주여성, 다문화가정 2세, 국제이주노동자, 새터민 등의 증가에 대한 정부의 정책적 지원과 그들에 대한 복지의 확충 및 사회통합을 위한 노력이 계속되고 있다. 그러나 국내에 거주하는 민족이나 종족 또는 인종이 다양해진 것이지 한국 사회의 포용성이나 문화적 다양성이 확대, 심화된 것은 아니다. 오히려 이주민에 대한 부정적 인식이 점차 높아지고 있는 것도 부인하기 힘든 엄연한 사실이다. 아울러 한국이 다문화사회로 급속하게 진전되고 있는 현 상황에서 학계와 시민단체등에서 다문화에 대한 우려의 시각이 증대되고 있는 것 또한 부인하기 힘든 사실이다. 한국 사회의 단일민족 의식과 순혈주의, 불법체류자의 증가, 다문화가정에 대한 복지예산 증액, 국제결혼 가정의 이혼율 증가, 새터민과 다문화가정 2세들의 학교와 사회에서의 부적응, 외국인범죄의 증가 등이 이러한 다문화 또는 다문화주의에 대한 우려를 자아내고 있는 것으로 보인다. 따라서 이에 대한 정부의 정책적 해결 방안과 학계 및 시민사회의 진지한 고민과 대안 마련이 절실히 요구되고 있는 것이 현재의 실상이다. 이 글에서는 저간의 ‘다문화’ 담론들의 내용을 비판적으로 고찰함으로써 역설적으로 문화공동체로서의 다문화 또는 다문화주의의 실체를 규명하는 단서를 모색하고자 한다. 특히 문화의 개념을 어떻게 규정하느냐에 따라 다문화의 실체는 사실상 존재하지 않는 것임에도 정치적, 경제적, 사회적 목적을 위해 다양한 담론이 조작, 변형되는 과정에 주목함으로써 다양한 ‘다문화’ 담론들이 사실은 한국이라는 국가의 정치적, 경제적 이득을 극대화하는 방향으로 진행되고 있음을 드러내고자 한다. 이를 위해 이 글에서는 기존의 다양한 ‘다문화’ 담론들은 어떠한 역사적 배경 하에서 형성, 변화되어 왔으며, 그것이 갖는 문화적 의미는 과연 무엇인가를 현재적 맥락에서 고찰하는 것이 무엇보다도 긴요하고도 시급한 일이라는 전제하에 논의를 전개하고자 한다. This paper examines and reviews critically discourses on multiculturalism in contemporary Korea. In this paper, I consider the discourses on multiculturalism in Korea currently progressing into multiculturalism discourses through some concrete examples with special reference to the development of multiculturalism. I will focus on the formation and transformation of the discourses on multiculturalism or so-called anti-multiculturalism in contemporary Korea. In this paper, I attempt to review critically the discourses on multiculturalism or anti-multiculturalism in contemporary Korea. For this purpose, I will examine and review critically the diverse dimensions of formation and transformation of discourses on “multiculturalism” or “anti-multiculturalism”, and historical backgrounds and cultural meanings of “multiculturalism” discourses in contemporary Korea. In this paper, I regard the formation and transformation of discourses on “multiculturalism” or “multicultural society”, or “multicultural family” and so forth, as an important socio-cultural phenomena to understand the cultural characteristics and meanings of “multiculturalism” discourses or cultural politics of “multiculturalism” identity in contemporary Korea. It is designed that this attempt is a part of academic inquiry for establishing a theoretical and methodological analysis new framework of discourses on “multiculturalism” or “multicultural society” in contemporary Korea. In conclusion, this attempt to examine the discourses on multiculturalism or multicultural society in contemporary Korea with special reference to historical backgrounds and cultural meanings of discourses on multiculturalism identity in Korea, is to improve the interrelationships between “damunwha gajeong, or damunwha gajok(multicultural family in Korean society)”and Korean society. It is very important to understand the current cultural characteristics and meanings of production and reproduction, and consumption of discourses on “multiculturalism” or “anti-multiculturalism” in contemporary Korea.