메뉴 건너뛰기
소속 기관 / 학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
역사교육연구회 역사교육 歷史敎育 第161輯
발행연도
수록면
1 - 28 (28page)
DOI
10.18622/kher.2022.03.161.1

이용수

DBpia Top 1%동일한 주제분류 기준으로
최근 2년간 이용수 순으로 정렬했을 때
해당 논문이 위치하는 상위 비율을 의미합니다.
표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
이 논문의 연구방법이 궁금하신가요?
🏆
연구결과
이 논문의 연구결과가 궁금하신가요?
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

This paper is an attempt to create a comprehensive survey of the modernity and universality that the issues and conflicts from the Cultural Revolutionary period hold from a new perspective through political keywords that are central and widespread in modern society. To achieve this, the paper puts its focus primarily on subjects regarding the Red Guard movement in the early days of the Cultural Revolution and at the same time, limits the area of study to Beijing to provide as much context as possible on the social conflicts of the time. The study especially focuses on the “fairness-justice” and “discrimination-hate” discourse-a core social discussion in Korean society today-as a medium to reinterpret the string of specific contexts. I consider these discussions as a form of “post-revolution discourse” encompassing the democratization process its outcome. “Post-revolution discourse” has been adopted as a means to readdress the Cultural Revolution because discussions concerning the Cultural Revolution can also be understood as a form of “post-revolution discourse” regarding the achievements of the 1949 Socialist Revolution. The objectives of social activism in the 20th century are relatively clear. It aimed to establish a just policy that would allow for a fair distribution of resources and the abolition of all discriminatory practices. China took the path of socialist revolution and Korea took that of democratic movements. While both countries’ movements bore fruit, both also had clear limitations. The question is: how should the social responses to the shortcomings be compared and evaluated? This is not, by any means, an attempt to equate China in 1966 and Korea in 2021, nor is it a bid to force ideological standards that distinguish revolutions and reactions upon each party. What this paper strives to accomplish is to investigate the possibility of utilizing different historical experiences as a cross-reference for pioneering interpretations, despite uncertainties as to what is truly revolutionary and what is reactionary.
상세정보 수정요청해당 페이지 내 제목·저자·목차·페이지
정보가 잘못된 경우 알려주세요!

목차

  1. 1. 序言: 문화대혁명에 대한 ‘평가’라는 문제
  2. 2. ‘혁명 후 17년’
  3. 3. 出身과 表現, 혹은 신분과 능력
  4. 4. 結語: 문화대혁명의 현재성
  5. 참고문헌

참고문헌

참고문헌 신청

최근 본 자료

전체보기