• Nuclear industry
• /
• v.27 no.10 s.296
• /
• pp.36-37
• /
• 2007

• Cross-Cultural Studies
• /
• v.43
• /
• pp.171-206
• /
• 2016

Russian anarchist thinker P. A. Kropotkin had a significant impact on the school of thought, the literary field and the anarchist movement in East Asia in the early 20th century. This paper examines the history of the translation of Kropotkin in terms of the routes and paths of translation in colonial Korea in comparison with those in Japan and China. It is a known fact that the acceptance of Kropotkin in colonial Korea is owed to pioneering translation works in Japan, but it appears that there have been various transformations and magnetizations in the process of translating the texts into the Korean language. Despite a disturbing censorship, the works of Kropotkin, such as "I appeal to the youth ("Aux Jeunes Gens" in French)", were imported, translated and distributed by various routes throughout the 1920s and there were various versions of translated Korean texts. At this point, it is noteworthy that there are works which were translated from Chinese texts about Kropotkin, such as the works of Yu Seo (柳絮), and it can be said that there is a relationship between Korean translations and Chinese original texts. Since the 1930s, the phenomenon of the appropriation of Kropotkin as a litterateur and critic rather than an anarchist thinker is particularly apparent, and this allows us to understand that Kropotkin became a major pathway to interpret Russian literature in East Asia. In colonial Korea, translations of Kropotkin were generally via Japan and China, but the process of translation also showed the struggle to accept and adapt 'the foreign text' into the Korean language.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.22
• /
• pp.277-316
• /
• 2014

Many ideas which have appear in human history ought to be fruits of the relevant time, however they sometimes reveal new meaning. Daesoon idea is like that, and anarchism also has been resurgent today according to the demand of the time. Both ideas aim at an ideal society. They are not codes of conduct by specific ideology, but are the spirit of resistance against all kinds of oppression, i.e. which began from human nature. Anarchism refuses intellectual revolution theory or idea, but it wants only the life of human nature. Therefore, in spite of the diversity of its historic type, anarchism is in the same discussion as idealism e.g. religion, politics, etc. which have seek the essence of human life. Daesoon idea, as well, begins from religious idealism, it kindles the same discussion as anarchism. Particularly, anarchism is receiving attention with its spirituality of the new century. If so, it will be a critical help for the development of Daesoon idea to consider such newness through a conversation with anarchism. A comparison between Daesoon idea and anarchism is mainly a conversation about the ideology of ideal society. The researcher intended to investigate the viewpoint of anarchism in terms of comparing its personality, society and nation with Daesun idea, though it was not easy work since the ideological genealogy of anarchism is various. Both of them have a mental attitude, i.e. 'essential resistance', on the basis of such introspection. The spirit of resistance is an essence of man and the right of resistance is a basic human rights that insist the dignity of man. When the right of resistance reaches the essence of human life, it becomes an ideal thought and religion. Also, the ideal can be finally realized when the spirit of resistance becomes the power of practice by actualizing it as the right of resistance.

• Journal of the Korean Geographical Society
• /
• v.50 no.4
• /
• pp.431-449
• /
• 2015

Philosophical roots and discussion frames of neoliberalism are very heterogeneous and approaches to neoliberalism including anarchism, post-neoliberalism also take diverse stances. Even if neoliberalism is losing legitimacy and stability through the global financial crisis, 2008, spatial perspective is becoming more and more important as neoliberalism constantly evolve with creating immense variations. Especially, urban space has become strategically crucial arenas as spatio-temporal strategies and generative nodes for reproduction of neoliberalism. Urban enclosure plays a key role in the specific process of neoliberal urbanization as a kind of capitalist formal and real subsumption. Contemporary capitalism continuously has been sustaining the accumulation by dispossession based on urban enclosure through reshaping the primitive accumulation mechanism. These enclosures are embodied by the change of public use concept from public ownership to economic benefits and public-private taking for private capital. Urban enclosure promotes reification deepening the separation and alienation of workers from the means of production and survival, and interdiction from free place appropriation, transformation of urban economy to patrimonial forms. Also it is pervasive in a daily life space and everyday experience in the city, and private tangled social rules dominate public space and the publicity of space.