• Journal of International Area Studies (JIAS)
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.477-498
• /
• 2010

The Reasons which Rose Revolution, Orange Revolution, and Lemon Revolution had been much argued in international society are as follows: Firstly, the important fact was that authoritarian governments in Georgia, Ukraine and Kyrgyzstan were collapsed not by physical violences and military forces, but by unblooded civil movements, so called Civil Revolution. And it is also called as Colorful Revolution. Secondly, during the advance of three Civil Revolution, hegemony conflicts between Russia and western powers including US appeared. In fact, tensions between the two countries, Russia and US had already occurred in Post-soviet region after dissolution of Soviet Union. Thirdly, as a result of three Civil Revolution, there were built up fullest attentions in international societies about the possibilities of other civil revolutions, that is to say, 'Colorful Revolution' among the countries which were the republics of former USSR. In this respect, in this investigation of Lemon Revolution in Kyrgyzstan as like Rose Revolution in Georgia and Orange Revolution in Ukraine, this article examined the roles and supports toward NGOs of Western powers including US. To my opinion, it is likely that NGOs, with powerful sponsors, become political bodies working through networks and media rather than being rooted in civil society and acting on behalf of citizens. And that powerful sponsors, directly or indirectly financed by outside governments, become involved in political activities. So NGOs have been important roles in promoting civil revolution as political agencies and more political instruments of foreign governments. In the long run, through the Colorful Revolution, it is better to understand that hegemony struggle is beginning between external concerned superpowers including US and Russia, rather than hegemony struggle having directly broke out.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.89-123
• /
• 1996

The world has moved from the Cold War between the east and the west and moved toward the age without idealogy. It places emphasis on economic benefit and welfare of its own nation as its main point With this world trend, in order to sam the competitiveness and the reconciliation of the divided nation the north and the south Korea should be united. Once the north and the south are united, information society will be altered with the huge flow of the civilization. At the same time, the issue of how to operate library policies and system, in which effective acquisition, manipulation, accumulation, and dissemination of information un would be very important. From this point of view, the following conclusions are obtained in this study. Firstly, when building a national library preparing for the national unification. it is essential to introduce 1) the concept of policy and system for information society and 2) that of policy and system which has national-culture as its focus. Secondly, it is essential to prepare the cooperative-structure between libraries prior to the national unification. This kind of cooperation should gradually expand to an extent that allows actual benefits such as building union catalog, inter-library loan system, resource sharing, standardized cataloging rules, and exchange of dissertation... etc. Thirdly, developing the library policies and systems for the national unification must be based on the concept of the mutual cooperation as inter-dependent model rather than on the concept of the incorporation-absorption as a dominant model. The next point the principles of the followings in preparing the library policies should be considered: 1) free-competition, 2) revolution of consciousness through the social education, 3) independence and love for humanity, 4) scientific or reasonable thinking, 5) job responsibility, 6) democratic citizenship, 7) mind far collective life, 8) spirit of public interest 9) globalization In addition, the model of the library systems preparing for thenational unification should include the followings : 1) uniformity of library system and its authority, 2) establishment of research institutes for library policy and system, 3) exchange of library establishment and information resources, 4) building library networks, 5) establishment of education systems for the library and information science and enhancement of its quality, 6) modernizing and developing information technology and its transfer. Finally, the libraries in the north and the south has different concepts, goals, information resources, and the different ways of using them. Considering the practical aspects of the libraries and the reasons for their existence, they must structure the mutual cooperative system so as to minimize the shock when confronting the social changes, so-called the national unification.

• Journal of the Daesoon Academy of Sciences
• /
• v.48
• /
• pp.375-406
• /
• 2024

This study aims to define the meaning of 'Sangsaeng (mutual beneficence)' within the context of 'Sangsaeng ecological theory,' a form of discourse of that has emerged from Daesoon Jinrihoe's perspective on ecology. Sangsaeng ecological theory applies the concept of interdependence to ecology in order to explain how Sangsaeng, which is commonly used as an ethical system for humans, can be applied to the realm of ecology such that it extends its scope of application to include non-human beings. Interdependence, when applied to ecology, is formed via relationships between individuals. Such relationships can be positive, negative, or neutral, and the type of interdependence that emerges can be competitive, predatory, parasitc, and symbiotic. Even if the relationship between individuals ends negatively, it can still exert a positive effect on the ecosystem. Consequently, all of these produce a type of 'dependence'. However, relationships that end negatively can generate grievances, and from the perspective of Sangsaeng ethics, this type of interdependence is to be avoided. Therefore, by way of contrast, ecological Sangsaeng may include both relationships of positive interdependence and relationships of predation, parasitism, and competition in so far as there no grievances. Ecological theory requires a perspective that enables an understand of the relationship between nature and humans in an integrated way that does not separate them. One view of universe, known as Cheonji-saengin-yongin (Heaven and Earth give produce humans make use of them) provides insights into the relationship between the universe and humans and nature and humans from an interdependent perspective. Heaven and Earth take humans as the basis of their existence, and only after humans discover the law of nature and the sacredness behind it can a deep interdependence between Heaven and Earth and humans and nature and humans be established. However, as modern humans emerge, the interdependence between Heaven and Earth and humans collapses as they destroy nature and lower the authority of Shindo (divine order). Haewon Sangsaeng (the resolution of grievances for mutual beneficence) and Boeun Sangsaeng (the reciprocation of favors for mutual beneficence) is the solution to reestablish the interdependence that has been disconnected between Heaven and Earth and humans and nature and humans. The practice of Haewon Sangsaeng through Gongbu rituals is the way to restore interdependence between nature and humans. The process of humans achieving Dotong (mastery of the Dao) through religious practices is the practice of Boeun Sangsaeng, and humans will be reborn into Injon (Human Nobility or 'divine humans') with ecological nature and enjoy an eternal interdependent relationship with nature. In summary, Sangsaeng in the context of Sangsaeng ecological theory is the idea and practice of allowing nature and humans to restore their interdependence and live on eternally.

• KDI Journal of Economic Policy
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.31-68
• /
• 1990

The concentration of economic power takes the form of one or a few firms controlling a substantial portion of the economic resources and means in a certain economic area. At the same time, to the extent that these firms are owned by a few individuals, resource allocation can be manipulated by them rather than by the impersonal market mechanism. This will impair allocative efficiency, run counter to a decentralized market system and hamper the equitable distribution of wealth. Viewed from the historical evolution of Western capitalism in general, the concentration of economic power is a paradox in that it is a product of the free market system itself. The economic principle of natural discrimination works so that a few big firms preempt scarce resources and market opportunities. Prominent historical examples include trusts in America, Konzern in Germany and Zaibatsu in Japan in the early twentieth century. In other words, the concentration of economic power is the outcome as well as the antithesis of free competition. As long as judgment of the economic system at large depends upon the value systems of individuals, therefore, the issue of how to evaluate the concentration of economic power will inevitably be tinged with ideology. We have witnessed several different approaches to this problem such as communism, fascism and revised capitalism, and the last one seems to be the only surviving alternative. The concentration of economic power in Korea can be summarily represented by the "jaebol," namely, the conglomerate business group, the majority of whose member firms are monopolistic or oligopolistic in their respective markets and are owned by particular individuals. The jaebol has many dimensions in its size, but to sketch its magnitude, the share of the jaebol in the manufacturing sector reached 37.3% in shipment and 17.6% in employment as of 1989. The concentration of economic power can be ascribed to a number of causes. In the early stages of economic development, when the market system is immature, entrepreneurship must fill the gap inherent in the market in addition to performing its customary managerial function. Entrepreneurship of this sort is a scarce resource and becomes even more valuable as the target rate of economic growth gets higher. Entrepreneurship can neither be readily obtained in the market nor exhausted despite repeated use. Because of these peculiarities, economic power is bound to be concentrated in the hands of a few entrepreneurs and their business groups. It goes without saying, however, that the issue of whether the full exercise of money-making entrepreneurship is compatible with social mores is a different matter entirely. The rapidity of the concentration of economic power can also be traced to the diversification of business groups. The transplantation of advanced technology oriented toward mass production tends to saturate the small domestic market quite early and allows a firm to expand into new markets by making use of excess capacity and of monopoly profits. One of the reasons why the jaebol issue has become so acute in Korea lies in the nature of the government-business relationship. The Korean government has set economic development as its foremost national goal and, since then, has intervened profoundly in the private sector. Since most strategic industries promoted by the government required a huge capacity in technology, capital and manpower, big firms were favored over smaller firms, and the benefits of industrial policy naturally accrued to large business groups. The concentration of economic power which occured along the way was, therefore, not necessarily a product of the market system. At the same time, the concentration of ownership in business groups has been left largely intact as they have customarily met capital requirements by means of debt. The real advantage enjoyed by large business groups lies in synergy due to multiplant and multiproduct production. Even these effects, however, cannot always be considered socially optimal, as they offer disadvantages to other independent firms-for example, by foreclosing their markets. Moreover their fictitious or artificial advantages only aggravate the popular perception that most business groups have accumulated their wealth at the expense of the general public and under the behest of the government. Since Korea stands now at the threshold of establishing a full-fledged market economy along with political democracy, the phenomenon called the concentration of economic power must be correctly understood and the roles of business groups must be accordingly redefined. In doing so, we would do better to take a closer look at Japan which has experienced a demise of family-controlled Zaibatsu and a success with business groups(Kigyoshudan) whose ownership is dispersed among many firms and ultimately among the general public. The Japanese case cannot be an ideal model, but at least it gives us a good point of departure in that the issue of ownership is at the heart of the matter. In setting the basic direction of public policy aimed at controlling the concentration of economic power, one must harmonize efficiency and equity. Firm size in itself is not a problem, if it is dictated by efficiency considerations and if the firm behaves competitively in the market. As long as entrepreneurship is required for continuous economic growth and there is a discrepancy in entrepreneurial capacity among individuals, a concentration of economic power is bound to take place to some degree. Hence, the most effective way of reducing the inefficiency of business groups may be to impose competitive pressure on their activities. Concurrently, unless the concentration of ownership in business groups is scaled down, the seed of social discontent will still remain. Nevertheless, the dispersion of ownership requires a number of preconditions and, consequently, we must make consistent, long-term efforts on many fronts. We can suggest a long list of policy measures specifically designed to control the concentration of economic power. Whatever the policy may be, however, its intended effects will not be fully realized unless business groups abide by the moral code expected of socially responsible entrepreneurs. This is especially true, since the root of the problem of the excessive concentration of economic power lies outside the issue of efficiency, in problems concerning distribution, equity, and social justice.

• The Journal of Korean Philosophical History
• /
• no.32
• /
• pp.215-249
• /
• 2011

This essay reflects on the modernity of Korea by examining the transformation of the traditional knowledge system from a historico-semantic perspective with its focus on the opposition and collision of the old and the new conception occurred in the early period(1890~1910) of the acceptance of the Western modern civilization. With scientific success, trick of reason, Christianity and evolutionary view of history, the Western modernity regarded itself as a peak of civilization and forced the non-Western societies into the world system in which they came to be considered as 'barbarism(野蠻)' or 'half-enlightened(半開).' The East Asian civilization, which had its own history for several centuries, became degraded as kind of delusion and old-fashioned customs from which it ought to free itself. The Western civilization presented itself as exemplary future which East Asian people should achieve, while East Asian past traditions came to be conceived as just unnecessary vestiges which it was better to wipe out. It can be said that East Asian modernization was established through the propagation and acceptance of the modern products of the Western civilization rather than through the preservation of its past experience and pursuit of the new at the same time. Accordingly, it is difficult to apply directly to East Asian societies Koselleck's hypothesis; while mapping out his Basic Concept of History, he assumed that, in the so-called 'age of saddle,' semantic struggle over concepts becomes active between the past experience and the horizon of expectation on the future, and concepts undergoes 'temporalization', 'democratization', 'ideologization', 'politicization.'The struggle over the old and new conceptions in Korea was most noticeable in the opposition of the Neo-Confucian scholars of Hwangseongsinmun and the theorists of civilization of Doknipsinmun. The opposition and struggle demanded the change of understanding in every field, but there was difference of opinion over the conception of the past traditional knowledge system. For the theorists of civilization, 'the old(舊)' was not just 'past' and 'old-fashioned' things, but rather an obstacle to the building of new civilization. On the other hand, it contained the possibility of regeneration(新) for the Neo-Confucian scholars; that is, they suggested finding a guide into tomorrow by taking lessons from the past. The traditional knowledge system lost their holy status of learning(聖學) in the process of its change into a 'new learning(新學),' and religion and religious tradition also weakened. The traditional knowledge system could change itself into modern learning by accepting scientific methodology which pursues objectivity and rationality. This transformation of the traditional knowledge system and 'the formation of the new learning from the old learning' was accompanied by the intersection between the old and new conceptions. It is necessary to pay attention to the role played by the concept of Sil(hak)(實學) or Practical Learning in the intersection of the old and new conceptions. Various modern media published before and after the 20th century show clearly the multi-layered development of the old and new conceptions, and it is noticeable that 'Sil(hak)' as conceptual frame of reference contributed to the transformation of the traditional knowledge system into the new learning. Although Silhak often designated, or was even considered equivalent to, the Western learning, Neo-Confucian scholars reinterpreted the concept of 'Silhak' which the theorists of civilization had monopolized until then, and opened the way to change the traditional knowledge system into the new learning. They re-appropriated the concept of Silhak, and enabled it to be invested with values, which were losing their own status due to the overwhelming scientific technology. With Japanese occupation of Korea by force, the attempt to transform the traditional knowledge system independently was obliged to reach its own limit, but its theory of 'making new learning from old one' can be considered to get over both the contradiction of Dondoseogi(東道西器: principle of preserving Eastern philosophy while accepting Western technology) and the de-subjectivity of the theory of civilization. While developing its own logic, the theory of Dongdoseogi was compelled to bring in the contradiction of considering the indivisible(道and 器) as divisible, though it tried to cope with the reality where the principle of morality and that of competition were opposed each other and the ideologies of 'evolution' and 'progress' prevailed. On the other hand, the theory of civilization was not free from the criticism that it brought about a crack in subjectivity due to its internalization of the West, cutting itself off from the traditional knowledge system.