1930년대 조선 지식인들의 파시즘적 역사인식 고찰

Abstract

Numerous studies have recently defined fascism as “populist nationalism.” In a fascist system, modernization and tradition are simultaneously emphasized, and as subjects, they create one single unit, that of “the ethnic group.” The antipathy of the public toward liberalism and socialism is exploited here. In fact, Hitler perceived history as a means of promoting “national pride” based on his presentism. Therefore, “fascist historical perception” can be defined as “a historical perception that calls upon the traditions and history of the entire nation (state) to mobilize the public politically.” During colonial Joseon, how did the intellectuals accept such a historical view? Magazines such as Shin-Dong-A and Dong-gwang, along with intellectuals such as Lee Kwang-soo and Shin Dong-woo, saw that fascism could surpass the limits of Western modernity. Meanwhile, socialists rejected fascism as being a “capital advocacy movement” or questioned the notion of universality asserted by Japan, as did Seo In-sik and Park Chi-woo. When considering the path through which fascism is localized as a form of “totalitarianism,” it may be a process through which major elements of fascism (race, lineage, public support, etc.) are selectively emphasized or omitted. Concurrently, some socialists, including Kim Nam-cheon and Seo Kang-baek, criticized Ahn Jae-hong as a “Joseon-version fascist.” In fact, Ahn Jae-hong critically viewed fascism as a phenomenon that appears in the development of liberalism, and was concerned with saving nationalism from the accusation of “fascism.”