개인구독
소속 기관이 없으신 경우, 개인 정기구독을 하시면 저렴하게
논문을 무제한 열람 이용할 수 있어요.
지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The 2005 version of the New History Textbook put out by Husosha publishers exhibits the following characteristics with regards to its descriptions of the wars provoked by Japan as well as of Tokyos colonization policy from 1910 onwards:
First, the Husosha textbook plays down the role played by individuals in party politics and foreign policy during the 1920s and 30s. In addition, unlike the 2001 version which contained a passage that read, the participation of the Japanese military in politics led to the destruction of the national order, no such critical references of the Japanese militarys participation in politics are included in the new version of the Husosha textbook. The new version of the Husosha textbook also attempts to whitewash the Manchurian Incident with the simple claim that the majority of the Japanese public supported the Kwantung Army.
Second, the textbook attempts to deflect Japanese responsibility for the Manchurian Incident, Sino-Japanese War, and the Pacific War by placing the responsibility for these wars on the shoulders of China and the United States and claiming that Japans participation in these wars was based on its self-defense strategy.
Third, the textbook goes to great lengths to justify the Pacific War by focusing on the Taedonga kongy?ngkw?n (Greater Asia Co-prosperity Sphere). It defined the Pacific War as a conflict that was designed to protect Japans sovereignty and liberate the Asian people.
Fourth, while this textbook only contains a short summary of Japans rule over Korea and Taiwan, there is nevertheless a section which claims that Japan contributed to the development of Korea and Taiwan. No mention is made that such development was purposed to exploit the human and material resources in its colonies.
Fifth, the textbook strongly emphasizes the fact that there was no basis under international law for the Tokyo War Crimes Trials to sentence Japanese leaders for ‘crimes against peace’.
Sixth, the textbook also promotes the need to amend the Constitution, while increasing the criticism of the Peace Constitution.
First, the Husosha textbook plays down the role played by individuals in party politics and foreign policy during the 1920s and 30s. In addition, unlike the 2001 version which contained a passage that read, the participation of the Japanese military in politics led to the destruction of the national order, no such critical references of the Japanese militarys participation in politics are included in the new version of the Husosha textbook. The new version of the Husosha textbook also attempts to whitewash the Manchurian Incident with the simple claim that the majority of the Japanese public supported the Kwantung Army.
Second, the textbook attempts to deflect Japanese responsibility for the Manchurian Incident, Sino-Japanese War, and the Pacific War by placing the responsibility for these wars on the shoulders of China and the United States and claiming that Japans participation in these wars was based on its self-defense strategy.
Third, the textbook goes to great lengths to justify the Pacific War by focusing on the Taedonga kongy?ngkw?n (Greater Asia Co-prosperity Sphere). It defined the Pacific War as a conflict that was designed to protect Japans sovereignty and liberate the Asian people.
Fourth, while this textbook only contains a short summary of Japans rule over Korea and Taiwan, there is nevertheless a section which claims that Japan contributed to the development of Korea and Taiwan. No mention is made that such development was purposed to exploit the human and material resources in its colonies.
Fifth, the textbook strongly emphasizes the fact that there was no basis under international law for the Tokyo War Crimes Trials to sentence Japanese leaders for ‘crimes against peace’.
Sixth, the textbook also promotes the need to amend the Constitution, while increasing the criticism of the Peace Constitution.
목차
Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 근현대편 서술 체제의 특징
Ⅲ. 1910~1945년 서술에 나타난 역사인식
Ⅳ. 1945년 이후 서술에 나타난 역사인식
Ⅴ. 맺음말
ABSTRACT
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
일본 중학교 역사 교과서(후소샤 版) 문제의 배경과 특징 : 역사기억의 왜곡과 성찰
한국사연구
2005 .06
-
일본 중학교 역사교과서의 한국근대사 서술과 역사인식
한국사연구
2005 .06
-
한ㆍ일 중학교 역사교과서의 근대사 서술 분석 : 한ㆍ일 관계를 중심으로
계명사학
2008 .11
-
일본 중학교 역사교과서의 중ㆍ근세사 서술과 역사인식 : 후소샤(扶桑社) 교과서를 중심으로
한국사연구
2005 .06
-
Perspectives on the Korean War in Japanese High School Textbooks : Research Trends of Japanese Academia and their Reflection in the Textbooks
THE REVIEW OF KOREAN STUDIES
2009 .03
-
교수요목기 중등 역사 검정 교과서의 발행 상황과 목록화
역사교육
2019 .09
-
역사교과서 문제의 교재화와 학습자의 인식
역사와 세계
2009 .06
-
일본 역사교과서 문제와 그 전망
한국사연구
2002 .03
-
『한국 근ㆍ현대사』 교과서에 실린 사료의 비교 분석과 제시 방안
역사교육
2008 .12
-
역사교과서 이념논쟁과 학문의 위기 : 고등학교 『한국사』 교과서 8종의 현대사 서술 비교
역사와현실
2014 .06
-
1차 세계대전에 관한 독일-프랑스 공동 역사교과서 분석 : 독일 역사교과서와의 비교
역사교육
2015 .06
-
The Korean War in European Social Studies Textbooks
THE REVIEW OF KOREAN STUDIES
2009 .03
-
문학 교과서 개발과 구성의 경직성에 대한 비판적 고찰－'작은 교과서'를 지향하며 －
문학교육학
2019 .01
-
국어 교과서 검정제에 관한 실태 분석과 도입의 방향 탐색
이중언어학
2005 .01
-
중국 초등학교 어문 교과서의 체제와 내용 분석
국어교육연구
2015 .10
-
청일전쟁에 대한 한·일의 기억과 전승 : 증폭과 망각의 양극
역사와 세계
2014 .12
-
패전 직후 일본의 ‘평화교육’ 재음미
역사와 담론
2012 .10
-
2009 개정 교육과정 한국사 교과서 현대사 부분 분석
역사교육
2010 .12
-
한국사 교과서 검정 파동의 원인과 과제
역사와현실
2014 .06
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-911-018333298