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
Historically, the liquidation of the past in the world has pushed ahead at transitional period for democracy. The same was true of Korea
Since Great struggle at the June 1987, the victims and their families of state violence continuously have struggled for investigation of the truth of the past affairs. It was the movement for the liquidation of the past and forced the state to liquidate the past.
By the way, the state reflected it upon the various liquidation policy of the past. The state had strategically four objects at the negotiation for the liquidation of the past. Firstly, the state tried to unify social conflict. The state stressed national unification the most importantly in the process of the negotiation for the liquidation of the past. Secondly, the state intended to exuviate from its historical responsibility about the past affairs. Thirdly, the state didn’t tried to make people be the subject of the liquidation policy of the past. The state didn’t attract people’s attention to the liquidation policy of the past, and didn’t tried to expand it into the social attention and participation. Fourth, the state intended to investigate as evidence in court the truth of the past affairs. The state didn’t investigate the structural evidence of the society.
However we must investigate the memory and truth as the process of restoring contradiction and conflicts that were basic causes of the past affairs. We must socialize the liquidation policy of the past beyond the state. It means that the liquidation policy of the past should be executed by social movement’s subjects beyond state for the true sense of democratization.
Since Great struggle at the June 1987, the victims and their families of state violence continuously have struggled for investigation of the truth of the past affairs. It was the movement for the liquidation of the past and forced the state to liquidate the past.
By the way, the state reflected it upon the various liquidation policy of the past. The state had strategically four objects at the negotiation for the liquidation of the past. Firstly, the state tried to unify social conflict. The state stressed national unification the most importantly in the process of the negotiation for the liquidation of the past. Secondly, the state intended to exuviate from its historical responsibility about the past affairs. Thirdly, the state didn’t tried to make people be the subject of the liquidation policy of the past. The state didn’t attract people’s attention to the liquidation policy of the past, and didn’t tried to expand it into the social attention and participation. Fourth, the state intended to investigate as evidence in court the truth of the past affairs. The state didn’t investigate the structural evidence of the society.
However we must investigate the memory and truth as the process of restoring contradiction and conflicts that were basic causes of the past affairs. We must socialize the liquidation policy of the past beyond the state. It means that the liquidation policy of the past should be executed by social movement’s subjects beyond state for the true sense of democratization.
목차
문제의식
Ⅰ. 과거사정리의 논의와 쟁점
Ⅱ. 과거사정리와 국가의 전략
결론을 대신하여: 과거사정리의 본질적 한계와 과제
[ABSTRACT]
참고문헌 (41)
참고문헌 신청
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2013-911-001425877