• Author : Chiwon Choi
• Publication : Zeitschrift der Koreanisch-Deutschen Gesellschaft fuer Sozialwissenschaften
• Publisher : Koreanisch-Deutsche Gesellschaft Fuer Sozialwissenschaften(K-G Association For Social Sciences)
• Volume : 33(4)
• Date : December 2023

A ‘class-conscious bourgeois’ as citizen, Max Weber’s politics of civil society is a product of the political-practical attempt to overcome the crisis of Historismus. In the most comprehensive sense, it provides a new ‘Historie’ which corresponds to that of Marx and Nietzsche who are responsible for the crisis of Historismus. It internalizes methods of Marx and Nietzsche, which Historismus couldn’t provide. Above all, although Weber was a ‘child of the historical school,’ he accepts the critical problematique of Hegel and especially Marx: His concept of politics of civil society attempts to preserve the value and meaning of politics in respond to the demands of the times by requestinf a reexamination of the entire Bilder of the existing Historie. His unique ‘source’ of thoughts, which opens a new perspective on society and politics, has its specific content in his concept of politics of civil society. His concept is not related to the traditions of natural rights theory or social contract theory, which equated civil society with political society, nor should it be understood as the product of a naive political interpretation based on the religious ego or self and mentality. A concept of politics of civil society captured not only by moral ethics (voluntarism) based on the ego-idea of Parsonianized Weber but also by a creative individualism in the manner of Tocqueville and Mill, which furthermore is colored by Verba’s ‘civic culture’ and Putnam’s ‘social capital’, vulgarizes, simplifies and misleads Weber’s thoughts. In the academic and intellectual climate of the United States, such Parsonianized romantic version of politics of civil society may be possible. At best, such concept only results in the politics of civil society as Zivilgesellschaft, which has nothing to do with Weber. Weber, with his theoretical and practical cool-headedness, however, would not accept such naive and lax concept of politics of civil society as an ‘Americanized version of Romanticism’.

• Author : Jiil Kim
• Publication : Strategic Studies
• Publisher : Korea Research Institute for Strategy
• Volume : 30(3)
• Date : November 2023

What is the reason behind the unwavering commitment of North Korean leader Kim Jong Un to expanding North Korea’s nuclear arsenal and resisting nuclear disarmament? To address the aforementioned research question, this study delves into the core psychological factors shaping Kim’s mindset and consequent behavioral patterns. Utilizing the documentary research method, this study endeavors to illuminate the research inquiries by employing the psychological framework of ‘historical trauma’ to dissect Kim Jong Un’s behavioral tendencies, which have manifested during denuclearization negotiations. The findings of this study reveal that Kim Jong Un bears a historical trauma inherited, through a process of ‘transference,’ from his grandfather Kim Il Sung, who initiated the Korean War. Specifically, Kim Jong Un’s historical trauma encompasses both ‘short-term war trauma’ and ‘alliance trauma.’ Within this context, the short-term trauma significantly contributes to Kim Jong Un’s reluctance to commit to denuclearization. Furthermore, these two forms of trauma have manifested as his deceptive maneuvers during denuclearization negotiations and his endeavors to undermine the military might of enemy alliances while persuading North Korea’s allies to align with his nation.

• Author : Sangsoo Lim
• Publication : Journal of Asia-Pacific Studies
• Publisher : Institute of Global Affairs
• Volume : 30(3)
• Date : September 2023

Abstract: Recent events including rapid nuclear modernization of North Korea and China and increasing fear of nuclear escalation in Ukraine have led to renewed attention to nuclear politics in East Asia. In this context, this paper aims to address one of the most distinguished concepts in nuclear politics and its relevance to East Asia’s security environment: the stability-instability paradox. Specifically, this paper seeks to address the two following questions. Is the stability-instability paradox applicable to the inter-Korean security environment? If so, by what mechanism will the stability-instability paradox work in the region? Through theoretical analysis and a case study on the bombardment of Yeonpyeong Island in 2010, this paper yields two findings. First, while not yet fully applicable, the logic of the stability-instability paradox is increasingly becoming relevant in the inter-Korean security environment. Second, the stability-instability paradox in the region is likely to work through the mechanism of the ‘red-line model’, which entails relatively little danger of intentional nuclear escalation.