Meaning of ‘rational’ and ‘real’ in Preface(Vorrede) of Hegel’s Philosophy of Right – In loving memory of the late Professor Im-soo Yoo (1942.11.18.-2021.12.11) (2021.12)

  • Author : Choi Chi won
  • Publication : Zeitschrift der Koreanisch-Deutschen Gesellschaft fuer Sozialwissenschaften
  • Publisher : Koreanisch-Deutsche Gesellschaft Fuer Sozialwissenschaften(K-G Association For Social Sciences)
  • Volume : 31(4)
  • Date : December, 2021

Abstract: ‘What is rational is real; and what is real is rational’ – This phrase appears in ‘Preface(Vorrede)’ of Hegel’s ‘Elements of the Philosophy of Right.’ Because of its complexity in meaning it is the subject of much debate; there is critics for example that the conservative and reactionary Prussian state existing as a ‘real thing’ was not a ‘rational’ one. However, Hegel’s words need to be understood as his own philosophical position to the world in order to open a new horizon to understand the newly changed political and social reality after European revolutions. For Hegel, what was important was the world ‘grasped in reality(Substanz).’ Thus, his statement of position contains not only aspects of the historical reality of the French Revolution and the British Industrial Revolution but also those of critical reflections on the Enlightenment and classical economic theories, including the theory of natural rights. Philosophy becomes ‘science(Wissenschaft)’ in the re-establishment of the relationship between philosophy and reality. In short, in ’science’, reality is ‘rational’ because it does not exist in a person’s ‘special thought(Meinen)’, and also ‘real’ because it exists by specific historical processes. At the same time, philosophy is ‘real’ because it grasps reality as this world, not the otherworld that does not exist, and also ‘rational’ because it grasps reality in the rational form of a concept.

 

원문링크

A Study on the Concept of ‘Leading Country’ (2021.12)

  • Author : Wang Hwi Lee, Nam-Kook KIM
  • Publication : RIAS
  • Publisher : Institute of International Affairs
  • Volume : 30(4)
  • Date : December, 2021

Abstract: In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, the concept of a leading country is gaining salience in which a state sets an example on how to respond to a new global crisis. This article examines the definition and ideological origins of the leading country concept, as well as its necessary conditions and examples of leading countries for each stage of industrial revolution. This article also compares concepts similar to those of leading countries such as hegemonic states, great powers, advanced countries, advanced small countries, and middle powers. The concept of a leading country refers to a state that provides an example for other countries to refer to by faithfully carrying out good policies or systems from a normative point of view. Leading countries are distinguished from advanced countries, which are defined as countries who are at a more advanced stage than others on the singular path to development assumed by modernization theory. They are different from great powers that set as their ultimate goal as national prosperity and defense because leading countries can lead the zeitgeist of the times and present a direction that other countries should go in. Leading countries also wish to accrue influence through good examples of governance, unlike hegemonic states that project their overwhelming national power to the world. In other words, the leading country is a new concept of a country that leads the international order in a better direction by exerting its influence and setting an example for other countries to follow beyond the existing concepts of advanced countries, great powers, and hegemonic states.

 

Original Text Link

The Korean party system after democratization, how will it be viewed? Evaluation of the level of institutionalization of the party system from the perspective of electoral volatility (2021.12)

  • Author : Hyun Jae Ho
  • Publication : Korean Political Science Review
  • Publisher : The Korean Political Science Association
  • Volume : 55(5)
  • Date : December, 2021

Abstract: This paper aims to analyze the phenomenon of the splits and mergers between parties in Korean party politics after democratization through the ‘revised’ Pedersen index and evaluate the level of institutionalization. Two electoral volatility indices were used. One is extra-system/ within-system volatility resulting from entry and exit between parties, and the other is block/within-block volatility resulting from progress-conservative (or left-right) contexts. The analysis results are as follows. On the one hand, the high index of total electoral volatility is largely due to an increase in extra-system volatility rather than within-system volatility, and an increase in within-block volatility rather than block volatility. On the other hand, the proportion of within-system volatility and bloc volatility also appears to gradually increase. However, in either case, the implication of the electoral volatility index is the continuation of instability resulting from the low level of institutionalization of the party system. It means that even though a generation has passed since democratization, the social base of the party system and the linkage between parties and voters are still weak. According to Sartori’s expression, it represents the absence of a mass party that can strongly cohere the party system. This i s why the Korean p arty system is defined a s an ‘ inchoate p arty system’.

 

원문링크

 

Beyond ‘Responsible Reconciliation – Philosophical Foundation for ‘Korea-Japan Historical Reconciliation 3.0’ – (2021.12)

Abstract: The purpose of this study is to find one of the causes of the delay or reversal of the historical reconciliation between Korea and Japan in the limit of the viewpoint of ‘responsible reconciliation’ and to provide a philosophical foundation for ‘Korea-Japan historical reconciliation 3.0’ in terms of ‘inclusive reconciliation’. Responsible reconciliation through ‘politics of apology and forgiveness’ is based on political responsibility that sees reconciliation as a process that continues in political space. However, reconciliation based on ‘politics of apology and forgiveness’ in Korea-Japan relations has resulted in reducing the political space and blocking the reconciliation process by focusing on legal responsibility, not political responsibility. This article argues that it is time to restore the reconciliation process through ‘politics of embrace’ and move on to a deeper relationship through the healing of both victims and perpetrators.

 

원문링크

The Politics of Trade Adjustment Versus Trade Protection (2021.11)

  • Author : Sung Eun Kim & Krzysztof J. Pelc
  • Publication : Comparative Political Studies
  • Publisher : Sage Publications
  • Volume : 54(13)
  • Date : November, 2021
  • Abstract: The United States’ Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) program seeks to help workers transition away from jobs lost to import competition. By contrast, trade remedies like antidumping seek to directly reduce the effect of competition at the border. Though they have very different economic effects, we show that trade adjustment and protectionism act as substitutes. Using the first geo-coded measure of US trade protectionist demands, we show that controlling for trade shocks, counties with a history of successful TAA petitions see fewer calls for trade protection. This effect holds when we confine our analysis to the steel industry, a heavy user of antidumping duties. And though they are both means of addressing import exposure, the two policy options have distinct political effects: in particular, successful TAA petitions carry a significant electoral benefit for Democratic candidates. Greater recognition of the substitutability of trade compensation and protectionism would improve governments’ response to import exposure.

원문링크