|
Showing 1 - 4 of
4 matches in All Departments
Under the global hegemony of the West, societies have interpreted
the world and defined their identities through the frameworks of
Eurocentric discourses. Since the mid-twentieth century,
Eurocentrism has tended to be associated with economic
developmentalism. The discourse of seonjinguk (developed country)
has been a dominant Eurocentric developmental discourse in Korea.
However, in what historical contexts have the Koreans set
seonjinguk as their national goal and yardstick to judge nations?
What roles have been played by the concept of seonjinguk in Korea?
What discursive frameworks did the Koreans use for their national
identities and worldviews before the developmental era?
Eurocentrism and Development in Korea is the first scholarly
approach to those questions. Through a chronological analysis of
Korea's dominant discourses from the late nineteenth century to the
present, Kim demonstrates the historical nature of developmentalism
and seonjinguk discourse for Korea's developmental era, and traces
their genealogy to gaehwa (enlightenment) and munmyeong
(civilization) discourses from a sociological historical
perspective. Providing essential knowledge about Korea's history of
Eurocentrism, developmentalism and national change, this
enlightening monograph will appeal to undergraduate and
postgraduate students, as well as postdoctoral researchers,
interested in fields such as Korean Studies, Development Studies
and Global Sociology.
Under the global hegemony of the West, societies have interpreted
the world and defined their identities through the frameworks of
Eurocentric discourses. Since the mid-twentieth century,
Eurocentrism has tended to be associated with economic
developmentalism. The discourse of seonjinguk (developed country)
has been a dominant Eurocentric developmental discourse in Korea.
However, in what historical contexts have the Koreans set
seonjinguk as their national goal and yardstick to judge nations?
What roles have been played by the concept of seonjinguk in Korea?
What discursive frameworks did the Koreans use for their national
identities and worldviews before the developmental era?
Eurocentrism and Development in Korea is the first scholarly
approach to those questions. Through a chronological analysis of
Korea's dominant discourses from the late nineteenth century to the
present, Kim demonstrates the historical nature of developmentalism
and seonjinguk discourse for Korea's developmental era, and traces
their genealogy to gaehwa (enlightenment) and munmyeong
(civilization) discourses from a sociological historical
perspective. Providing essential knowledge about Korea's history of
Eurocentrism, developmentalism and national change, this
enlightening monograph will appeal to undergraduate and
postgraduate students, as well as postdoctoral researchers,
interested in fields such as Korean Studies, Development Studies
and Global Sociology.
East Asia is widely regarded as the main "winner" in contemporary
globalization, unscathed by the economic crisis of 2008, with its
leading new industrializing nations and emerging economies. While
20th-century globalization was mainly led by the West, the 21st
century is ushering in different dynamics. The re-emergence of Asia
involves alternative visions of the world and different
perspectives on globalization. This volume seeks to address these
dimensions, turning to local reflexivities, notably in South Korea
and China, to explore the key debates in sociology and political
economy within East Asia rather than from an outside view.
East Asia is widely regarded as the main "winner" in
contemporary globalization, unscathed by the economic crisis of
2008, with its leading new industrializing nations and emerging
economies. While 20th-century globalization was mainly led by the
West, the 21st century is ushering in different dynamics. The
re-emergence of Asia involves alternative visions of the world and
different perspectives on globalization. This volume seeks to
address these dimensions, turning to local reflexivities, notably
in South Korea and China, to explore the key debates in sociology
and political economy within East Asia rather than from an outside
view.
|
|