1920년대 개조론의 확산과 기독교사회주의의 수용·정착

Abstract

In Korea, it was the ‘Christianity and Socialism’ discourse, which was supported by Christian students who responded the anti-religion movement in 1923 and 1924, that laid the ideological foundation for Koreans’ embracement of Christian Socialism. With this discourse, the speakers interpreted the Social reconstruction argument’s narratives in terms of Christian concept "kingdom of God", and they searched for an alternative for a people’s society, while also attempting dialogue with Socialism. It was around 1925, when writings of the famous Japanese Christian Socialist Kagawa Toyohiko were translated and introduced to Korea, that the Christian Socialist ideology was introduced to the Korean Christian community as a Christian discourse of action. The ‘Socialism of Love’ argued by Kagawa, which was based upon historical conception of Materialistic morality and the movement for the kingdom of God, one of theory and one of action, was an instant hit to the Korean students in their youth. So people who armed themselves with Kagawa’s idea, trying to model their actions after those of his, started to appear. They got interested in the rural society where a lot of the poor people were living. And they also turned their eyes to the cooperative unions which could function as social facilities of love that could overcome the nature of Capitalism which was destined to pursue only interest. The Christian Socialism of Korea encountered the opportunity to set firmly its feet on Korean soil, with the organization of the Christian Rural Research Association in 1929. This group embarked upon Christian-based rural reconstruction work, equipped itself with Christian Socialism, and spreaded its roots in the Korean society. They suggested the so-called Christianism("The ideology of the Cross"), a theory designed to invite an ideal society which was also different from the one envisioned in Marxism. And they also initiated the movement for the Jesus Village as an utopian model village(‘Spiritual movement of materials’), based upon the rural churches and cooperative unions. Yet the anti-Materialism, non-Materialism, and the Socialist inclination against selfishness clashed with each other in real life situations as well, and that was sort of a passage rite that all those theories and actions that were searching for a ‘third way’ between Bourgeois Nationalism and Socialism had to go through.