학술논문
해방 정국에서의 박헌영(朴憲永)과 김일성(金日成)의 갈등
이용수 260
- 영문명
- A Study of Conflict between Park Hun-young and Kim Il-sung during 1945-1953 in Korea
- 발행기관
- 개인저작물
- 저자명
- 신복룡(Bok-ryong Shin)
- 간행물 정보
- 『개인저작물 - 사회』社會科學論叢 第24輯, 1~46쪽, 전체 46쪽
- 주제분류
- 사회과학 > 개인저작물
- 파일형태
- 발행일자
- 2000.01.01
8,320원
구매일시로부터 72시간 이내에 다운로드 가능합니다.
이 학술논문 정보는 (주)교보문고와 각 발행기관 사이에 저작물 이용 계약이 체결된 것으로, 교보문고를 통해 제공되고 있습니다.
국문 초록
영문 초록
[1] This article was devised to depict the conflict between two Communist leaders Park Hun-young and Kim Il-sung, and its results in the age of Liberation(1945-1953) of Korea
[2] As a genius, Park was born irregular son in a poor family. Being a concubine of small land-lord, his mother managed a tavern. His grievances, which he had experienced in his child-boyhood seriously effected his political behavior afterwards. After studies at regular schools, he was indulged in the domestic communist movement. On the other side, Kim Il-sung was born in Christian family, and connected with Communism, while being exiled with his father in Manchuria. On the Liberation day, he was captain of 88 Brigade in Red Army.
[3] Park and Kim were contract in their political line.
(1) Park was indulged in the peoples front, but Kim in national unification front.
(2) In the device of national independent fight, Park preferred to Lenin`s vanguard theory, but Kim stepped on populism.
(3) Park and Kim clashed with the building of North Korean Branch of Korean Communist party. Park wanted to control the North Korean Communist including Kim under the principle of `One-party in One-state,` But Kim, backed by the Red Army in North Korea, proclaimed to establish the North Korean Labor Party under the name of `distinct situation.`
(4) In the process of 3 Parties merge of Korean Communist Party, Korean Peoples Party and Korean New Democratic Party, Park wanted to stand on the center of leftist circle but failed. Kim wished to merge the three parties around Ryu Woon-hyung. When it failed, Kim concluded that Park`s sectarianism was responsible to it.
(5) Park could not look-over the U.S. Military Government`s policy to collaborate the moderate leftist Ryu Woon-hyung and the moderate rightist Kim Kyu-sik. But Kim wanted that Ryu could bring Park under his control through collaboration.
(6) Joseph Stalin chose Kim rather than Park, because he preferred the Commintern-oriented to the domestic communist.
[4] At the origins and process of the Korean War,` Park believed the possibility of people`s uprisings, but Kim, who has experienced the armed struggle against Japanese rule, preferred to guerilla strife. When they lost the Korean War, Kim shuffled the responsibility for defeat on to Park, and purged him.
[5] Concludingly speaking, the conflicts between Park and Kim were the struggle between the domestic-classical communist and Commintern, but Kim won the game under the favorable auspices of J. Stalin.
[2] As a genius, Park was born irregular son in a poor family. Being a concubine of small land-lord, his mother managed a tavern. His grievances, which he had experienced in his child-boyhood seriously effected his political behavior afterwards. After studies at regular schools, he was indulged in the domestic communist movement. On the other side, Kim Il-sung was born in Christian family, and connected with Communism, while being exiled with his father in Manchuria. On the Liberation day, he was captain of 88 Brigade in Red Army.
[3] Park and Kim were contract in their political line.
(1) Park was indulged in the peoples front, but Kim in national unification front.
(2) In the device of national independent fight, Park preferred to Lenin`s vanguard theory, but Kim stepped on populism.
(3) Park and Kim clashed with the building of North Korean Branch of Korean Communist party. Park wanted to control the North Korean Communist including Kim under the principle of `One-party in One-state,` But Kim, backed by the Red Army in North Korea, proclaimed to establish the North Korean Labor Party under the name of `distinct situation.`
(4) In the process of 3 Parties merge of Korean Communist Party, Korean Peoples Party and Korean New Democratic Party, Park wanted to stand on the center of leftist circle but failed. Kim wished to merge the three parties around Ryu Woon-hyung. When it failed, Kim concluded that Park`s sectarianism was responsible to it.
(5) Park could not look-over the U.S. Military Government`s policy to collaborate the moderate leftist Ryu Woon-hyung and the moderate rightist Kim Kyu-sik. But Kim wanted that Ryu could bring Park under his control through collaboration.
(6) Joseph Stalin chose Kim rather than Park, because he preferred the Commintern-oriented to the domestic communist.
[4] At the origins and process of the Korean War,` Park believed the possibility of people`s uprisings, but Kim, who has experienced the armed struggle against Japanese rule, preferred to guerilla strife. When they lost the Korean War, Kim shuffled the responsibility for defeat on to Park, and purged him.
[5] Concludingly speaking, the conflicts between Park and Kim were the struggle between the domestic-classical communist and Commintern, but Kim won the game under the favorable auspices of J. Stalin.
목차
1. 머리말
2. 가계와 성장, 그리고 정치적 오리엔테이션
3. 노선의 갈등
4. 한국전쟁에 대한 인식의 차이와 책임 공방
5. 결론
참고문헌
SUMMARY
2. 가계와 성장, 그리고 정치적 오리엔테이션
3. 노선의 갈등
4. 한국전쟁에 대한 인식의 차이와 책임 공방
5. 결론
참고문헌
SUMMARY
키워드
해당간행물 수록 논문
참고문헌
교보eBook 첫 방문을 환영 합니다!
신규가입 혜택 지급이 완료 되었습니다.
바로 사용 가능한 교보e캐시 1,000원 (유효기간 7일)
지금 바로 교보eBook의 다양한 콘텐츠를 이용해 보세요!