The purpose of this thesis is to examine a theoretical problem of "Multiculturism" concept that importance has risen in various fields in recent years. Especially, I want to present the unarrangement of conceptual definition as a theoretical problem in "Multiculturism". The main discourse attempts the specification of a center point under the discussion of "Multiculturism" by examining Taylor, Kymlicka and Hollinger. For the purpose I showed the outline of Taylor and Kymlicka's "Multiculturism" theories and Hollinger's Criticism on "Multiculturism". It is as follows. Firstly Taylor supports "Multiculturism" with the frame of "The politics of recognition". Taylor argues that modernity and modern nation-state as its product had institutionalized social inequality by unequal and alienating identity, "Multiculturism" is exactly the one that the ethnic minority and other move to resolte it. Next, Kymlicka shows common recognition with Taylor on modern nation-state. But he especially proposes "Multicultural citizenship" for national minority's right. The feature in the point to make cultural community national minority' perpetuity, especially "Autonomy right" becomes a focus. Finally, Hollinger criticizes "Multiculturism" in shape of evaluation of the movement actually done in the United States. Hollinger emphasizes that the property of ethnic minority as the rightful subject in "Multiculturism" has a "Construction" side with social policy, therefore insists to form civil identity beyond the minority's individual identity and the social fairness with it. Well, a conceptual characteristic of "Multiculturism" that becomes clear from these outlines is the following respect. First of all I made clear that the cause of difficulty of the generalization of "Multiculturism". To speak plaintly, it is a disagreement of recognition to the position of "Culture" in the formation of the minority that becomes a focus by the frame of "Multiculturism". Next, as a more positive meaning of this paper, if discussions instituted under "Multiculturism" investigate it thoroughly, it will be converged problem of an existing nation-state system. And, on this point, we confirmed the important difference on nationstates theories. That is, on the one hand Hollinger has tried to ground social fairness on civil identity, on the other hand Kymlicka and Taylor have insisted that recomposition of social goods and service through national or ethnic identity. Exactly, this tension of nation states theories is at the center of "Multiculturism" theory. Therefore, final recognition of this paper is that "Multiculturism" will be able to become a possible concept of the direction of the reality of the present nation-states by getting over the description that specializes in the minority side and not by "Dismantlement" of nation-states but theorizing this "Reorganization".
抄録全体を表示