There is an argument about whether or not Kajimura Hideki’s ‘immanent development theory’(내재적 발전론), which was forged through his ‘research of history’, was also utilized in his ‘analysis of present’. This article aims to confirm that the Kajimura‘s ‘dependent development’(종속 발전), his key concept for understanding Korean capitalism, rests on the framework of his immanent development theory which puts importance on external pressure and people’s lives.
Kajimura found that South Korea’s monopolistic conglomerates had the ambivalence of being ‘subordinate’ and ‘nationalistic’. He explained that the ‘nationalism’ of the Bak Jeong-hui regime was strongly related with that ambivalence, and paid attention to support from the people for the modernization policy of the Bak regime. He also stated that Gim Il-seong’s ‘autonomical national economy theory’ could defeat his opponent‘ s ‘international specialization theory’ because of the support of Gim’s people.
Kajimura discribed the performance of Korean capitalism in the 1970’s as ‘dependent development’ and explained the process of ‘dependent development’ in the periphery by accepting the dependent theory, that is pre-capitalism→colonial semi-eudalism→peripheral
capitalism. At the same time, he explained the process of ‘bipolar disassembly’ toward the empire and the colony in East Asia, by studying the relative strength of external political militaristic pressure at the critical point of political reform, which might determine if a country can be placed in the orbit of capitalistic development or not.
The emergence of the NICs(New Industrialized Countries) called for a change of the theories which had explained the peripheral economy. Using the expression ‘NICs type dependent development’, however, Kajimura tried to explain the NICs phenomenon with his ‘dependent development’ theory, although he acknowledged the ‘NICs shock’. He stuck with the framework of his immanent development theory which puts importance on external pressure and people’s lives, by finding the cause of Korea’s successful development in the international condition and paying attention to the sacrifice and revolt of Korean people. He denied the possibility of desubordination of Korean economy.
There was a controversy on whether Korean society should be characterized by the ‘state monopolistic capitalism theory’ or the ‘peripheral capitalism theory’ in mid-1980’s Korea. Kajimura criticized the former by supporting the latter. In the course of the controversy, the ‘state monopolistic capitalism theory’ moved into a direction where the problem of subordination was considered seriously, and the change meant that it got closer to Kajimura’s stance.
Kajimura tried to determine the ‘substance’ of national economy and at the same time, derived from that, the ‘idea’ of national economy, by further developing the ‘national economy theory’(민족경제론) of 1970"s Korea. Kajimura’s ‘people’s nationalism’(민중적 민족주의) was also strongly related with that national economy as both ‘idea’ and ‘substance’.