The political economy of the left has emptied the space of critique. It has articulated an unusual combination: bureaucratic centralism aligned with the expansion of financialization. If, as Marx claimed, historical events appear first as tragedy, the contemporary institutional left—especially in Latin America—has staged a neoliberal play. This has fueled delusion, much captured by the far right. This situation has demanded engagement with the public intellectual role in the Latin American—particularly Brazilian—tradition, in which critical theories have been tied to social forms of resistance against political and economic power. When such powers are reorganized within left-wing programs and governments, engaged intellectuals must confront their field. In this article, we draw on Ruy Fausto’s reflection on the misdirections of the left in its processes of bureaucratization and institutionalization to assess the limits of reformism, the question of left unity, and the conciliatory project with the accumulation regime. From this dialog, we propose taking the critique of financialized capitalism seriously through the decentralization of socialist alternatives, capable of resisting both the homogenizing force of financialization and its top-down imposition by the institutionalist left.

This essay traces the emergence of a linguistically and culturally bifurcated public literary-cultural sphere in Sri Lanka from the early twentieth century to the postcolonial present. It looks at key “moments” in the history of literary-cultural public discourse and argues that different visions of what a Sri Lankan identity could be jostled for influence. However, the colonial political economy under which this literary-cultural sphere developed, and the ensuing majoritarian political developments in post-independence Sri Lanka, overdetermined the linguistically and culturally segregated “form” this literary-public sphere eventually developed. Through the critical exploration of this history, this essay demonstrates that the literary and the political imaginations reproduce each other and that the literary-cultural public sphere is best understood as a contingent space shaped by ideological and political forces that can be both progressive and regressive rather than a normatively progressive or “open” space of public engagement.

This article examines three key debates about Black humor during the Harlem Renaissance, framing them as public “symposia” that reflect conflicting views on comedy’s role in Black cultural and political life. It argues that Harlem Renaissance comedy can be grouped into three categories: repression, rebellion, and revision. While scholars often interpret Black humor as a tool for survival or subversion, this article contends that it is rooted in cynicism—a “Black cynical reason” aware of the illusions of racial capitalism but skeptical that self-aware satire could resist them. Harlem Renaissance comedy critiqued white supremacy but also created internal tensions within the Black community, highlighting the complex relationship between resistance and complicity. The article explores this dynamic through three debates: the 1926 Crisis exchange between W. E. B. Du Bois and Carl Van Vechten, reflected in Jessie Redmon Fauset’s Comedy: American Style; the 1926 Nation debate between Langston Hughes and George Schuyler, explored through Schuyler’s Black No More; and Ralph Ellison’s 1958 exchange with Stanley Edgar Hyman in the Partisan Review, examined through Ellison’s essays. The article concludes that while Harlem Renaissance comedy advanced sharp critiques and inspired future activism, comedy itself struggles to produce putative political or social change.

In Bangladesh’s southwest delta, climate adaptation unfolds less through mass migration or master plans than through everyday routes. In August 2023, 40 young people from 5 flood-prone villages mapped 120 geotagged journeys to water points, schools, clinics, markets, and cyclone shelters. Their stories reveal “routes of care” patterns of movement that sustain families and keep communities rooted under pressure. Three practices recur: staying, where repair and mutual support enable life in place; leaving and looping back, where seasonal departures strengthen ties through return; and protection, where circuits of water, health, and education provide survival. These everyday mobilities challenge the binary of migration versus immobility and explain why national strategies such as Tidal River Management and the Bangladesh Delta Plan 2100 succeed only when aligned with lived routes. Four design principles emerge: map real paths first, value staying as care, support looped mobility, and integrate water, health, and schooling.

Since 2018, the Chicory Revitalization Project (CRP) has used vernacular poetry published in Baltimore’s Chicory magazine (1966–1983) as the centerpiece of a public humanities project. Chicory existed at the intersection of the liberalism of the War on Poverty, which funded it, and the radical esthetics of the Black Arts Movement, which inspired it. After digitizing the magazine, the CRP has used Chicory as the basis of poetry workshops, public events, a traveling exhibition, and a new magazine. Through our work, we have come to see the vernacular poetry in Chicory as emotional history and the basis for intergenerational dialogue in the present. More accessible than canonical poetry, vernacular poetry reflects its historical moment through emotion. Building on this emotional connection, we encourage young writers and activists in Baltimore to engage in intergenerational dialogue with the poems and project stakeholders. When we read, interpret, and respond to poems written in the same place decades apart, an essentially civic question arises: What has changed or not? What is the role of place-based art in social justice?

Antimicrobial resistance is one of the biggest global health threats, demanding urgent action. However, the threat of AMR and the ability to respond to it are far from evenly distributed. In many parts of the global South, where infectious diseases are more common, healthcare systems are weaker, and the social conditions that shape health are more precarious, the effects of AMR are felt more acutely. Because AMR arises within these unequal conditions, rapid action alone is insufficient; attention to how costs and benefits are distributed, who is prioritised, and whose voices are heard is essential to ensure that efforts do not inadvertently deepen existing inequalities. Hence, as the world prepares to tackle this “complex wicked problem,” it needs to ensure that we not only make a quick transition but also a just one. The first step in ensuring a just AMR transition is examining the fairness of our current strategies. This study critically reviews the National Action Plans of the countries in the WHO Western Pacific Region to examine the extent to which ideas of justice are considered. Findings reveal that there are limited considerations for how the burden and benefits of actions are shared; decision-making is dominated by external and national actors within human health. Access to antibiotics is restricted across the spectrum without adequately expanding and strengthening alternatives. As NAPs undergo revision, there is a need to more consciously and explicitly integrate considerations of justice and equity to avoid unintended harm and ensure effective outcomes.