This Article offers a first comparative analysis of the evolution of U.S. corporate personhood doctrine and the “freedom to conduct a business” under Article 16 of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights. It argues that, over the past fifty years, the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS) and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) have both contributed to the rise of neoliberalism by using these legal doctrines to shield market mechanisms from democratic intervention. While SCOTUS has expanded and deepened corporate personhood, granting new and more powerful protections under free speech and religious freedom to corporations, the CJEU has similarly interpreted the “freedom to conduct a business” to weaken labor protections and different market regulations. This unexpected convergence contrasts with the CJEU’s ostensibly social mission and underscores the dangers of an uncritical expansion of Article 16. But despite this shared goal, this Article highlights the divergence in the approaches of SCOTUS and the CJEU through insights from comparative political economy. Differences in legal mobilization, the role of courts in political disputes, and the political economy of industrial relations have shaped each doctrine’s development. These findings are useful for legal reformers developing different strategies to curb corporate power in both jurisdictions.

This article shows how urban life in Seoul under the Lee Myung-bak government combines neoliberal political economy priorities with an immense accumulation of spectacles. It examines the Cheonggye stream restoration, which has been promoted as upgrading Seoul to become a cleaner, greener and competitive global city. The Cheonggye stream project points to a new form of governance which looks beyond the display of national progress through conventional museums or monumental structures, as favored by previous regimes. Instead, the progress of the city and the nation is increasingly being portrayed through the popular use of urban space.

Recent changes in the Turkish healthcare system aim to enhance efficiency by implementing various feedback systems, performance-based wages, and new auditing mechanisms to monitor resource and time use and cycle of motions in medical settings. This paper aims to answer the following question: how do nurses respond to changes that place them in a subordinate position, where supervisors and administrators dictate control over time and the nature of labor? In the literature on labor and neoliberalization, resistance by workers to control over work is mostly concluded as part of the reproduction of workers’ subordination. However, this paper challenges such a conclusion by presenting an alternative perspective. In-depth interviews with twenty-one nurses conducted in İstanbul revealed that nurses disrupt control mechanisms by refusing to conform to behaviors dictated by managerial principles, manipulating information about medication and equipment usage, and concealing beds and patients through their authoritative control over them. This study unveils new dimensions of contemporary nursing in Turkey through which covert solidarities between nurses enable efforts to maintain “good care” often shaped by gendered expectations. These efforts mostly resist the “hotelization” of hospitals and aim to remake the moral boundaries of care work.

Neoliberal forces have increased the use of English as a medium of instruction (MOI) in higher education globally. The status of English has shifted from being a curricular subject to the primary language of instruction, particularly in private higher education institutions. Drawing on Baldauf (2006), Kaplan and Baldauf (2003), and Spolsky (2009), and conducting a multi-level policy document analysis, this study set out to investigate the use of English as an MOI in Bangladeshi higher education. At the macro level, we analysed language-related policy documents, such as the National Education Policy (NEP), the Bangladesh National Qualifications Framework (BNQF), and University Grant Commission (UGC) policies. At the meso level, we examined various publicly available policy documents of a private university, including MOI statements, purpose and vision statements, admission requirements, curriculum, assessment, textbook recommendations, and advertisements for faculty positions. The findings revealed that while macro-level MOI policies are left open for meso-level interpretation, private universities have adopted an MOI policy that shifted from a nationalist Bangla-only ideology to a neoliberal English-only one, as evidenced in their practices and management initiatives. This shift has essentially served a covert colonial agenda under the guise of internationalisation and adoption of the American higher education model.

I argue that alienation objections to housing markets face a dilemma. Either they purport to explain distributive injustices, or they hold that markets are objectionable on intrinsic grounds. The first disjunct is empirically dubious. The second undermines the motivation for objecting to housing markets, and overgeneralizes: if markets are objectionable due to alienation, so is all large-scale social cooperation.

Revision of the Japanese Constitution is a heated topic, associated with nationalistic sentiment. Conservatives insist the constitution was imposed by the US occupation and call for an “autonomous constitution” created without foreign interference. This article critiques this discourse within the historical context of modern democracy. I emphasize the need to distinguish two questions: whether a constitution was established democratically and whether it has contributed to enhancing democracy. I highlight the importance of the second question. The Constitution of Japan may not have democratic origins, but it has enhanced democracy. The article provides a historically rooted and theoretically solid framework for constructive discussions of constitutional revision as the Abe administration prepares to submit its proposal for revision.

This article studies the narratives of counter-urbanization as presented in contemporary South Korean documentaries. In recent decades, there has been a surge of ethnographic media productions with a return-to-nature theme, highlighting urban-to-rural migration. What appears as a Thoreauesque pursuit of pastoral life in the woods reveals the traumatic aftereffects of the 1960s-80s rapid industrialization as well as the 1990s Asian Financial Crisis that resulted in layoffs, bankruptcies, homelessness, and migration. This article analyzes a selection of counter-urbanist documentaries through the dual lens of social class and masculinity, especially considering South Korea's hypermasculine industrialization and neoliberal ethos of survivalist individualism. It also examines cross-generational perspectives on counter-urbanization to recover human agency.

This article looks at three recent Japanese mass market works about poverty, arguing that each is representative of a different mode of depicting economic disparity and want in contemporary Japan – individualization, nationalization, and generalization. These modes of representation contribute to a comparatively low level of awareness of poverty as a major social problem as well as political inaction. Following Raymond Williams' interrogation of social “keywords” as well as critical discourse analysis to identify the interplay of absences and presences in these accounts, this article will argue that even empathic approaches toward poverty can obscure its complex interconnections, disparities such as its disproportionate impact on Japanese women, and block the thinking of social and economic alternatives.

Cities around the world are facing a global housing crisis characterized by rising unaffordability, slums, gentrification, inequality, and urban segregation. The Global Financial Crisis highlighted the detrimental impact of highly financialized housing markets. This Article argues that transitioning from a market-based to a welfare-oriented approach is both necessary and feasible to ensure the right to adequate housing for everyone. This shift requires a fundamental re-imagining of housing issues, recognizing that the root causes lie in a political economy where law plays a pivotal role, crossing traditional boundaries between private and public law. We illustrate the legal foundations of adopting a welfare-based approach to the political economy of housing law, contrasting it with a market-based approach in three key areas: Land use regulation, housing finance, and rental markets.