Building on the work of Bob Jessop, Jurgen Habermas, Nancy Fraser and others who have helped develop our theoretical understanding of various forms of crises (economic, political and social) that emerge within capitalism, this article proposes an integrative ontology of hegemony and crisis in capitalist societies. Specifically, it argues that there are three underlying structural dimensions to any hegemonic formation, all of which must be preserved and maintained to avoid descent into crisis: capital accumulation, political legitimation and social reproduction. At the same time, there exist structural contradictions both among and within each of these three dimensions that pose potential challenges to the maintenance of each and thus to the maintenance of hegemony overall. The article uses Japan as a case study for exploring both how these three spheres of activity contributed to the maintenance of hegemony and how contradictions developed both internal to and in the intersections of these spheres, leading to crises of accumulation, legitimation, and social reproduction. It does this first by examining the policies, institutions and practices developed in relation to the three spheres of capital accumulation, political legitimation, and social reproduction in order to effectively maintain conditions of hegemony in post-war Japan. It then analyzes the contradictions that emerged within and among these three spheres, thus providing a partial explanation for the overlapping and multi-faceted set of economic, political, and social crises that Japan has faced since the 1990s, which are understood in the context of the article as separate but inter-related crises of accumulation, legitimation, and social reproduction.

Housing First is a support project aiming to provide immediate residence to chronically homeless people in developed countries around the world. Housing First follows the principles of unconditionality, which do not impose any requirements on homeless people, and is often considered an extraordinarily innovative initiative compared to past policies. However, Housing First has been criticized for its complicity with neoliberalism. This study aimed to reconsider this complicity by critically focusing on three dimensions of neoliberalism: ideologies, governmentalities, and policies. Our reexamination of the Housing First government initiative in Tokyo indicates that the concepts of homeless-zero, self-responsibility, and cost reduction have indeed demonstrated complicity. Furthermore, this study explores an alternative method of supporting homeless people based on the innovative logic of the Housing First initiative that avoids complicities and identifies Housing First as a social movement for the homeless in Tokyo. This study reveals circulation, dialog, and universalization as essential for the radical Housing First social movement.

This paper comprises a case study of T, a Brazilian man of Japanese descent who immigrated to Japan from Brazil at the age of 10 and was deported when he was 31. T’s 20 years in Japan can be described as a vicious cycle of truancy, delinquency, time in a reformatory, crime, time in prison, visa overstay, long-term detention, and forced repatriation. The paper investigates why T encountered difficulties in his life in Japan, was held in long-term immigration detention, and was ultimately repatriated to Brazil. The background and significance of his situation are examined through interviews and letters between T and the author, an inspection of T’s judicial records related to his case, and interviews with T’s mother. Factors connected to T’s social decline include the Japanese government’s shortsighted acceptance of migrant workers, an absence of an educational policy for foreign children, and an immigration policy that largely employs long-term detention and forced repatriation. Undocumented immigrants in Japan are regarded as unwanted foreigners and repatriated. In conclusion, the paper argues that T’s punishment was far heavier than the severity of his crime from the perspective of the balance between crime and punishment.

Westerners are increasingly discovering Buraku studies. This paper analyzes their tendency of designating Burakumin as an “outcaste,” considering that the concept of outcaste derives from the caste system (Varna and Jāti) of India. Incorporating findings of caste system studies, I consider whether adaptation of the caste system theory is reasonable in the case of the Buraku issue, and I find errors. This paper critiques Edward Said, and argues a relationship between Orientalism, and this tendency of Occidental researchers to apply the outcaste label. The argument naturally follows that Orientalism in the Buraku issue is a conclusion of power from the Western episteme.

No critique of Orientalism by a Burakumin, as Japanese in Asia, can remain at this theoretical level, however. To apply the theory, an important procedure will be required of Burakumin. We must engage in self-reflection as Orientalists against Asians. Burakumin self-realization depends on our self-analysis. This paper originates in my own origins, and may therefore add to discussion of the positionality issue.

In 2005, after a series of fatal incidents at Nagoya Prison that raised public suspicion about widespread abuse in the Japanese prison estate, Japan enshrined in law the principle of third-party oversight of penal facilities. Seeking to harness the power of Japan’s civil volunteers’ sector, the parliament copied the Independent Monitoring Boards system that has been in place in England and Wales since 1952. The present article uses the so-called “spiral model” of human rights norm diffusion from the political science literature as a framework to understand the incorporation of this system of prison governance in Japan. Relying on interviews with key lawyers, Ministry of Justice documents, and communications with the United Nations’ Committee against Torture, the article takes stock of the developments since 2005, documenting the positive aspects, albeit still quite few, brought to the Japanese prisoner population by the Boards’ activities, as well as the places where the Japanese system continues to fall short of meeting the standards of its progenitor. The conclusion emerging from this overview is that rather than being a bona fide attempt to further the situation of prisoners, the Boards’ system was incorporated by the Japanese bureaucrats as a way to fend off reproval for the disastrous failings at Nagoya. The article ends on a positive note, however, observing, in line with the spiral model of rights’ norm diffusion, that having once made the tactical concession to introduce the Boards’ system, even if in an empty shell format, Japan’s bureaucracy is expected to be sucked, its kicking and screaming notwithstanding, ever more deeply into a cycle of compromises in favor of prisoners’ rights.

What would have happened if corporate packaged food (CPF) had not been available in neighborhoods that entered lockdown in Manila after the appearance of COVID-19? Is it possible that a minor failure in food provisioning to a distressed urban poor could have triggered looting and further social unrest? This paper takes these questions as a starting point to put forward two hypotheses. Firstly, CPF was effectively utilized as an instrument of tension management during the first enhanced community quarantine (March 15 to June 15, 2020). Secondly, the donation of food packages and cash transfers became normalized practices within the governmental rationality of a bloc of social actors: state agencies, corporations, NGOs, religious organizations, and other philanthropic groups. This paper is based on primary and secondary sources in Manila’s urban poor neighborhoods: Payatas, Tatalon, and Dakota. In sum, this paper states that a complex governmental rationality saw CPF deeply embedded in the practices of donating food and transferring cash to poor people.

Recent studies on racism have illustrated that the racialisation of marginalised groups is a dynamic and interactive process, not only in relation to whiteness but also to other oppressed groups. This paper aims to examine how Asian minorities were racially constructed in South Africa by reconsidering the ‘honorary white’ status, purportedly afforded to Japanese residents by the South African government during the apartheid period (1948-1991), through a relational lens.

Under the racial segregation policies of that time, Japanese business expatriates and their families were permitted to reside in white residential areas in South Africa. This preferential treatment of a population group classified as non-whites in terms of apartheid’s racial categories led to the Japanese being described as ‘honorary whites’ in popular discourses1). Even with the initial success achieved by previous studies in presenting honorary whiteness as a contested category having been framed not just from ‘above’ but also from ‘below’, the interactive process of their racialisation vis-à-vis other groups has scarcely been scrutinised.

The present study involved collecting South African archival materials, parliamentary records, and newspaper articles. Interview-based research was also conducted with Japanese people who lived in South Africa under apartheid as well as South African-born Chinese.

The findings revealed the following: 1) the 1930 agreement between the Union of South Africa and Japan regarding the favoured treatment of Japanese nationals resulted from the global wave of Asian immigration and regime of white supremacy. 2) Contrary to common belief, the positions of the Japanese and Chinese were closely entwined with each other in South Africa. Notably, the term‘honorary white’ was born and used to describe the ambiguous status of the Japanese in comparison with South African-born Chinese. 3) Acknowledging agency under circumstances of marginalisation would be expressly valuable for studying race and racism through a relational framework.

This paper is organised around engaging with multilayered positions of power in research theorised as “stronger” standpoint theory. Specifically, it 1) affirms tojisha-kenkyu as a research resource both theoretically and methodologically, 2) revalues feminist theory by adapting it into “stronger” standpoint theory, 3) discusses multilayered positionality, and 4) demonstrates the researcher’s power to implement the standpoint. Tojisha-kenkyu externalises “issues” constructed to appear for certain bodies within situated experience. Bodies are the lived embodiment of subjectivity which is created in relation to others and objects. Feminist standpoint theory reaffirms silenced subjectivity in situated experience as empirical evidence related to engaged and accountable positionality. “Stronger” standpoint theory analyses how power accrued around certain bodies works on multiple layers by highlighting the multiple discriminations which are twisted, conflicted, intensified or compensated in differential contexts, making them possible. Using myself as a paradigm, a foreign researcher in Japan, demonstrates positionalities as a majority/minority, assailant/victim, and the discriminator/ discriminated. I argue “stronger” standpoint theory proposes changes to the centre of power, the visible white/male/researcher, according to the needs of the margin, the silenced queer/foreigner, within the same researcher through the dialogue between shifting standpoints which are not separate but inclusive, interconnected, and co-dependent. Using phenomenology to guide our description of lived embodiment shows how the “meaningfulness” of certain advantages/disadvantages are constructed for certain bodies. By refusing to erase dimensions of the researcher accrued from their bodies, such as whiteness, it challenges the implicit knowledge and privileges provided by colonialist and racist practices embedded in research.

Existing research into newcomers to Japan has focused primarily on the perspective of researchers. This means that the views of the newcomers themselves have not been the subject of a great deal of discussion. Critical narratives of the newcomer as a researcher can reveal the insider’s point of view and provide an opportunity to explore practical application in solving social challenges surrounding newcomers. This paper describes the author’s experiences as a Chinese person who came to Japan as a newcomer. To achieve this purpose, the method of autoethnography, which puts emphasis on experiences of persons concerned, is adopted. The author’s life history has been divided into three distinct phases in this paper. The first phase covers the period that begins with their arrival in Japan and ends with the completion of elementary school. The second phase is seen to have begun with entry into junior high school and to have ended with graduation from high school. The final phase extends from enrolment in university until the present day. Based the stories, the author’s development process was discussed from the perspective of places of belonging.