• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.147
• /
• pp.29-58
• /
• 2018

The purpose of this article is to demonstrate that Hegel's philosophy of right is a dialectic critique of liberalism. The dialectical criticism in this article does not mean the formal logical denial, but a return to self by self-negation. Thus, if Hegel's philosophy of right is a dialectical critique of liberalism, Hegel's philosophy of right will be critical of liberalism and at the same time, it will not reject liberalism, but rather have aspects of liberalism. The criticism of liberalism implies that individual freedoms and rights can not be realized subjectively through individual free acts, but are realized intersubjectively through social mediums. And this is also found in controversies among modern liberalists because modern liberalism requires the government's role and institutional arrangements for the realization of individual freedoms and rights. We can find the aspects of liberalism in Hegel's philosophy of right since Hegel's ethical life entails ultimately the concrete realization and extension of individual freedom and rights.

• SUVANNABHUMI
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.19-52
• /
• 2020

Southeast Asianists have a perennial tendency to question the reality of the region in which they are specialized. Yet while scholars have doubted, Southeast Asians at large have become increasingly sure that Southeast Asia does exist, and increasingly inclined to identify with it. This article summarizes a range of evidence to that effect, from opinion poll research and from the history of ASEAN and other pan-Southeast Asian institutions, and uses it to construct a critique of the relativistic view that Southeast Asia is a fluid and ill-defined concept. Southeast Asians today tend to see Southeast Asia as a cultural as well as a geographical and institutional unit. The nature of the perceived cultural unity remains unclear, and further research is called for in this area. There are reasons to think, however, that it reflects real inheritances from a shared past, as well as shared aspirations for the future.

• Journal of the Korean association of regional geographers
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.305-322
• /
• 2006

An increasing number of cities employ rescaling strategies that not only construct metropolitan production network scaled down from national context, but also tune up new governance to effectively control local geographies of the city. In this context, urban redevelopment has emerged a key 'global' strategy to empower governmental institutions of the city, which not only eliminate such threatening spatial variables as deteriorated housing, working-class ghettos, and crime areas, but also increase and extract exchange value of those spaces. I view such practices a process of 'glurbanization'. This paper investigates how state/city government employs the discourse of urban re/development for 'inventing' poverty at an urban scale: how it institutionalizes the discourse for implementing concrete projects: and how urban institutional apparatus appropriate their discursive practices of redevelopment for their own ends in the city. By particularly focusing on the California Redevelopment Law and the Community Redevelopment Agency of the City of Los Angeles, this paper analyzes the ways in which the law and the agency extract value from what they define 'blight areas' by means of eminent domain and tax increment revenues. For empirical analysis I employ discourse analysis and institutional ethnography. I conclusively argue that the urban spaces stigmatized as 'blight areas' are increasingly entrapped by the urban redevelopment agency, which extracts increased exchange value from the areas and redirects it for supporting external investors, private developers, and the body of the agency itself.