Despite recent legislation and regulations to protect homeowners’ rights in the process of urbanization, forced eviction remains one of the most prevalent causes of violence in contemporary China. This article examines the capacity of residents of Chinese cities to protect their property rights using new media to produce alternative discourses on law in the urbanization process. Fieldwork conducted in Beijing from 2007 to 2008, a period during which the national capital underwent massive development schemes for the 2008 Summer Olympic Games, shows that homeowners create virtual precedents, backed not by the authority of the court, but by that of the media. Evictees of so-called dingzihu (nail-houses) facing chaiqian (demolition and relocation) develop arguments based on the 2007 case of Wu Ping, the first new media superstar in (post-)socialist China. The article, following post-structuralist formulations, develops a theory of ‘legal surrealism’ characteristic of the position of law in reform-era China. Whereas social media is equated with revolution elsewhere, in China, the lesson of the role of new media in effecting social change may be one of limitation. While digital mass communication technologies may assist individual ‘victories’, challenges to eviction face both intrinsic and extrinsic obstacles for collective action.

Why is shariʿa the taboo of modern law? This article examines the “spread of halal” controversy in China as a window to assess how nativist public opinion influences state law and policy whereas state law is foreclosed to providing protection to rights provided for in shariʿa. Among Chinese Muslims (Hui), qingzhen (lit. “pure” plus “true”) or “halal” is the kernel of their localized shariʿa, and one that prohibits consuming pork. The symbol qingzhen has proliferated in the course of China's economic modernization such that it pervades the public sphere, creating anxiety among Han Chinese that Chinese society and government is becoming “Islamicized.” Hui fear that the profusion of qingzhen foments food insecurity and endangers truth in labeling. In response, they have sought greater protection for their diluted core symbol in national legislation—attempts which have only exacerbated Hui-Han relations. Based on observations from over seven years of field research and interviews with Hui legal entrepreneurs, and drawing from the anthropology of taboo, I explain the debate in China by taking the Hui idea of shariʿa as a taboo to reflexively think about how secular non-Muslim states regard shariʿa as the taboo of modern law.

In Marcel Mauss's analysis, the gift exists in the context of a homogenous system of values. But in fact, different types of normative systems can inhabit the same social field. This is the case among Hui, the largest Muslim minority group in China, for whom the “freedom” of the gift resides in the giver's capacity to follow the rules underlying gifting, in this case, the rules of sharia. I call this capacity “minjian (unofficial, popular) autonomy.” Hui follow sharia in pursuit of a good life, but their practices are also informed by mainstream Han Chinese gift practices and by the anxieties of the security state. In their gifting practices, Hui thus endeavor to reconcile the demands of Islamic, postsocialist, and gift economies. [gift economy, autonomy, sharia, charity, China, Islamic finance, ethics] 按照马塞尔·莫斯的分析, 馈赠存在于均质化价值观体系的背景中。但实际上, 在同一社会领域中可以存在着不同类型的社会规范体系。中国最大的穆斯林民族‐回族就是这样的案例, 对他们来说 馈赠的"自由"取决于馈赠者按照馈赠的深层次规则行事的能力, 在这里, 规则即指“设若尔提” (伊斯兰教法) 。我将这一能力称之为“民间自主权” (非官方的, 大众化的) 。在追求美好的生活时, 回族会遵循“设若尔提”, 但他们的做法同时也会受到汉族主流的馈赠礼物的做法和“安全国家”焦虑的影响。因此, 在馈赠礼物时, 回族人会努力协调伊斯兰教、后社会主义经济和礼物经济的不同要求。[礼物经济, 自主权, “设若尔提”, 慈善, 中国, 伊斯兰金融, 伦理]

New legal hubs (NLHs) are "one stop shops" for cross-border commercial dispute resolution, in financial centers, promoted as an official policy by nondemocratic or hybrid (i.e., democratic and authoritarian) states. NLHs address the problems of the legitimacy deficit of host states and also insufficient economic growth. They do so by optimizing conflict of law rules, namely choice of forum and efficiency of procedure, attracting international parties to the hub venue. Further, they suggest a novel heuristic in the study of transnational law, particularly during a period of geo-political and ideological flux. This article is based on empirical fieldwork over a period of two years in six NLHs in four countries across "Inter-Asia," including in Hong Kong, China, Singapore, Dubai, and Kazakhstan. It analyses legal hubs at two levels: their impact on host states and interhub connections as a form of transnational ordering. This article finds that, first, legal hubs are engines of doctrinal, procedural, and technological experimentation, but they have had limited impact on the reform of the wider jurisdictions within which they are embedded. Second, through relationships of competition and complementarity, legal hubs function to enhance normative settlement. However, many of the innovations (e.g., intrahub cross-institutional mechanisms between courts and arbitration institutions and interhub soft law such as memoranda of understanding) are untested, vulnerable to state politics, or even unlawful. Consequently, NLHs demonstrate the potential and fragility of "rule of law" in nondemocratic states that promote globalization against trends in the West. The article begins with an introduction that defines NLHs, identifies their significance as jurisdictional carve-outs to otherwise weak legal systems of host states, and proposes an anthropology of legal hubs. Part I sets the analysis of NLHs against the backdrop of a partially deglobalizing Euro-American liberal legal order and a globalizing Inter-Asian one. Part II describes the methodology of "para-ethnography." Part III provides a theory of NLHs. Part IV builds on this theory to generate a continuum of NLHs. Part V assesses how NLHs and their host states affect each other, including hubs'