‘This book enaases with the polities of social and environmental justice, and seeks neve waye to think about the future of urbanization in the twenty-first century. Tt establishes foundational concepts for understanding how space, time, place and nature ~ the material frames of daily life axe constituted and represented through social practices, nat as separate elements but in relation to ‘cach other, Itescribes how geographical differences are produced, and shows hhow they then become fundamental to the exploration of political, economic and ecological altematives to contemporary life “The book is divided into four parts, Part I describes the problematic nature of action and analysis at diferent scales of time and space, and introraces the reader to the modes of dialectical thinking ard discourse which are used throughout the remainder of the work, Part II examines how “nature” and “environment” have been understood and valued in relation to processes of social change and seeks, from this basis, to make sense of contemporary environmental isues Part Ill, in a wide ranging discussion of history, geoeraphy and culture, explores the meaning ofthe social production” of space and time, and clarifies problems related to “atherness” and “difference”. The final part of the book deploys the foundational arguments the author has established to consider contemporary problem of social justice that have resulted from recent changes in geographical divisions oflabor, in the environment, and in the pace and quality of whanization ‘Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference speaks toa wide readership of students of cocial, cultaral and spatial theory and of the dynamics of ‘contemporary life, tis convincing demonstration that itis both possible and necessary to value difference and to seek just social order. Justice, Nature & the Geography of Difference | KEAIOH | Joleyiq Jo AUdOIB085) pg SINJON ‘eoUsne David Harvey is Professor of Geography at the Johns Hopkins University From 1987-1993 he was Halford Mackinder Professor of Geography at Osford University. He received the Outstanding Contributor Awaed from the Association of American Geographers in 1980: the Anders Revins Gold Medal from the Swedish Society for Anthropology and Geosraphy in 1989: the Patron's Medal of the Royal Geographical Society in 1995, and the \Vautrin Lud Prize in France in the same year. His books include Explanation in Geography (1969); Sociol Justice and ihe City (1973, new edition 1988)"; The Limits to Capital (1982)"; The Urban Experience (1988)", and The Condition of Postredernity (1989)". "Published by Blackwell Coram sie ly Ha He Pt Chi No Yo on Barrette David Harvey | IB TEES oles aboats PESLACKWELL | llJustice, Nature and the Geography of Differencefir Defina Justice, Nature and the Geography of Difference David Harvey BLACKWELLCogyghe ® David Hey 1996 ‘he ght of Dai Harvey te ier aah his wor as been ase nacre with the Coprghe Dep Pn ho 1988 ine puis 1996 PAGE WoT S54 Bled Pi T 258 Main Ss Cenbsige, Mamehuvens 2142 Usk ‘Baal Plies ad 108 Comey Rot Oded Ox JE UK Alig ened, epithe gaeen of snp de pps af i seen 0g ha pblion ay ees i er pon one {many feo: by any means, caxnc man, papyeg ing ore ‘hou the pie pean of aloes ‘acy in she Unie Sas of Arercatisbeok i eubpectthevo dht eal e byway af ere a other, be lat, soa he oun, here oct who tbe Pls ro coses n any fem oF iding ox ce es than hat nh hed ‘al without a imi condon icading dn crn ting inn on he amen palser ow of Conn Can i Pablo Dato sry, Daiy 1935 Jers mu, a th ear iencsDavl Hares a Inching enc sd nds ISBN 1.557480 al. pp) — ISBN 19578681. ph ale pope) 1 Ss vie. 2. Socal change, 3 Sod alae 4 Gla avon cane 5, Cale lien 6, Spe ad tie. Tie ENatGHaG 188 aoas7 aa 96961 ‘ce But ilo Ceging nPuon Dat [AGH case ress thi bo vile on she Bish Liney Type 1 on pe Gated Pad in Gest Bein by HarnalsLinio, Bods, aral "This book's peed om ai Fe paper PARTI PART I PART IIE 9 10 "1 PARTIV 2 B “i Contents Thoughts for a Prologue Acknowledgments Inteoduction ORIENTATIONS Militant Parcicularism and Global Ambition Dialostice The Lebnizian Conecit ‘The Dialesicsof-Dise 1 Change a Tatorieal Agency and the Loci of So THE NATURE OF ENVIRONMENT Pare I Prologne « ‘The Domination of Navate sad is Discontents Valuing Nature = Goines ¢ 8) elbd ‘The Dialectes of Social and Environmental Change SPACE, TIME, AND PLACE Part III Prologue ‘The Social Construction of Space and Time ‘The Currency of Space-Time From Space to Place and Back Again JUSTICE, DIFFERENCE, AND POLITICS Pare IV Prologue ‘Class Relations, Social Justice, and the Political Geography of Difference ‘The Environment of Justice Possible Urban Worlds » 46 9 7 96 ny 120 150 176 207 21D 248, 291 329 234 366 403vi Contents "Thoughts for an Bologue 89 Bibliography 0 Thoughts for a Prologue Index 456 Here is « map of us country: haere i che Sea of Indifference, glazed with salt This is che haunted river flowing from brow to groin wwe dare nor taste its water "This ie the desere where missles ae planted like corms “This is the breadbasket of foreclosed farms This isthe birchplace of the rockabilly boy This i the cemetery ofthe poor who died for democracy hiss 2 baulefcld from a nineteenth-century war the shrine is famous ‘This is the sea-rown of myth and story when the fishing fleets ‘went bankrupt ete is where the jobs were on the pier processing frozen fshsicks hourly wages and no shares ‘These are other battleelds Centralia Dewroit haere are the forests primeval che copper the silver lodes “These are the suburbs of acquiescence silence rising famelike from the stroets This isthe capital of money and dolor whose spires flare up through air inversions whase bridges are crumbling, whose childzen ate difting blind alleys pene Decween coiled ras of rarar wire T promised o show you « map you say bur dis is 2 mural then yes le itbe these ate small distinct ‘where do we see it from isthe question Adsienne Rich An Alas of he Difficude World‘Acknowledgments ‘The lines ftom “An Atlas of the Difficult World,” from An Alar ofthe Difficult World: Prems 1988-1991 by Adrienne Rich. Copyright © 1991 by Adrienne Rich. Reprinted with petmision of the anthor and W.W. Norcon & Company, Tne Introduction In recent years I have frequently found myself speaking at conferences on “globalization.” The coafereace at Duke University in November, 1994, was by fir the most interesting, le brought together diverse people not only from ‘many disciplines and walls of life but also ftom many eiferent counties. Tt wwasa weloome change to fisten vo academies, activists, and representatives from Tike South Korea, China, India, Russa, and Feypt as ‘opposed to the rather repetitive and sterile discussions of globalization (increasingly dubbed by cynics “globaloney") thar all oo often occur in universe setxings inthe United States or Europe. But the atmosphere ofthe conference was frequently tense and arguments offen hard to follow, illistrative of the inroads chat hyperciical currents of choughe like porisructuraism, postmodernism, deconstruction, and the lke have made Uroughout the world, ‘But what erly rendeced he occasion memorable for me was my say in the ‘Omi Hloel in Dusham, Norch Carolina. The hotel was fll of fails of 8 very distincrive sor. The men wore either slightly baggy suits or blazes and flannels, ssually embellished with a jolly necktie. The children were remarkably well behaved, the hoys typically dressed in blazers and flannels and the gies for che most parti filly dreses. And the women all wore ankle-length dresses and, mose distinctive of dll, had long baie. the only petmisible deviation apparently being to loop it up into a bun. This was definitely noc Levi, Calvin Klein of even Beneton territory though Laura Ashley could have made i) ~ nota pai of jeans in sight, And everyone was remaskably friendly, bestowing, beaming ‘hellos” and “good-days’ to obvious deviants from thesartoral norm such as myself 1 vas curious enough follow eis distinctive crowd whither ic was headed and soon found myself in che midst of the Southeastem Regional Mecting of Evangelical Peneeostal Preachers. I was intrigued enovgt wo stay. An evening, of pariipanc observation taught me a lot. I could aot help contrasting, for crample, the incredible enthusiasm, oy, and vigor of the Pentecostal meeting2 Sanroduesion with the angsc and compedcive tension a he globalization conference. While the Pentecostal meeting was very much led ftom the front by white male preachers (no concern hers to balance the program according to criteria of fender or race), che levels and degree of enthusiastic audience participation ‘were extraordinarily high, compared tothe heard-it-all-hefae incredulity and reseniful pusivty of the campus audience. Furthermore forthe Pentecostal iewas an orchestration of emotions and passions rather than of intellect eat was being sought and the ends and objectives of the orchestration were clear. wondered what the parallel objecrive of the globalization conference might bbe. [had a hard time finding any song or coherent answer ta thae question, The preacher who opened the ceremonies that evening did sa with the following invocation. “Through these four days,” he said, "we have come t0 tundetstand the foundational belief dhat keep us firmly on the rock,” Foundational belief! | wondesed what on earth would happen if started to talk about foundational belief in the globalization conference. The decon- structionists would gp ro work wit iy precision, che rlacivsts would callously sncet the ritical cheorsts would rub their hands and say “this simply will not do” and the pomodernists would exclaim “what a dinosaur” And I myself agree that all foundational beliefs should be scrutinized and questioned, But ‘hac coubled me was the thought thae when a politcal group armed wich ssrong and unambiguous foundational belie confronts a bunch of doubting “Thomases whose only foundational ble is skepticism towards all foundational bacliefs, chen i isracher easy 0 predice who will win, Which led me to the following reflection: the task of critical analysis is not, surely, to prove the impossibility of foundational beliefs (or truths), but co find a more plausible and adequate bass forthe foundational belief chat make interpretation and political action meaningful, eeative, and possible Im this boo, I ery to define a sec of workable foundational concepts for tund=rveanding space-time, place, and environment (name). The eriial search for such foundational concept is, of course, no trivial or easy task, It requires nothing shore of establishing 4 metaphysical basis for enquiry. But it is dangerous in academia these deys to confess to heing meta about anything, for to do so is ro suggest a longing for something myrtcally outside of us (ot Sometimes within us) which we can appeal co stabilize the food of chaotic images, ephemeral representations, contorted positionings, and multiple fragmentations of knowledge within. which we now have out callctie being, [But metaphysics in its traditionel sense is precisely about the kind of critical ‘enquiry that allows fr che free interplay of passions, emotions, rationality, and intellect rather than their esticive corapartmnentalizations. That balance is not always easy co strike. If, for example, the Pencecostals were unduly high ‘on charged emotions and the collective orchestration of passions and desires for highly restrictive ends, chen we academics surely er in being far too highly captivated by the cerebral and highly disciplined (in every sense, both posivive Inraduction 3 and negative, ofthat word) qualities of our own individualistic, profesional deknod,fraginented, and often egcisicaly driven enterprises. Metaphysics ac its best alo socks general principles to understand but never repres the evident complexity of physical, biological, and social life. Enquiry ofthis sort is never easy going and during the writing of cis book I have often found myself longing for the easy simplices ofuth of the Penteosals the ceriudes oF positivism or the absolutes of dogmatic Marxism. "As the evening with the Pentecostal wore on, it became evident tha these was a very pardcalar political target for the occasion. And that get was racism, The blood of Jers, i was suid, ill wash aveay all sins of racial Ginn Rai icimiation win the church ws conse ier to the expansion ofits powers and in che nist of extaordinary scenes preacher ker preacher exhorel the asebled ito eb the lack been ‘wth joy, hui, and understanding. Aad so ic was that an audience that in the contest ofthe US south would be tadtionallychoughe hose ro rail integration came to embrace (on the surface ac leat) not only che black brethren present bi ako the ideal of racial equality inthe eyes of the church and ofthe Lord. Now Lbappen to bein favor of alos anything that mitigates the destructive, degrading, and debilitating practices of racism inthe United Sates and it certainly seemed to me that more may have been accomplished ce tat even ene ong of Ress preching han ve decade of lipscevice paid in my own university to ideals of afimatve action. There ws, faoeves hitch vl hay appari. wo reside somewhere andthe enunciation of the tatorous Jes, the madres of Jesus Christ, hovered over the Pentecostal proceedings making me wonder how much the polis of the ‘cccation was alto dominated by an attempt to wean away aetual or potential ‘Alican~American supporters of Fusakhaa’s "Nation of Mm.” ‘On my way out of the necting | found myself confronted not only with a whole baery of preachers dying 0 tell me what appalling sinners shey once Tad been and how wondrous i was to cedscover the ways ofthe Lor, but a set of booth selling everything from religious icono and books to T-shirts. pprticular Tshirt cought my eye and I could not resis buying it. Produced by Righiows Wear, « Jens Christ Centred Company it proclaimed in starting colors GET RIGHT OR GET LEFT Deconstructionists could have a fied day with that ene, I thought. Authority forthe logo-was located, however, in Ecclesiastes 10:2 and Matthew 25:33-4 icing in the Omni Hotel, | had instant aocess to Gideors Bible and, on repairing to my wom, I checked the two citations. Fclesastes merely stated ‘har God placed wisdom on His right hand an feolisness on His et. I diate rind that since being ofthe polis eft Ihave long recognized tha it eakes4 Ineraduction 4 litle foolishness to change anything. Bue the passage from Matthew was ‘much more bothersome. God separates the nations as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats, And the sheep were placed on His right hand from whence they inherited the kingdora and che goats were laced om His let hand and condemned to “the eternal ire prepared forthe devil and his angels” Now ic is 2 sanding joke among many of his fiends chat God is nov a leftist sympathize, but condemnation to such total damnation seemed a bie too much, So why, exacly, were the goats oondet ven is cha: ned to the exernal fre? ‘The reason ‘was hungry and you gave me no food Iwas tiny and you gave me no dik, Twas 2 suanger and you did aot wriceme me, aaked an you cid noe cle ‘me, sick o in piso and you did ‘The goats protest that they did not see Him hungey, thirsty, adked, sick, or in prison. God notes chat Uiey have met such peopl all around ther on 2 daly basis and says “ifyou did ie not to the least ofthese, you did it not to me.” Now these happen «o be rather old-fashioned, cradivional, and, dare I say it, “foundational” values fora socialist polities. Se what has happened to chose concerns? Why was there so ite tee up on such questions in dhe globalization conference? And how come the religious “tight” now claims these concerns as their own? On this last point I immediately hada provocative thought. If God is located somewhere in space then maybe what appeais to be on His left is actually to out right! This turas out to be a far from trivial point: Leibniz, ‘hose ideas I will often invoke (particulasly in chapter 10), contested Newton's theories of absolute space and time and insisted upon a relational theory of space-time on the theological grounds that the absolute theory diminished God's powers by malking it scem as if He was located in (rather than crestor and Lord of) space and time. Inthe Leibnizian view it would be impossible tw tall of God having.a left or right hand because God isan oranipresent power throughous the universe and not to be construed as someone who sits somewhere in space and time surveying all that happens. “What seers like an arcane seventeenth-cenniry theological controversy has 1 contemporary echo. In the current rush to provide “cognitive maps” of everything going on in art, polities, the humanities, literary, and social theory, ete. (Mapping the West European Lf, Mapping Ideology, or Locaring Calsure to cite some recent book titles), the question ofthe relative location af various political groupings, stances, ideas, and movements har become « major ‘terion of evaluation and judgnient. The disewsion unforuunately evades the problem that mapping requires « map and that maps ate typically totalizing, usually ro-dimensional, Cartesian, and very undialectical devices with which itis possible ro propound any mixture of extraordinary insights and monstrous Introduction 5 lies Mathematicians (ike Bulerand Gaus) long 2go proved, for example, that icis imposible to map even the spherical surface ofthe earth on a fa piece of paper without distortion, and the history of map projections finluding those of topological varie) indieate an init of possible mapping systems snakingt possible to transform leit right o- bo into nowhere, depending ‘upon the particular projection chosen. This isnot to say that maps ae useless ~ far from i (an shall fequcndy appeal to them in what follows). But the mappi subsumes (and sometimes obscures} the problematies of an often unquestioned chee to employ one particular projecion (and 1 deibertely use the term in borh its mathematial and Poychological xenic) rather than some other. For myself I think the whole thetoric of lft versus ight (eadical versus reactionary, progresive versus conservative; revolutionary verus counterevolucionary) is less than helpfil these days since all sore of diffrent meanings are being assigned to chose ems (often depending upon dhe unspecified map deployed). IFT generally reo ‘what follows tothe binary of peo- or anti-capicalst (socialist) then iis partly ‘our of an urge to come up with somewhat clearer tesms of discussion, even though, hasten to concede, even tha binary is confused enongh. Bur wouscling out of Ged’ damning judgment through such arcane arguments (theological oF otherwise) hardly seemed the point. I needed to relict upon how che conference on globalization (myself included), ‘ostensibly ‘radical and “leftist” (Chough noc remarkably ani-apitalist) ini ‘orientation, might help vo feed che hungry, clothe the naked, minister to the sick, and generally pursue the foundational aims of socialist/anci-capialst politic. It is not sufficient, 1 concluded, to explore the metaphysical founding, the foundational belief, cha might be applied to understanding sbatrace terms as well asthe concrete politics of space, time, place, and cavironment (nature) in isolation, Such explorations should simultaneously pure a poliscal commitment feed, nourish, clothe and sustain che hungry | the poos nd she weal Conezms about socal justice (and how to understind snd operationalize foundational beliefs about that contested term) thereby \incerewine withthe question of how to understand foundational geographical {concepts At the intersection of all these arguments lies the question of the just _bradction of ust graphical dfeences We ned eiial ways ro eink about {how differences in wvologia, cultutal, economic, political, and social |condiions get productd (particularly through those homan activities that we [ax ina position in prtsipl to mily or contol) and we also need ways to Jevaluate tie juscclinjusice ofthe diference 0 produced, While ike most | socials, [havea cena ataclanent ro the principle of equal for example, this plainly cannot mean the erasure ofall forms of geographical difereace (ven presuming such erasure would be feasible ia a world that includes Nepal. Nicaragua, Finland Maly, Saudi Arabia, nd the United Stats). lndeeds the6 Iueduction quality principle could just as easily imply the prolifration of geographical differences ofa cerrain benign sor (leading immediately to the question of how to construe what is ois not “beniga’). Uneven geographical developmen is concepe deserving of the closest elcboraion and attention. Furthermore, any hhitorica-geographical materialise worth his or he salt, must surly recognize that radically diferent socio-ecologcal circumstances imply quite different approaches to che question of what is or isnot just. The baseline argument I shal thecefore adopt ~ an argument which I suspect many will now be happy to concede ~ is that spatial and ecological differences are nor only consiuted by Wyo constnusive of wha T shall call scio-ecolagial and potivicnl-exomomic procese. This includes che dificult prospect that such processes are ‘onitiausive of che very standards of socal justice that shay be used to evaluate and modify their oen operation. Ts my foundasional aim eo provide Tale concepeual apparatus t enguireineo the justness of such rations and how the sense of justice in turn gets hiscrically and geographically constcuted. Coincidentally, T also consider this work t be an enquiry into the foundational principles for an adequst historical-geographical materialism in the Marzse edition. “A.number of general themes incerrwine in the chapters that follow. T want here to lay some ofthese ou in advance as guiding threads or sgnports, The Problem of Dialectics | try to develop a dialectical and relational approach to the general topic at hand. The nature of dialectics is often misunderstood and there are in audition, many forms of dialectics that can reasonably elaim our attention. I therefore thought it wise to set out (in chapter 2) some inital principles of dialectics (as I interpret them) as a guide to the theoretical and conceptual practice that follows. To some, of course, the very mention of the word dlalectics sounds unpromising and unduly complicated, though to others, such a5 those working in litrary theory, dialectical formulations are now so ‘commonplace as to be old hat. Resistance to this way of thinking has been :musch stronger inthe socialsciences for obvious reasons {eren laying aside the politcal implications, ic challenges standard applications of statistical methods and mathematical modeling procedures. not so much in terms of actual practices bur in terms of interpreations and meanings). ln tis eegand [find myself siding with literary theory and arguing strongly again chat very large segment of social theory and of the physical, biological, and engineering, sciences thar siss comfortably and often unquestioningly in a posiivse ot ple empiricist mode of thought and work. I would like to persuade my calleagoes in these fields that an understanding of daletics can deepen our understanding of soco-ccalagical processes in all manner of ways, withour Iruroduction 7 eaticey refuting or abandoning findings amived at by other means. Tn prtiuls, I want offer a dialectical way to emphasie relations and oral, fs opposed to isolated causal chains and innumerable fragmented and Sometimes contradictory hypotheses proven tatstcally comect atthe 0.5 per- cent level of significance. Pare of the work of the dilectician i, then, to translate and transform other bodice of knowledge accurnulated by differene structures ofeiquiry and ro show how such tansloxmatons and transbtions tre revealing of new and often intersting insights. There are, however, limits te that process leaving ares of problems and issues for which canslation isha if nc impossle. These are most clearly eviden in dhe way Fundamental understandings are derived concerning foundational concepts sues as space time, and nacure. Since I concentrate forthe most parton these foundational topics, che difference that dilesical argument and praxis makes will be very much in evidence throughout ‘The Problem of Historical Geographical Material ‘While diacstics i satvely weak implanted in the social, physical, biological, and engineering sciences, iis a fariliar mode of thought in some segments ‘of the humanities, becoming particularly powerful with the wave of philosophizing ia literary theory and the pervasive influences of Hegel, Marx, Heidegger, Derrida, and a hos of others The relational dialectics adopt has made headway, for example, in feminist theory for interesting reasons ‘According to Friedman (1995), “cultural narativesof relational positionaity” have permitted feminists to move beyond the confines of what she call "sripss ‘of denial, accusation and confession” chat ret on simple binaries and often "upon essentialist categories (., women/good: men/bed), Within a relational framework, “dents hit with «changing context, dependent upon the point ofreference” so that there are no esences of absolutes. "Wenttes are ud sites that can be understood diffeendly depending on the vantage point of their formation and function.” Istoagly suppor: this way of thinking, But here ry argument also moves gency in contr ow (recalling, pechaps, the powcr of the simple binaries of those evangelical preacher). The reduction of everything to Huxes and flows, and the consequent éemphasis upon the tansioriness of al forms and posiions has its limits. IF ‘everything thats solid is always instanancously melting into ai chen itis very hha vo accomplish anything or even sec ones mind wo do anything, Faved with that difficulty the rempration is strong 1 go back w some simple foundacional beliefs (whether these bea fetishism of the family on ee tight ‘or of something called “resistance” on the lef) and dismiss the proces-based arguments out of hand. believe such a maneuver would be fundamentally ‘wrong, But while T accept the general argumene that process, flux, and flowil 8 Ineraduction should be given a certain ontological priority in understanding the world, T also wane to insist cha eis is precisely the reason why we should pay so much, sore careful attention to what | wll ater call dhe “permanen _us.and shich we also constzuct to help solidify and giv Furthermore, while itis formally truc that everything can be reduced to flows ~ including, as A.N, Whitehead says, Cleopatce’s Needle and the Sphinx — we ae in daily practice surrounded by things, institutions, discourses, and even, states oF mind of such relative permanence and power that it would be foolish tor to acknowledge tho evident qualities, There is belcr, ascetng some sort of “dsolucon of al fixity and permanence” in ce famous "last instance” if, a fr as we human beings are concern thar lst instance { is nowhere insight. The “solid rock” of bistorical-geographical materi | here sed to say tar dialectical argumentation cannot he wnderstood a | of the concre® material conditions of che world in which we find ourselves; |and those concrete conditions are often so sc in literal concrete (at leas in ‘elation to the time and space of human action) chat we must perforce acknowledge their permanence, significance, and powcr. All of this har polccal import. Consides for example, Dewida's couraordinaryfantary in Spetor of Marx in which ivmersion inthe flows ie thought somehow to be radical and revolonary in itself The move chat makes thie posible is to separate “dalectcs" from all tangible sense of historical-geagraphical conditions aswell as fom any raatednes in a tangible and organied pois, Derrida can chen envisage a “New International without status, without ete and without name ... without patsy, without country, ‘without national communiey.” Ths i, as Esgleton (1995: 37) remarks “the ulkimate poststruccuralst fantage an opposition without anything. as distasteflly systemic or draby ‘orthodox’ as an opposition, a dssen beyond all formulable discourse, a promise which would betray itself in the ace of fulfillment, a perperual excited openess to the Mesh who had bercer not let us down by doing anything a determinate as coming,” We need not only to underand but also to cate permanence: organization, institutions, doctrines, programs formalized structures, and the ke ~in onder to change anything in any kind of meaningful or diected way ‘And iis acthispoine hac | pare company with that eave of rational dialectics tht has bocome pute idealism seca far fmer grounding to politics in che concrete historia and geographical conditions in which human action unfold. In this regard, chereore, | Gnd myself wating aginst an emerging ‘cond, grounded ix dialectical and celational waysof thinking, producing what night be clled “anew idealists i which thought and discourse ae believed Co be all chat natce in powering the hisorical geography of socio-exological and polvicsl-cconomic change Inirrducton 9 ‘The Problem of Theorizing here is a great deal of tlk these days about practices of theorizing’ and of “geting the theory right” These are concerns that [share but I hasten to ad that is not always easy to understand what is meant by theorizing and theory Teszands o season chat thee terms ake on very special meaning when [assume a dialetical(telational), historical geographical, and materialist approach to lenowledge and that thc rules of theorizing are here quite diferent from how they might be construed in, say, an analytic or positivist approach, The knowledges and theories produced by such diference means are not wholly incompatible with eich ocher. But nar ate they directly assimilable co exch cxher. The general stance I take i that a dialectical, historieal-geographical and serait theory, becase ideals with toca, paricla ion, and fixity ina certain wa, holds out the prospect of embracing many other forms of theorizing within its frame, sometimes, with only minimal loss 10 the incegrity of the oxginal (though in other instances the losses may be substantial). Tam not concerned to justify that argument here. Bu there is tne line of thoughe that is so fundamental to what follows thac ic is worth broaching in advance. “The insertion of spatial considerations into most forms of social sheorzing {dialectical and noncialectical) often sens out to be profoundly disruptive oF hhow the theory can be specifled and pot to work, Social theoretic meta- narratives (sich as those provided by Marx and Weber) usually concentrate fon processes of temporal change, keeping spatlity constant, If spatialcy typically disrupts received cheory and dominant metanarrative then those who, for whatever reason, want to disrupt them can most easly do so by invoking some sor of spataliry. Tht accounts, I suspect, forthe exraoedinary «upton of spatial meraphors in peststucruralist and postmodernist work (the work of Foucaule being quite explicit onthe point) But here, t00, [find myself a somewhat odd position For while T welcome con the one hand the explosion of interest (agin, much of tin lieray zather than socal theory) in things spatial and a proliferation of texts and arguments thac wrestle with what spaciality might be all about, it has never been my incention to use such a conceptual apparatus to attack mets-theory per se. My concern is, athe, with tying co rebuild Marsian meta-theory in such 2 way ‘8 0 incorporae an understanding of spatio-ternporality (and soco-eologcal iaous) within its fame. This has me weting epeim chose uses of spatclicy and of spatial metaphor whose sole purpose sczins to be to take unceconeilable Ahiferace, inommunieabilvy, particularity, and ineducibleindividualisn and fx then in stone, Tchas never ben my point to argue that spatility makes theory impossible: Tywant a reconstruc theory with space (end the “rcltion co nature”) clearly Integrated within cas Foundational elements. The only way c do that is10 Irsadusion ‘beorine what might be meant by “the production of spece" in particular of, ore generally, “the production of naire.” Such a project isnot withost its dlficulies (s the lengeh and intricacy of some of the argument inthis book ilustrate). But we should and, I vhink, do end up with a very different kind cf andersznding of how theory should be construed and what « "mete theory” should look lke believe i posible, on chs bass, to construct «general theory of dalecical and historical geographical materialism, ‘The Question of Values and the Nature of Justice Situating oneself in the fall lood ofall the Bucs and lows of social change ruler appeal%6 Si potinanent- st of values with WhicR. 6 animarecolecive cae welledirected-socal action suspect. This i not a new thought. Sometime ‘wards the cad ofthe second century, camped along the misty, ague plagued regions of the Danube, the Emperor Marcus Aurcios, tying vainly 0 hold bck the barbarian hordes that threatened the bores andthe permanence of the Roman Empire, wrote in his Meditations (One thing hastens into being, nother hestens out oft, Even while a thing i inthe at of coming into existence, some prt of it has aleeady ceased to be Flue and change ae forever renewing the fabri ofthe universe. Tn such runing ver, where thee is no firs foothold, what isthere foreman wo value among all the many things that ate racing pas him’? I is not hardin these times to empathize with che question. But the question cannot be evaded, not despite but because ofall the manifest insecurities and ‘volatilities inthe political economy of daily life and the parallel preoccupation in radical segments of the humanities and the arts with emphasizing (even hypostasining) the inseabilities offices and floes. Ici in tis realm of values” that conservative and religious thought has its strongest appeal, precisely because the presumption of permanence (in culture) or of ectnal truths (in religion) gives stabilicy to valucs that radical thought finds hard to acknowl ‘edge. Buc meaningful politcal action (and, for that macter, even meaningful analysis) cannot proceed without some embedded notions of value, only a determination 28 to what is ors por importane co analyze intellectually ler alone to struggle for politically Tn some forms of enquiry, of course, the distineion berween “fats” and “values” is held «o be sacrosanct. To permit values ro enter into the domain of scientific objetive enquiry, fr example, i often seen evidence and resslts and render them suspect or useless. In che dalecrical/relational views, the separation of facts and values is impossible to achieve (except by sleight of hhand or within certain strictly limited domains where ie may easonably be held Inareduction V1 ‘that values are of can be held constant). In some areas of science, as we shall se, this dalecicalfrelational view of te inevitable sion of facts and values has undergone a revival of sores, as multiple contestations have atsen over, for ‘cxample, how to interpret quantum theory. of aus” ate = i cam TS wink dees : ata ork an enimer as a ‘orang OF WSeIS CTO RIC AATSH THE read will doubiless notice, Tar example, ie "perpecal rests to considerations of money as a dominane symbol of « proces of valuation chat aes us al, Thad atone point coyed with the idea of taking ll the passages that dest wich money and assembling them ino one chapter. Bus in the end, seemed moce appropriate to le the question of money permeate the various chapets in much che same way that it permeates almost every fae of eacio-eologia,petsonal and collec ie in the wood wwe have now conscactd. The proces of money valuation is, i wanspires, Simultaneously a proces defining space, time, environment, and place and I Shall endeavor t unravel that connection in some deal ‘But money isnot the only way in which the proces of valuation can be understood. The relatively permanent configurations of values around fori gender rigion, nation, cde ideniy, humaniom, and various ideas of tmoraity and justice, indicat the existence of quite different and sometimes antagonistic process of vallation. How these diferent proceses can be teconciled isin ibelf a major topic of enguity (and nora little hemusement, as the Brangelical Pentecostal example of sling “righteous wear” dhrough a “Jesus Christ Centered. Company” ilstates). The povier of money, for ample, can be used to support other process of valation, Buti ean also tundeemine them and come into condlict with them. In what follows such onfcs wil be the ocesonal focus of attention. And if lately converge to the vale “social justice” asa central cancer ts only in pat for personal historical reasons (icallows me to revisit the terrain of my first “Marxist” work, Soria fctice andthe Ci, wzsten more than wo decades 3go}. Talo irl ine that thsi the best terrain of wahing apon which the ant-apiais sruggle can tke ts stand (ao matter whether that sige is weakly reformist 4 in the “Blairiem?” of the British Labour Party or mote revolutionary as ‘implied by the environmental justice movernen’), ‘While, thorefore, i may be tue, as hat old reprobate Lawrence Durrell once femarked, that “life consists of perpetual choosing and the perpetual ‘servation of judgement,” a political movement has to make its choice and12 Iraraduction not reserve its judgment, This was, I believe, the central difcrence bervcen the Evangelical Pencecostals and the globalization conference ~the former had no reservations of judgment whereas finding and expressing such reservations is the name of the gime in many intellectual modes of thought snd practice. All values, lke che Sphinx, will ultimately dissolve and ic is particulary hard ive the swift-flowing currents of change to sete on any particular se of core ‘als for very long, Bue we have no option eacep to articulate values and stick by them if emancipatory change is o be produced. Values inhere in socio spasal procests, furthermore, and the struggle (0 change the focmer is simultaneously a struggle to change che later (and vce vera). And cis precisely ac this point tha: the human imaginary has to be deployed to its fll force in the quest for progressive socio-ccologcal and poitical-economic change. The P ities of Possibility (One of the viruses ofa dialetical/cational approsch is that ic opens up all sorts of possibilcies that might otherwise appear foreclosed. I does so in the firs instance in the realms of thought and discouse and fo cis reason it can be the fount for all manner of Utopian schemes and fantasies (ofthe sore thax Derrida has recendy offered). But I also regan ic important, theoredcally and politically, co root che sense of chose possibilities in the mass of eonstcamis that derive from our embeddedness in nature, space-time, place and 2 particular kind of socio-ecological order (capitals) that regulate the material condi- sions of daily lif, ‘This is no remote or arcane isue, For just a the Evangelical Pentecostal preachers were building apolitical force by appeal to religious conviction to build che cty of God here on earth, 10 we find a vatity of pro-capialst political movements animated by articulation of some sot of Uopian vision, Jturn, for ceumple, to a report in the New York Times (August 23, 1995} on conference on “Cyberspace and the American Dream,” Alvin Toft, author of The Third Wave, was at important presence atthe conference. He argues that a “third wave” information-based revolution is replacing “Second wave industialism and is now in the process of forming a “civilization with its own distinctive world outlook, its own ways of dealing wih time, space, logic, and ‘awalty.” This in sels an interesting theme; but if TofBcr is tight, then the processes and rules producing historicsl-geographical diference are aso presumably undergoing a zvolusionary shift. Now it so happens that Toffler isa widdly read “postindustral” and “Ukopien”thinkec, He is also politically influential: Newt Gingrich, Republican leader of the US House of Representa- tives, has adopted Toffee as one of is “gurus” and has evolved a revolutionary rhetoric in which the dismanding of she inaieutional structures of the regulatory and welfare stats is seen a8 an imperative prclude to the liberation Intreduction 13 cipatory “third wave" forces now supposedly heramed in by the wave” industrial capicalism, The press reporin che New York Fimes continues hy sating cata new coalition of forces (from both lf and ight ofthe political spect) i organizing “to harnes the brightest mind of igh technology and use their collective brainpower to assist Mr Gingrich ashe tries to reshape the nation’s political and economic landscape in preparation forthe information revolution.” And there are many who now believe that an emancipacory revolution in political economy, in social relations, in the explorations of identity, semantic worlds, and aréstic forms is being bera out ofthe capacity tm create a “Virtual” reality in cyberspace. Gingrich wonders, furthermore, if it might be posible to distribute laptop computers to every child in America 4s solution to all socal and economic ills and a coluranist inthe Baleimore ‘Sum argues that the way out of the long-term steuctural unemployment and ‘confinement of human talents in che desolate public housing projects of the cr city is hough access to the entepreacutal posbiliies of the Internet ‘There is more than a hint of an of-criticized and, some would say, quite “vulgar” Marxist view of history in all ofthis: only liberate the contemporary “productive fores” (technologie) fiom ther socio-economic anc political chains {government regulation) and let the libertis of the market ake command, the sfgumen runs, and all will be well withthe world. Much ofthe revohitionary power and widespread appeal ofthe hegemonic pro-capitalist version ofthis Utopian argument derives, I suspect, from the beguiling simplicity of this vulgae Mansist formulation (parcculaly when articulated wich the lasty and conviction of someone like Margaret Thatches or New Gingrich, “The connection bewen this ightwing Utopian” and polite power and pacoe gnc, Ee ite ar fom dominant aunt Coen within the right) ic isa potent pro-captalist weapon with which o goto work seinat a whole array of forces chat would, inthe name of equality, justice, ot just pln political-cconomic and ecological common sei, seck ‘o carb, regulate, and diminish all the manifes excess for which capitalism js jusly infamous. The connection also highlights che dificuly of anti capitalist politics. Unable to deploy is own Utopian vision (though there are jlenty of min-ersions), anc-cpitals polities lacks the powes co animate and tobilae 4 mass movement on a global bavis. Thar was not tue of The Communist Manse, but, a6 | dhink Marx would hiznsel be the frst © appreciate, we canaoc seek the poetry of oar future in the particulas poctry of that past, however appeig it sll may be. And while ic may seem insuling wo include Deesida and Tafler in the same seatence, both provide copia “sons bur dhe lac, n pur y his simplicity, caity and sensing cootedness “in the material of the world, is proving far more effective ax changing it In siew of Manx wellknown antipathy w Utopian thinking ic may seem ‘rings to inclode im in discusion of cis sort. Buc Masx produced a cen14 Intredaction kind of Uropianism dhat he was most anxious to keep sepatate from other varieties. When he wrives in Captalthat “what separates che worst of architects from the bes of bees i tha “ne former erect his structure in imagination before giving ic material form” he opens a creative space for the human imagination to play bath a constractive and 2 ey role, When he writes in the Eighteenth Brumaire that each revolutionary movement has to create its own poctry particularly in those situations where the “content” (the process of ‘evolutionary change) outstrips “te phrase” (the capacity to represent what is happening), then he indicates a esk for the revolutionary imagination tha ic js eosental to fll. This raises the question for all of us what Kind of architete (in the brosdst posible sense ofthat erm) do we collecively want to create forthe soci-ecological world in which we have our being? Not to pose thar question it to evade the most crucial task confronting all forms of human action. Iti with this in enind chat I struggle to find foindasional concep for the human imaginary to contemplate our embeddedness in space, time, nature, and place Thave struggled in what follows to write as clearly a simply as | can often on difficuk and complicated subjects. Bue we can never write (to paraphrase Marx) under historical or geographical conditions of our own making. As the ‘conference on globalization indicated, the proliferating influence of what are loovely called “postscuccuralst” and “postmodernist” ways of thinking and wwrcing makes it particularly hard these days to find anything as mundane as 2 common language for expression, particulaey in academia. Yet the highly specialized and distinctive languages that have been evolved these last 30 years often have something very important ro say. [have cherfore often found myself farced (sometimes with good effect) to take up such languages and cerns, if ‘only to give duc ennsideraton to what are serious arguments worthy of equally serious scrutiny. And in some instances T have found it useful. i within my own text certain specialized languages as privileged modes of expression of particular but important standpoints. Puctly for this reason, 1 decided o devote « whole chapter coche topic of “discourse” in order to clarify my own discursive staceges while ying r0 position the role of the rapidly ng modes of representation in processes of socio-ecological and. L-ecanomic change. In other instances, most particularly in che evelopment of che relational rheary of space ane time in chapter 8; fhad no ‘option except ro engage with metaphysics a fay high level of abstaction Foundational concepts do not come easily and, as Marx commented in one of his many prefaces to Capital the difficulties that arise cannoc easily be ‘rushed aside, This is, he went on to remark: 1 diedeantage I am poweres t overcome, unes tbe by foewarning and forests those readers who aaously sek the truth, There i mo soya road Intraduction 1S to science, and only those who do nor dread thefrguing climb ofissezp pats hve a chance of gaining it lrinous suits. 1 hope that chose who climb the path will fd the surat s illuminating 25 Ido. ‘Not all historical and geographical conditions of existence are inhibiting to the production of new ways of thinking. I want co acknowledge the peculizaly favorable conditions that have allowed my own work o proceed. One of the great privileges of univers if isto setup and co-teach coursesin such away ts to de able to lea fom avarety of very talented people working in diverse fields. I wane to thank G.A. Cohen, Andrew Glyn, Neil Hera, Bill Les, Kirstie McClure, Emily Martin, Erica Schoenberger, Erik Swyngedouw, Katherine Verder, Gavin Willams, and Reds Wolman for proving an oppor tunity for extended dialogue through sueb a format. Iisa similar privilege to ‘work with some extraordinarily talented graduate students who struggle gamely to educate me in matters thae T might otherwise be deeply resitant to. They will doubeless chro up thee hands in ustation ac my ilu wo tzke on board they have sad, but my work has been immeasurably strengthen fons. include here che Oxford contingent of Give Barnet Maarten Hajer, Argyro Loukaki, Andrew Mertfeld, Advian Passmore and Mike Suncrs, and Felicity Called, Lisa Kim Davis and Melissa We Hopkins. Over the years Ihave been able to present my ideas in seminars, mectings, and workshops andl vant othankal of those ~and there were many of them — who on such occasions responded with tough and faie- Iminded questions and criticisms. Some of the materials presented here have alzo been published (in whole or in part) in books and journals and the many ‘citoral comments received have aso been helpfal. Working with Sallie Davies, of the BBC on a series of radio programs abo proved wo be a great leaning. txperience. Among ay close colleagues and friends, some of whom have ar various times locked ar and commented on die work in progiess, I wane to thank Kevin Archer, Patrice Bond, Mike Johos, Vicente Navaro, Ric fee, Bertell Ollman, Erica Schoenberges, Erk Swyngedou, and Dick Walker. 1 ‘most pasiculaiy want to thank Neil Smith fr eecuing the whole project Fem oblivion with his patient encouragemeat when days became very dark and prospects for closure very bleak and John Devey of Blackwell Publishers for his patience, encouragement, and live interest inthe project. These may not he he best of times, but feien and colleagues ofthis caliber make absolutely ‘tain chat it is nos che worst of times eithet. Finally, all my love goes to Haye and Deltina with whom thas been posible to explore ways of thought and feeling hat arcimmeasurably riches than those could ever hope to achieve Johns aumerable| PARTI [a Orientationsgpa oe ana sem oo art 1 Militant Particularism and Global Ambition 1. Local Militaney and the Politics of a Research Project 1.1988, shortly after taking up a poston in Oxford, I became involved in a esearch project concerning the fate of che Rover ear plant in that cy. Oxford, particularly for outsider, i usually imagined a a city of dreaming spires and lniversty grandeur, bur as late as 1973 the ear plant at Cowley in ese Oxford Employed some 27,000 workers, compared eo less than 3,000 inthe employ ‘of the university. The insertion of the Morris Motors ear plant into the tredieval soca lbric of the city cay in the century had had enormous effets ton the poiieal and economic lie of the place, paralleling almost exactiy the three-stage put socialise consciousness Set out in The Communit ‘Menifee. Workers hal selily been massed together over the yeas in and Sound the car plant and its ancillary installations, had become conscious of tac own interests and buileinstiacons (primarily the unions) to defend and promote chose interests. During the 1930s and again in che 1960s and exly 1970s, theca plane was the focus of some ofthe most virulent das struggles et she Farure of the industrial rations in Briain, The workers moverent Sinvkancously created » powecf pital instumene in the fom ofa local Tahout Party tha ultimately assumed continuous contol of ee local coun sfle: 1980. But by 1988 rationaliations and cutbacks had reduced she work foie to azound 10,000; hy 1993 i was down to less chan 5,000 (as opposed £6 the 7,000 or so then inthe employ ofthe unversiy) The duet of total ~Alosute of the car plane was never far avy ‘book on she Coney sory, Te Facer andthe Cit: Te Say ofthe Conley i Workers in Osfird. edie by Teresa layer and myself was published ate 1993. Ic originated in rrearch work conducted in support of a campzign gst closure that began in 1988, when Beth Aetospace (BAe) acquired the We Ga company in a sweetheart privatization deal ftom the Thatcher20. Oriensaione government, Partial closure el rationalization a ehe plant was immediatly fnnounced end the prospect of astecstipping or even toral closure loomed Land values in Oxford were high and BAe, with the property boom in fall flood, acquired a propergy development company specializing in the cteation ‘of business parks (Arlington Securities) in 1989. The fear was that work would be transferred to Longbridge (Birmingham) of, worse still, to 2 greenfield nonunion site in Swindon (where Honda was already involved in co prodection arrangements with Raver) releasing the Oxford land for lucrative redevelopment that would offer almost no prospeets for employment 10 a community of several choussnd people that had evolved over many yeuts £0 serve the car plant. BAe’ subsequent profitable sale of Rover to BMW (while Arlington retained che released land) shows the fears were not groundless ‘An initial meeting to discuss a campaign against closure drew represent tives from many sectors. Is was agreed to set up a research group to provide information oa whae was happening and wha the effects of any moves by BAC ight be on che work force and on the Oxford economy. The Oxford Motor Industey Research Project (OMIRP) was formed and I agreed chair ic Shordy thereafter, che union leadership in the plane withdrew its support for both the campaign and the researc, and most of the Labour members on the city couneil flowed suit, The research was chen left co 4 small group of independent researchers mainly based in the Oxford Polytechnic (now Oxford Brookes University) and Oxford Universe, aided by dissident shop-stewarcs ‘or exworkers from Cowley. For personal reasons Iwas not active is the campaign nor did I engage much with the incial research. I did help co publicize che results and to mobilize resources forthe research project which the union leadership and the majoriey (of the locel Labour Party actively tried to stop ~ they did not wane anything to ‘rock the bout in thet ‘delicate negotiations’ wich BAe over the future of the plant and the site, Foruicously, OMIRP produced a pamphlet, Couley ‘Warks, a the very moment when BAe announced another wave of rationaliza- sions that would cut the work force in half and release half of the land for tedevelopment. The history ofthe plant cogether with the story ofthe struggle to launch a campaign and the dyzamics ofthe subsequent run-down are well deseribed in the book. Teresa Hayce, the coordinator of MIRE, received 2 research fellowship at SePeters Callege in 1989 ea pall ogether a book about the history of Cowley, the failed campaign, and the political problems of mobiliving resistance o the arbitrary actions of corporate capital. The book involved broad-based group. Each contributor produced a chapter (or chapters) on topics with which they were most familiar. Bach chapter was read by others and comments went bade and forth until a final version was arived at. Tagreed, partly for purposes of making the book more attractive o prospective publishers, to bea co-editor ofthe book with Teresa Hayter. This meant that in eddicion Militant Pacculriom and Global Ambition 2 tothe one chapter I co-authored, I spent quite locof time, along with Hayter, editing, commissioning new segments to ensure fll coverage, and generally trying to keep the booke as a whole in view while atending co the part. “The book is a fascinsting document. Ic beings together radically different jtionalties ~ varying from an unnamed shop-steward in the plant, others who had worked there ot who had heen long-term residents of east Oxford, 45 well as academics, planners and independent less. The language differs radically rom chapter to chapter. The activist voice emanating from the plant experience contrasts with the more abstract judgments of the academics, for ‘example, while the perspective from the community reeds differently from the perspective of the production line. In the preface we argued that the hetero- sencity of voices and of sryles was a very particular steength ofthe book. Twas early evident, however, that the many contributors had quite diferent political perspectives and interpretations. Initially, these differences were negotiated through; everyone trod warily through 4 minefield of differences in order 1 get to the cher side with a completed book. The dillicultics arose with the conclusion. [ proposed two conclusions, one by Hayter and one by nyse a that readers might gee a better handlc on the politial differences and be left ra judge for themselves. This was rejected. And so T drafted 2 condlsion based on varius ideas pur forward by several members of che group. “That draft conclusion suczeeded in exploding almost every mine that had been negotnted i the weiting of the book. Macters became extremely tense, difhcul, and somerimes hostile berween Hayter and me, with the group 10 some degree polarized around us, Inthe midst ofthese intense arguments, I recall a lunch in Se Peter's College aeshich Hayter challenged me to define my loyalties. She was very clear abou hers. They lay with the militane shop stewards in che plant, who were not only ‘on and laboring under the most appalling conditions but daily ing co win back contol from leuleship so as vo build a bette basis for socialism. By cones, she saw me as a free-loating ‘Marsiseintlleccual wh ha no particular loyalties co anyone. So where did say loyalties ie? Jowasa stunning question and I have had to think about it a great del since Av the time T recall arguing that while loysley to those still employed in che Sphanc was important, cheze were many more people in east Oxford wha had een aid off or who had no prospects for employment (for example, alienated ‘anifuiscontenred young people some of whom had aken to joy-rcing beinging. “Sfiyinaliarion and police oppresion for the whole community in their wake) deserved equal time All slong; I noted, Hayter had treated my concetns he politics of communi 252 parallel force tothe politics of the workplace seépticism, I further thought that some consideration should be given co Aer of socialism in Oxford under conditions in which che working-class (etic dat had been buil around the plane were pialy weakening and22 Orientations ven threatened with elimination, This mean the search for some broader Collision of forces both to support the workers in the plant and to perpemate the socialise cause, I also thought it would be disloyal not to put a critical dliganes between us and what had happened in order to becer understand why the campaign had failed wo take off. Hayter refused to countenance anything, thac sounded critical ofthe strategy of the campaign and likewise rejected any perspective thar did not accepe ae its basis the eitcal struggle for power oF the shop-foor ofthe plant. ual sorts of ather issues divided us. Deteriorating work conditions in the plant, for example, made ic hard to argue unequivocally for the long-term. preservation of whae were in effec “shitjobs,” even though ie was plainly Emperative to defend such jobs in the short-run because there were no reason able alternatives. The isue here was not to subordinate short-verm actions c© Jong-teem pipe dreams, but to point out how dificult itis to move on a long: teem trajectory when short-term exigencies demand something quite differ tent. Twas also concerned about the incredible overcapacity in the automobile industry in Britain as well a in Furope in general. Something was going to have to give somewhere and some way had co be found to protect workers interests in general withous filling into the reactionary polities of the “new realism” then paralyzing official union politics. Bue across what space should, thac generality be calculated? Britain? Enrope? The world? | found myself srguing for at last a Eutopean-wide perspective on adjustments in automobile production eapaciry, but found it hard co justify stopping at that scale when pressed. There were also important ecological issues to be considered deriving hor only fom the plant itself (che paint shop was.a notorious pollution source) br also from the natare of the product. Making Rover cars for the ultra rich and s0 contributing to ecological degradation hardly seemed a worthy long term socialist objective. The ecological issue ought not to be ducked, I felt, even though it wis plain that che bourgeois north ‘Would likely use it to get tid of the car plant altogether if giv The problem of time-horizon and dass interests needed co be explicitly debared rather than busied, Furchermore, while Twould in no way defend the appalling behavior of BAc, I did think irrelevant to point out thae the company had lost about one-third of is stockmarket value in the fst few months of 1992 and that its hopes for a killing on the property market had bees seriously aninished inthe property crash of 1990. This posed questions of new forms ‘of public or community control over corporate actviy (such as BACs carn € property speculation as an alternative to production) chat would nor repeat the bitte history of nationalization (uch as the disastrous rationalizatons and reordering of job stnuccares already suffered by Rover, when it was Brits Leyland in the 19703) 1 fel it would be disloyal to the conception of socialism not co eae about allo these issues in. the conclusion. Not, {hasten to add, with the idea that the chance. Lilian Paricularion and Global Ambivion 23 hey could be resolved, but because they opened eran of dscunsion implicit jn the imatrials assembled in the book, Such a conclusion would keep options oper and help readers consider active choices acros abroad terrain of posibi- lis while paying proper attention to the complexes and dificules. But Hayer fl, ever shough she paralyagred on the longterm significance of sch ideas, hat dicsing them would dilate che immediate struggle co keep jobs in Cowicy and prevent their ander to a greenfield nonunion stein Swindon. The isues T wanted to rise could be atcended to, she held, only ven the work force and the progessive stewards had regsined thee strength nd power in the workphce. Twas operating, i became plain, at diferent level and with different kinds of abstraction, Buc the impetus forthe campaiga, dhe research, and the book {id not come from me. It arose out of the extordinay strength and power of wadition of union ailcancy emanating fom th plane. This radtion had is own version of intenatonalism and presumptions to universal wuth, tkbough 2 ease could be made shat it eapeure and osificaion by a racer tuaarow Trost rhetoric was « much a part ofthe problem as the more farudamental confit betwesn Hayeees and my perspective, But it would be swrongto depict the argument in sectarian temas, For the issue ofa purely plant- hnased versus a more-encompassing politics was always there. 1 could not ahandon my loyalty to che belief that the polities of a supposedly unproblem- atic eceasion ourwards from the plant of prospective model ofa total social transformation is fundamentally awed. The view tha what is right and good fiom the standpoint ofthe matantshop stewards a Cowley sight and good forthe city and by extension, fr society a large is far too simplistic. Ozer lejels and kind of abstraction have vo be deployed if socialism isto break out of ts local bonds and become a viable alternative to capitalism as « working Inde’ of production and socal relations. But there is something equally Foblctbatc about imposing a pais guided by abstractions upon peopie who have gen of thei ives and labor over many yeas in a particular way ina patel place. So‘what evel and what kinds of abstraction should be deployed? And what ight it mean to be loyal to abstractions rather than to actual people? Beneath ‘quesons lic others, What is it that constitutes 4 privleged cima 1 7 Wiowledge and how can ve judge, understand, sjudicte, and pethaps 4 Sltioran tough diferent knowledges constructed at very diferent leeks of | Misetcion under radically diferenc material conditions? Epere questions thar preoocupicl Rayrmonel Willams, exopting frequently i ork, though, for reasons that will shortly become apparent, they are188 The Nase of Environment char they were and continue tobe somehow “loser vo rane” chan we are (eve Re wn come: fs inc dis rap), Faced with the ecological vlecrabilty a cine with such “proximity to nature," indigenous groups cam cree ons bon thei pracsices ard thet views of nature with staring apie deere emons even when aimed with all kinds of cultural waditons and ‘bolic esues tha indicate deep espest fo the pay i ats ey acne in extensive ccosystemic transformacons that undermine “ei Sieraressarnue witha given mode of production, The Chinese may have sregealiy senidve rations of Tao, Buddism, and Conficianiom Haas ofthoughe which have payed an important roe ia promoing an SSelogeal conscousnes?’ in the vet) but che historical geography of deaee ion land degradation, iver erosion, and looding in China contains are environmental events which would be regarded as catastrophes by se jens day rtandards. Archeological evidence likewise sugges that te fe: Be hucrng goups uote many ofthe prey to exineson while Ge oa Be Up ness ope ofthe most far-reaching sets of eolgialancfosmason cy ied, lowing very small group f0 exercise immense xsystemic influnce (Saves, 1956) MT pin her i not to argue tha cere is nothing ew under dhe sun shane cclogicaldiscurbance generated by human zcvtie, but tases sen cecaly new and unduly sesh given the unprecedented rapidy meer of contemporary scio-colgical ansformations. Bur histori! apogranialenquites of his ort alo pin pempecive those dams weil BEOBraP yaonse ecologists that once upon a tne “people everywher: kre Haare Pre harmony with dhe natual workd” (Goldsmith 1992: xi) and ae math skepticism Bookchin (1990a: 97) equal dubious cain that" see ealfguciene community, visbiydepetident on i environment for aang of hf, would gain a new respect fr the organi intsttlaionships thats ‘ich concerporary“eclogicaly conscious aa ser eneion to what indigenous groups #47 without looking at what a a ie cannon opel, foc example, thac native-American proties ae eelgialy peso to ous om saremsnt such as those of ane Stands Bear that afte soil and the sil sof ws, We love the birds and she bess that re the same water a8 ve did and read We: Belcvng s, there was in out hear 2 “i ving, growing things. (Cited in Boot Weare prew with us on this sil Uey dr fhe same ae. We are all one in mca reat peace anda welling kinds foe {nd Jacob, 1990: 27) “The inference of “beter and more harmonious celogical practices” Frm #1 rae teat this sort would require bliin either some external psi yuan sarrheure evalogially “ight” outcomes, oc an extraordinary omniscience it ‘he Dialects of Sacal ene Emivenmental Change 189 Stel ped yl ane endl ose Te feb dinette cena oe Solna p ity and input-output ratios” (Burzet, 1982: 320). All their share of ecologically based difficulties and, as Buzer rior to our own just because such groups possess discourses . ed te cg ep geek ee pore ae er argument contra Benton (1989; 1992) thar the thesis of “mastery ove : Seen aeermame per tes iret cr aly esata PoUSAnG aie Sac octet tg a See kplan mem vy ~ including literary or artistic) project a project about nature, environment, ad cosy and vie wera, Sach» propose : 2 propostion sbould nt ste, be wb fe tse weeng inthe hired oneal wan neo, Woe ‘argued, after all, that we can discover who and what we are ‘our cis calc) ely though tosfeming the Wodd sod and in Bi nc Be dei fc and lpg hore of al ‘tr ihat dileaal evcatonary norement ne A190. The Narre of Ensivonment IIL. Towards an Evolutionary View tat etch oe nie! ngs en cel re te Tego of Un my tc sn a =e y He (90 Tat ee eee have aien om the socal theory side whence a biological bass Pas a ee dh wy vl Deon Fie el oe nm ema en Ment oe aco merci =o a a he pe see hl 8 ref ahas ider did noc mater raf they bad v0 be consiued a something ‘ec ga Frama penne i tric hmeer ngs sendin et ned na og i gel nace ist Since Fates rel he rt Te np seme 0 beak JH iat con rd thought about how 10 1. Competon and the egg for ete: (he poducon of esky sa lomo) 2. Alapason and ves af dvesis). 3. Coloration, cooperation, 4. rea seansformations (the production of nature). rion into environmental niches (ehe production and mutual aid (the production of social nna cago be an aly exe si as eral eotiee TR te tl prcensand hey hen thy ge ha CO i spinon tai a a ue comp rote eh so elem -cannm gn ee easton 2 Ea toa calaaon on evi Thi isan eclent example ofthat abana ee of comertng intra lains among moments nto CS in a ae ange without noticing it Bt fom ladon pit of want 40 teat these 261 provesses and thereby to insist chats ‘The Dialers of Socal and Pasironmental Change 191 view competition can jst a3 eatly be seen as a form of cooperation. The cxample of tetitoraliy examined in caper 7, ivan interesting case in point. Bur is ic not also a fundamental tence ofthe liberal theory of capitalism that rampant competion between individuals palace collaborative socal eect called “socien?” Adaptation and diversification of species and activites into special niches is also a form of both competion and collaboration and the effect isto transform environments in ways that may make the ler mote sacher than les diverse. Species may diversify futher creating mote diversified ches. The production of a mote diversified nacure in turn produces greater diversi of species Te caample ofthe iberal dor of capil, however wedldyimpaneed i isin practice and howe ideological it content, can be pressed farther into service here to alert us co something ee important For within tat theory its ocsimply competition that matters, but the paiclse endeaf competition, the rules and regulations thar ensue Ut only one sot of competition ~ hat within fel functioning markets respecting propery rights and freedom of contract ~ vil rewl From this perspective seems as ifthe nora causal ordering plied inwriog ps roel Kee ol tou tai ad coopenive sructures of society (oweter epered) that competition andthe srg for existence canbe orchestrated todo it work. Bur the pete hess ‘otto change the causal ordsing an thereby vo make it sec aif society (the ‘mode of cooperation) has in some way contained nature (competition, adaptar too, and environmental change), Ics much more appropriate to suggest that competition is always reguleed in imporant ways by dhe effects internalized within it of cooperation, adapeation, and cxvitonmental transformations. Thrkrgin he erm als us ete how apart indo smerral transformation (such as the great water projcs ofthe US wes) ffs tate mode of canyon (wie secs ls been Ya) ed the mode of collabomation/sdaptaton. Captalisic competition consequently ‘nan something quite different in the agribusiness sector in California compaced 0,54, dairy producers in Wisconsin, becaute the for of environmental ‘ransfermation have been so radically diferent inthe wo places 2 will not elaborate much further on this idea, buc it should be apparenc thar there are different modes of compesition, adaptation, cooperation, and ¢avizoamental transformation. Given the sslational dialectical theory advanc- din chapters 2-4, itshould also be pln that cic facet ofthe overall process jetenaizes a great dal of heterogeneity within ivelé Such heterogeneity a source of contradiction, tension, and confi, sparking iaensesropgles for snbity hegemony, and control. A mode of production, in Mares vense, can thea be construed a a particular regulated uy ofthese clifeene modalities, _ The transition ffom one mode of production ental ansformatons in all ‘modalities in relation co each other, including, of course, che nacure of ature produced. : : -192. The Nassre of Environment ‘hae tam proposing here isa way of depicting the Fundamental physic) and bogie conditions and process chat work ough alloc cultural rane projets eo ere a angie historical geography and todo) such Say as x to reader those physical and biologi clemens: 0 @ banal and pone background (© human bsorcal geography. But sy PucPOs also eeu dions and procesacs i such a way asco understand dhe outils for collective human activity in negating ‘ough these roar clemens to genet significantly divers outcomes of €¢*9% that a Marxisc theory of histo raphical development envisages: Given, for example, dhe four ‘moments n the biologieal evolutionary Pte then rants of any sre (most parca de human Peis) ‘can work with the oo competion, adaption, cooperation, and evionmenra molt arn ery of ways to produce radically different urnmes (suc st tht different mods of production). "No natura laws cn 9S done sway ae Mane wrote in eter Kagem in 1868, but “what can chang," eee derene ccumstnes, ic only che form in whic thes bes seer Whar we have vo pay attention co, terns is the parc 0 caer organisms (agin, of any sort) work with thes quite difetent POSE Haan ores inecactve was. Are do that requires that somehow vi ef break ewe “scien” and “avare” aust be erode, rendered porous, and evennully cisolved ey Tungunge her ishighy abstract and genera f donot Bind cba cont this syle oF thinking into motion, co differeniate i Further. 19

"The elope eis of vocalist "product she help, snc i | foes Manna wo r-ennine he poblemas of aenaon Ge, for cumple Msatos, 1970, Cllman, 1376) Unde eps, pees Proper, Cas slong, wage labor, and he shnns of racket Sechange ee onl tient om any tnsous and immediate cont xe intone age tented ad pul sense achevale under cls oven ions ef a) fom nar” wells oar other hunan beng. Bat ine eso tect the “hat nature his fad wih which he tus. retain i car ntechange if hels note dic” The bath of that bod heath, To espoct fundamental rou nature isto respect ourselves, To engage wth and eransform S -fstwe through work is wo transform oursches. This forms one side of Mars Eg hos. Bur erangement eum immediaee sensuous engagement with nature198 The Nature of Environment i-an ewensal moment in consciousness formation, le therefore ie. 2 955 th towards | pation and self realization (cf Ingold, 1986, cud shor) i ance is eo Lei icy and the construction of meancipatoey forms of knowles ¥ is rom, How to recuperate an upalienated relation (o lienated forms of social relations) in the face of 2 ogee, aor an eh Mina and logs permits reflex {uch as science) consciousness alienates ratuse (as well as unl contemporary divisions of becomes part of & common proj Pa byl se nS yw es Sense the quality of Bie elo Fecobk ag of cer " Eg ee a nl em Tn inc Siete a cn ae we Sam on cn ae ane Gens) toa precopiaist and communitarian worl of nonscen” — reo ended, oranizaionel icine techie Cringe pe 7 sar end in self fr chat i to est alienation asthe end point the goa. the alzenation from natusc (as well as from others) ‘that modern-day capi of any ccs projec The tis ins fetta wel a mexingll play (making ue fr example “crores of a” ave not ‘bought by “Tos of character”) becomes a censtal nn through which the lybor movement cary is image in bis mind, 2s he did, everywhere, never dy paning but he dosed his eee asa? it agai. his only landscape, Buc it ‘ra iferne co stand and look atthe reaiy Twas noc less beau every deal Fike land came up wit its old exciermen. But ic was nor stil, as he image fad been. Te was no longer «landscape oc a view, but valley that penple were Using Fle elie ashe watched, what bad happened in going away. The valley SS Lanchcap had bees taken, but is wor Forgotten, The Vicor ees beauty the ‘taint x place where he works ac has fiends. Faraway, closing hiseyes be Jad boan seeing cis wale, but a6 vstor srs it asthe guide book sees it his ‘alleys whi he a lived more than Bal his life, Border Coney, p. 75) “This distinction beeween a “tourist guze” and lived lives in place is vital to Williams, Lived lives and dhe sense of value that attaches thereto are embedded in an environment actively molded and achieved through work, play, and « wide array of cultural practices. Theze isa deep continuity here between the Covironmental ambience of Border Country and the mote explicit environ tnontal history of People of be Black Mountains Only atthe end of che former hovel can Matchew/Will come together, perhaps co reconcile the different Soucrure of feeling that atise through the mind that assert itself walking on the mountain and the knowledge achieved through the “polystyrene models and theie theoretical equivalents" ew seen lite the end of xe: Not going back, but thefesing of nile ending. For the dinance i) measured, and hat is what mavers. By messuing the Aiscance, we come home. (Border County p. 354) Agia and again, this same duality erapes in Willams’ novels. The bale between diffrent leds of abstractions, berween distinctively understood parcels of places and the necessary abstractions required to ake thos Understandings inco a wider realm, the right o cransform mica particular igm ino something more substantial onthe wort sage of capitalism ~ all of these cements become central lines oF contradiction and tension that power the storyline ofthe novels: Loar taenserucallyom such ensions. And in tir novel we gota far profounder exploration of political dilesmas chan comes fron any ofthe cheoretical Wook. ‘VI. A Question of Loyalties the sory of Loyalties begins with 2 meeting in 1936 berween Welsh miner and Cambridge University students on a farmstead in Weles to wotk ott ‘Militant Pansicularism and Global Ambition 35 ‘common means fight fascism in Spain. Out ofthat mecting comes a brie passionate liaison becween a Welsh girl, Nesta, who has scriking artistic lens, and Norman, a young Cambridge student ffom an upper-las background. ‘The question oftheir distinctive places, both maveially and in the structure of sociery, is raised immediately. She maintains thatthe place ~ Denyeapel ~ bas made her what she is; he graciously concedes that it must therefore be 2 ood place bur then urges her not to ge stuck init. She remains forthe rest fof her life there ~ the wornan enubedded inthe particular place that has both rurtured hee and which she continues to nureaze— while he the man, reruns to a moze cosmopolitan, incerationalit, and seemingly roodess world of internacional political inigue and scientific enquiry. Though the two never calkeagain ater ther beef inal encounters, the novel turns on the continuance of te tension between them primarily inthe figure of Gwyn, the son born fut of wedlock beeween ewo class and gender positions the one closely place- bound and the other ranging more widely across space — within a supposedly common politics defined largely through the Communist party. Gwyn, like Matthew Price in Border Country ieraalies the tension: raised in that place where Nesta dwells, he eventually gocs to Cambridge to study, in part atthe insinence of Norman’ sister who performs a crucial link role nurturing a familial connection to Gwyn that Norman broadly ignores, “The place-bound politics arising our of the ‘of clas slidarities and gender relations in Wales in radically different from the more abstract ‘conceptions held by academics and party leaders. The difference is not, it should be noted, berween parochialism and universalism, The mines, Bert, who ‘kimately marries Gwynis mother and becomes Gwyts real father, fights in Spain alongside other workers and stadents. When the xudent, who was close ‘ip’ Norman ae Cambridge, is killed in action, Bert acquires his binoculars (a sole tran of vison) only om his dated hand them on 9 Guy Bats also fights in World War II (billed as “the ultima war against fascism), _ i jffers a hideous injry in Normandy thar permanency disfigures his face | 20bae forever carries che marks of his intemasionalise commitments on his cl fhe, dels in alien wor an fashions fs the pany alto dhe cxae intra dif wy. Pel fn Burgess Maclean, Dhilby, and Blanc he Canbrige group who Soret gets during te 19369, Norman, an acomplibed sien, ed in posi on lense nonlede to the Contant juve’ Yenoguon, perpen mental pare ecg Te anges ever weer to suse yee cout in one ot fie ee, aco wa word whe consece mig dare Sofas ans ds anes conn Norn Ba ins deed ane powell eiceed spins these BG) fom dcr dy — “ny wed wr we kao now ve gt do36 Oviensuions by ourselves.” Gwyn echoes this judgment Norman and hisillewere the very ‘worse “because they involved in cheie hecrayal what should have beet the ilternative: their own working class party, their socialism.” "Buc Gwent’ final angry confrontation with Norman (sce below) is paralleled by an extzordinary outburst directed against Guya by his mocher Nesta The ‘occasion arses when she reveals to him two sketch portraits she has hidden tay ~ one ofthe young Norman, fair-haired and ethereal ad che other of rnow-decessed Bert, drawn afer his return from the war, a portrait that “was terrible beyond any likeness, az if the aleeady damaged face was still being broken and pulled spare.” Gwyn is deeply moved bur can only say how “incensely beaucful” the later portrait iss She was saring a him angry. Her face snd body seemed wise with sen fai. He was bewildered because he had never tea her in even ordinary anges ‘Shc had heen always so contained and quiet ad pleasant, slays younges than hor age elf posseed and slightly withdrawn 1s nos boot” se screamed, ina cece high vice, Mam, please I ida’ mean hat” Gun struggled ty “Do you understand nothing?” che seemed. "Do you know nothing? ave you lesmed necking?” “Mam, ll] mease—" “cis mor beatfal” she cred again, “Kes ugly. fs destroying! Le’ human flesh broken and pulp” Yes: Yes in him. Bus the rah, chet you saw the truth =” “Ideugy ts ugl! se creamed now pastall control. (Lestien pp- 347-8) isin dh of esi, of uc offing” as Willams pus, seal The problem hee ox only the el fasten at which he id ew faci plc as consul bat ofthe very flee Murs of ing tha can ata wo hoe difereat evels of absicion, Gey tas segited the distance olook upon te ora of Berta «won of a ree dabgot beau precely eee can capt and erent thea Sy aitaement ih an amen uth But fr Neti oe che wp Seton dar mater, but being opted be set pin of ha Rene foment and denen ie dealer pov by the seach fr any kind of et distance hen cone ot dey ec ler Coun, for example, Mathew Sake to ainbing the nearby moan, de Ree, nd admiring he vow ftom cahighEsolene the pal wis he ad en aed, he nw i was aot only a place, bur people, yet fiom here ie was as if no one lived chee, Tho one hd ver ved there arly init lle, is asa memory of hms "The mountain bad this pone, to abracc and to dar nd Be ould not say here: he ms go back down wire bei Mitiant Partcalrim and Global Ambition 32 ‘And th (On the way dovn the suapes faded and the ordinary identities reared. The voice in his mind faded and the osdinary voice came back. Like old Blakely asking digging his sick inthe er. What will you be reading, Wil? Books, it? [No better not. History, st. Hiseory fiom the Kestrel, where you st and watch memory move acoss the wide valley. That was the sense ofits ro watch, ¢2 incerpet co uy and ger clear. Only the wine narrowing the eyes, and so mach living in you, deciding waat you will se and how you will seit Never above, watching. You'll find avhat you're watching is yourself. (Bander Country, pp 291-3) Buc itis not only the devel of abstraction at which different representations ‘operate thats vital here. Theres something else going on in these interchanges that detives from the kind of abstraction achievable given different ways of scquiting knowledge of the world. There is a polarization in Wiliams’ tugument. Ingold (1993: 41), in a rather different context, describes the oppo tion as that Berween a vision of the world asa sphere which encompasses us ‘or asa globe upon which we can gaze: the eieot init ony awe apeson a ie foal, itis one that rests on an altogether different mede of apprehension — onc based. onan ee, pps pgmone th cmon edn wo trike gael tame ie taherhan one dence Sonor Geral os wl pr ne al eps the wd pe sinless re and understanding. . ener > Rh Bere and Nests scem always tobe reaching, out from thet centered ples - Danycapel ~ whereas Norman always tiesto understand the world in “whore derahed way en romeco his pli commitments. Gwyn incemalizes _Aiih-penpectves and is given with conflicting daoughs and feelings. Yet, ims seems ro he saying, we eannat do without both kind af abstraction pire dhan we can do without the conflicting modes of wpe esuaily atch 10 them, Willits ties to deine + comple leon vents son te iki sd wa SHEA that opposition he fols wove comtarabl, We should, he again and BB nits never ng the bete ugliness othe cas fied epeione i oppressed, We shonld not esteticie or theorize thase lived telcos Bi essicace as fle pains and pasions. To do so isto diminish or evento Jam anger against injustice and exploitation that powers so much of rsd change The fmlic view hat “th is beng” fe Jeedescrees to be rested with the wrath chat Nesta mets out acion that38 Oriemasions “The question of loys is defined, then, both by the lee! and kind of abstraction through which political questions are formulated. As a affetive sind canotive political foce, loyalties aways atcach ro certain definite structures of feling. The richest characters in all of William novels ae precisely chose ‘ho internalize different and cooflcting loyalties co radially differen struc tures of feling-~ Gwyn in Layelies or Matthew Price in Barder Conary and ‘Owen Price in Seaond Generation, And its no accident that Williams turns to the novel t explore the tensions. The Brechin straepy is everywhere fpparent and suggests not only tht the tensions can never bereaved buc that ‘Weshould never expect hem to beso, By perpetally keeping them open, We leecp open a primary resource forthe ative thinking and practices necessary to achieve progressive social change. This is telling formulation ofa problem that many mast recognize. recog. rie it not only as someone who, like Wiliams, weat from an English state School wa a Cambridge education, but aso more immediacly inthe contested palit ofthe Cowley projec. Where dd in loyalties lie? Williams’ warnings re sahiazy. The possiblity of betrayal looms, in our head as well ss ia our tttions, as we move fom one evel of abstraction or ftom one kind of epistemol- gy wo another. The dissident shop-tewards in the Cowley car plant probably Sed uakindly words about me of exaciy the sore that Bert said of “the dass Tunaways” in Loyd. Interestingly, Hayter inserted into the conclsion dhe very Strong words of a shop-stewaid in. che plant, “Betrayal is @ process, not ah indivedoal ace, and it is noc always conscious.” While the comment was not directed at mg, i could well have been in che light of our discussions. ‘But beeayal is « complex as well as bitter term. Let me go back to the fictional account in Lopate: (pp. 317-19). Hiere is how Normaris close associate defends him to Gwyn: “There ate genuine see of herayal of groups co which one belong. But you have only to look a the shifts of alizace and hos, both dhe international ‘hill an within Uhem the complex alles and hosts of cases, vo know how dynamie cis definable quanity becomes. Thre are titre within a cass toa nation, and with 3 nation to 4 dass. Peopl who live in simes when these Ioyalis ate sable are more fortune than we were” Nor ony in times. In places” Gyn sad. In any case, Norman was involved in siensfic research that had a complete diffrent domain of reference. This entailed: 4: dynamic coe within a highly specie eld, fe was vial to prevent thuongh ierbalanc, reaching that exeepsonelly dangerous stage in which, by ‘own logit passed beyond nations and classes and beyond al he loyalis that ny of ts had knowa, Excep, perhaps inthe ead, simple loyalty tothe home species. Militant Pariculriom and Global Ambition 39 [Nothing of uch moment was involved in the Cowley case ofcourse. Although there is one minor twist at the end of Loyaieshac would make the connection, ‘Nocman, allowed to retze without disgrace, has bought in a wood to save it from developmen. Inthe face of Gwya’s accusation of cass betrayal of “the rmoralty of shared exiseence” char underlies the mlitane partcularism of ‘community like Danyeapel, Norman argues: You abuse what you call my cas but whar you are realy abusing is knowledge and reason, By the way the society, cis ete, wich ws, that ideas are generated, Soitar been with toalgn: at once the good ideas and the rors. Yer we have bun eo core then, and this all hat can be dane I reason and in con soeace our duty now is ot something called socialism, isto cooserving ard faving che cath. Yer thing signiicant for chert generated «mong whae You ‘all your fellow councraen. Inded, thats, precy, their depevatan. Te ie aso thei inadequacy, and then what are yo asking of me. Thar I should be loyal 10 ignorance, £0 shorsightednes, to prejuic, beease these eas in my flow euntrynen? That I ahold stay il and connive inthe destruction of thecarth because my fllow countrymen ae aking parc in ie And tha I should do this Ieee of some tational sup, that T am bound ta inherit 2 common inadequacy, + common ignorance, becase its bearers speak the sme vongue, inhabit the same draenei? What oral, ely, do you peopse in cha? Goya’ tespon p enough ‘Wat you thought about communism, that you now think about natuce 20 ‘rove than a projection of what suited you. The fit that for other each belict {Ssubotanil merely enabled ye to deceive them, (yas, p. 364) "The argument in Loyaie is no, of course resolved. And I think Willams? fosnt co ins ehat ie can never be. Loyalescomurctel atone seal in one {ict and in terms of a particular scructue of feeling, cannot easily be carried © qver without transformation or translation into the kinds of loyalties required il eclen»vle moenen ce chews on gor Bat in he cof andacion someting, importane gets lst leaving behind a bier “Sida of always untealved tension, " VIL, Loyaltics, Identities, and Political Commitments ag thiseads ro one uncomfortable political fetons Let me depict thee starke, The socials cause in Brin has alas been powered particlcsms ofthe sor thas Willams described in Wales ad L40 Orienstons ack in Appalachia (Fisher, 1993) document the point bilan within che United Stites. But those militant particulars ~ even when they can be brought together into @ ational movement ~ as they have been ar various Boreal moments by dhe Labour Party in Briain = ate in some sens, rofoundly conserraive because they rest on the perpetuation of pactoms o etd rations and ern solaris ~ loyalties —achioed wader ace tein kid of oppressive and uncaring industrial order. While ownership may “hange (dough nationalization, for example), the mines and assembly lines Snasttekept ging for dese ace the mate bases forthe way of social lating Jind mechanisms oF els solidarity embedded in parccular places and com runtdes, Socialis pois acquires is conservative edge cau it cannot easy be abou the radia tasformation and overtheow of old modes of working and living. ms in he fist instance be bout keeping the eal mines open nd the asembly lines moving at any cos (wtnes the tangles of industrial policy of successive British Labour governmens in the 1960s and 19703, Should dhe struggle at Cowley be to keep the increasingly oppressive jobs in the ear plane going, ox ro seck our different, betts healthier, more satiying jobs in some quite diferent and more ecologically sensitive stem of pox tion? Ata time of weakness and no altesnasves, che Cowley sage necessarily focused on the former objective but J had the distinc impression. that even in the long-run and under the best of circumstances it would always be hus for those working on the shopflon, fr these most strongly imbued with roltan particulars associated wich working inthe plant “Theres another way of putting chi, Can the poi and soca ide forged under oppresive instal order of certain sore operating acein Fic aiccelgpe ordi wansounton otha xe? The netic Enower I shll profi sn” (and agin I think good del of evidence can be smanhaled to support tat concson)- that iss, then perpetvation of those political identities and loyalties requires perpetuation ofthe oppressive condi- ons that gave rise co them, Workingrchss movements may then se © perpetuate oF retum wo the condionscofappeesion that spawnes them, in mach tic same way thar chose women who have acquired their seve of self under Conditions of male violence retura again and again to living with vilent men "Thar parallel i instructive her. Ici as many feminists have argucd and snany women have shown, powble to break the patra, to come out ofthe ‘Ecpendeney. Working class movements can similaly retain a revolutionary impulse while elcng on new poliieal iden stvorking and Living, Buti along hard proces that aceds aloe of area work, Williams recognizes this dificult explicidy in his discusion of ‘ccologial ive Ie sno use simply saying co South Wales aninery chat all around them is 29 cclugical dissster. They alceady know. They ive init. They have lived in ior iesunder transformed condition: teases Militans Perticulerion and Global Ambition 41 generations They carry ie with them in dei ang... Buryou eannot just say ‘peopl who hare commited theirlie and thes comune cee kines ‘of production dat this hae ll got to be changed. You can't jus ys cnme out of the harmful induseizs, come out of the dangerous induswias, let us do omething beter. Everything wl have to be done by negoiaton, by equicable negotiation, and ic wil have to be taken steadily along, the way. (Willams, 19892: 220), “The worry athe end ofthat road of negotiation, tha socialise parties and men wl only succed in undermining the sacl and poll denis {bd loyalties chat provide the seed-bd of ther own suppor agin, quit abit of evidence can be marshalled for tha propoiin in wexein Burope since Would War I), Socialism, ic could be argued is always about the negaion of che miter condivons of is own politica idensiy” Bu it so happens that capitals ha foretoly aena pach hee last 20 yeas towards the elimina tion of many of che miltane parcularsme thac hve traconaly grounded Soci polities ~ she mines have closed, the assembly lines cutback or shut lowe che shipyards tured sen, Wechen che take the posikion that Hayter voice o me~ thatthe fire ofrocialam in Oxford depended on the outcome fa agg co get mas employment in car production back into Cowley (a tiew T onl not accepe) orcs we have to seuch for ew combinations of both old and new forms of militant partculecism co ground a rather ferent rerion of cialis polis. se no opion excep (o ake the ater pth, bow ‘er difcale and problematic i ray be. Ths doesnot entail thesbandon- ment of class polite for thore ofthe “new soci movement,” but the ‘Stlration of fren forms of aliancs tac can reconstitute and renew cass pols. Put popmasialy, class poitcs in Osfor could survive che coxa ‘Sone af the Cowley plan. but only fic ecures anew basis "Thc is ill another dimension toll this, whl ha odo withthe question af atl se and temporal horizon, With spect othe fort, Nel Sith £1992: 72-3) has recently remarked how we haye done a yery bad job of Jerning to negate between and ink serous diferent spatial salen of soca theoaing and pla action, Hl emphasizes what sear acetal confsion ‘nantemporarycommrctons of socialism aing out of “an extensive silence the question of sale se henry of eorphialwale— more orci the theo ofthe pron Bigeowaphica wale is eros undrcevcoped. In ey here rn vse eal grogrphicl sas, no omer an ii matt oe. And pes ul pars inourvholeppaphial corto of mati i 4 he bral eereion of Tinasen Squat 4 lol vet, 4 regia © Bs il ee, ast an iemetnnal eve’ We mh easnaby sure 2 all fi, which immed ears theconluson ta oil ‘land conse womne sort nese Heracial pace rather hana42. Onieneations nostic, How do we cstcallyconcsve of these various nested scales, how do we arbieaze and transhee between hem? Capitalism a a social system has managed not only to negodate bur ofen 19 actively manipulate such dilemmas of sale in its forms of class struggle, This tas been particularly true of ies penchant for achieving uneven sectoral and srographial development so 2s to force a divisive competitiveness between ples defined at different scales But where does “plac” begin and end? And [there «seal beyond which “militant parculatsa” becomes imposible to found let alone sustain? The problem for soils pols isto find ways to spnwer such questions, notin any final sense, but pecs ehrough defining Thodes of communication and translation between diferent kinds and levels of abstraction VII. On Conclusions I conceded that Hayter write the conclsion to The Facor and the Cty. The bool afterall was largely he reult of hor eff. The resi ead very oly Teondy worker’ aserGons thar focus exsvely on the struggle rein fade cont in dhe plant ate ameliorated ere an there by questions about Sreapacty, community invoement, and the environment. The eff is Sang sine fal o deny any prodaciveincerlized tension. This isa Higbee was an opportunity here not o sec closure ofan agument but: te the main inthe Boke refs upon and len ftom what had append, to open up « terain of dicusion and debate, 1 cannot help aeretang ufc vith the far more dug conluson = lly fDning spon de tension between class-based and plant-based Marist scr en the one hand and neo populie comoanitarian perspecives opener provided by Stephen Fin in ighng Back m Arpaia hdl of ee of gl ad i ini = Shany paral in terms ofthe muliple voi it ncomporates, ‘Our ule helps expan, I think, why Willams rsored to the novel < explore etn dilemmas, The sure hat we often sem compelled to search fins pieoeof eleural ox politcal economic research ean nore xsl remaik eerily open for efiection in the nova form, even when 88 Beppens © Rrahcw Pie some srt of rconcaon becomes pos once “the dita is messed Dual eondusions to dhe Cowley book would have kept isu dd options opens the tensions live, atthe sae ioe as it would bse highligited the question ofthe diferent eves and kinds of sbsracons Hh sew ofall chi I was quite started to read Williams’ novel Saved Geneiion, sorocime afer the Comey book was fished. This novel wd trblched fo 1964 and set in Oxford a around that time. Ie revolves around Milita Pariculariom and Global Ambition 43 the tensions berween a univertiy-based socalion on dhe one hand and the ontcted pote within the ec plant on the athe. The opening paragraph te these forthe problem of scale plc ina vided ge you stnd, today, in Berween Town Road, you can se ether way: west tothe spzes and cowers of che athedealand colleges east vo the yards anal sheds ofthe smetor works. You see diferent wodés, but there is no ones herween thems ‘there is oly the movernen: and trafic ofa single ty. (Second Generation, p. 9) Kate Owen, a local Labour Parey organizer and wife of a union leader in the plan is torn berween lyalty to family and comanity and che sexual freedom that beckons from the ather sie ofthe cls divide within a university-based socialism. Pever Owen, her son, is likewise caught in between. He i studying far his doctorate in industrial sociology acan Oxford college atthe same time as aviolen shopfloo struggle is wearing his father down and dow in Cowley AA the themes Williems develops elsewhere concerming the concaed Inowledge thar ics possible wo cuire and hold are richly developed here, including the incerplays of gender and class within “structures of fecling” embedded in socialise polities worked out in differen paces. “Many ofthe substantive issues thae arose in the work on the Cawley project actualy crop up, without resolution, in Serond Generation. Had I rad iebefore rather than afcr becoming associated with the Cowley research, my approach righe have been different. I would on the one hand have insisted om the Beechsan strategy of keeping the conclusions open. But on the other I would have aken more notice of Williams (1989 220) injunction that “everything will have to be done by negotiation, equitable negotiation, and it wil have to be taken steadily along the way. TX. Evaluations and Possi “hehe words “poe” “pace” ae “environment” encompass mich ofwhat apes do, Thr mening has een contre within geography ove the sire debates (peta inte rai oural snipe) ove for ls hw and why locales and place might bes o mater and hw ropirty to view relations between place and space (sce, for example, Agnew 2#i8 Duncan, 1989; Cooke, 1989, 1990; Massey, 1991; Pred, 1984; Smith, Seyegedoun 1989, 19924), And inthe cure ofthis dscusion, the sion of level of ezecsion and cle hs again and again ben abel Ge 1 Mais, 1989; Cooke, 1989; Duncan and Savage, 1989; Horr and 1984, Meri, 195, Swyngeoay 1992); a8 well Si, 190, # Bu peorpherae nr the only ones to dealin sneha In een #h¢ nergy to be abated so space, plac and nature have hecome44 Orientations Milica Pariculsion and Global Ambion 45 | aru matter of debut in soci cult, and Bterary theory (6, for cove inthe mais of place, pace and environ hal ats, Cane cal, 1993) ~2 debate in which geographers have certainly lant be acid by sndned stephan ea alsaos ak ha enipsed (ee Biel eal, 1993; Grgory and Uny, 1985: Keith and Fe, phenomena (5 cours for example inthe wot of Foocat when he apple ‘ 1993) These sors of concer and inerests have ben impelled in parc by the {oa spatial concept of heterapia asa Bild for cada scion}. My snbison uestion of he feaions berween what appears to be an emexpen elal n the chapters that follow, is to provide such a materials framework for ‘Mpa caltte onthe one hand and the reason of ll sors of eactonary sass and thereby imeprate space, place, and envionment into theories of Sr a potently propeesive "ican parccalsisms’ based in pacalae the socal proces 25 wells into thinking sbout practic politics pees on the other, coupled with a seemingly serious threat of global Environnencal degradation. Butthe concerns have ako-in part been produced by a burgeoning tradition of cultural studies that Raymond Williams helped oddefine, with i¢s emphasis upon structures of feeling, values, embeddedness, difference, and the particularities ofthe countethegemonic discourses and social relations oppositional groups construct. Willams thought a great deal abour questions of space, place, and envizon- iment and evidently worried as to how they might be broughe into play both in his culcuea theory and in his views on socialism. Transformations of space, plice, and environment are neither neutral nor innocent with respect to practices of domination and control. Indeed, they are Fundamental framing, ccsions replete with multiple possibilities ~ tha gover the conditions {often oppressive) aver how lives can be lived. Such issues cannot be left tanaddressed in struggles for beracion. Furthermore, such struggles necesarily internalize a certain reflexivity, if noc an unresolvable tension, Concerning both the levels and kinds of abstractions they inevitably embrace ts part and parcel of heir working tools for practical action. The fact that Williams’ dealings and concems over space, place, and environment ate voiced primarily in his novels suggests, however a certain hesitancy if not an outright dificuly in_ getting thie wipartte conceptual apparatus into the heat of cultural theory. The conclusion is not, however that pace, place, and enviconment cannot be incorporated into social and cules thcory, bue that practices of theorizing have to be opened up to the pos land dilemmas that such an incorporation requires. By eating Williams 2 his ‘ord, and seeing his novels and is cicical cultural theory as complementary, wwe identify a field of theorizing far richer chan chat which many of che hig theories oF contemporary culsite currently envision. Theory ismever & matter fof pure abstraction. Theorerial practice must be constructed as 2 continous | ils Sees ciencen the mean prea of fied Tvs anda sual © il IH} since suffecent cic distance and detachment co formulate global il The problematic that consideration ‘of Williams works as a whole 3/15 i a i sen ee on ova ses he ul ins wis uth Dg wey gone ee , Lat nee ll Ue) one eb EEA N to bear upon the world of daily political practices without finding ways} :2 Dialectics Raymond Williams chose to handle che complex isucs of place, space, and cavironment by resort to the “possible words” of fiction. Bar was this = reves athe than a contingent feature of his explorations in ealurl dheony? Tnthis chapter [begin upon the tsk of showing that such a move isin no way necessary. 1 hope to show cht historical materials: enquiry infused with dlalercal unsderstandings can integrate themes of space, place and envzen- tment (nature) into both social and herary theory. Most such theory as not inthe past aken sich a projectseriouly. And cis inspite of abundant mention and appeal to spario-tempord,place-bound, and environmental metaphors (Gach as Althusser’ “continents of knowledge,” Jameson "cognitive mapping Foueaul’s “heterotopia.” and a hoe of sudics with tes lke the "geography ofthe imagination,” “the space of licratre,” andthe lke). There seems to be 4 world of diference, as Smith and Kate (1993) observe, between invocation oF space, place, and environment (oature) as convenient metaphors onthe on hhand and ineegrating them as hisoscal and geographical reais into socal and literary theory on the other. shall aso hope show cha such a theoretical projec: not only has a transformative feet upon the train of theory, but also ‘pens up a cerrain of pola possibilies. the fst sep down this read so provide ome sort grounding in dak sis, Willams 25, of couse, deeply imbued with dialecca ways of thinking, Consider, once again, the following passage: Tin most description and analy, cults and weit are expres in a habitual jw tense. The serongest busier to the recognition of human cultura asivity F his immediane and sxular conversion of experience into finished product. “Whar i dele a= proedre in onc hist, wher on cnet sumptions many actions en be definitively taken as having end, s habitually projected, not only into the always moving substance of the past but into Eontemporuey lie, in whic relitonshipe, fasicutions and Tonmatons in which we ate stil actively involved are contered, by this procedural mode, it sear Dialecice 47 foemed wholes rather than forming and formative processes. Anaiyss is then ceated on clatians beswern these produced institations, formation, and experiences 20 that now, sin that produce past only the fixed explicit fren tere, and living presence i bays, by definition, receding, (Willams, 1977: 128-3) But Williams did. not or could not put this mode of though work in coofiooting issues of plac, spatio-temporlty and envionren dre in his cultural theory. He has nor been alone in this. In geography and the social ciences, the craft of dileericl reasoning isnot well understood, so the lace of dslccical treatment of space, place, and environment isnot surprising, In lcerary theory, however, dialectical modes of thought have become dominant in recent years, thanks in part to the resurgent influence of Hegel, Mans Heidegges, Althusser, Foucault, Ricoeut, Derrida, and many others trained in the waditions of European philosophy. As literary theory permeates socil theory the stage is sc For strong confrontations becween broudly positivist ‘empiricist, and historical materialist taditons on the one hand anda vast array fof phenomenological, hermeneutic, anc dialectical traditions on the other. I is then very likely that nondialcrical readings, however wel intentioned, of| dilestically constructed arguments wil goncrate widespread misinterpret ations. Within the recent istry of geography, for cxample, Duncan and Ley’ (1982) Cartesian and postvise reading of dialectical work has played havoc {possibly designed so) with ehe general understanding of dialectics. For this raion, I think itimporcant to set out, as simply as posible, the general princi- pes ofdalectes, wo explore its epistemological and ontological underpinnings and tillustrate by way of examples how it mighe operate a che intxfaces oF social, geographical, and lcerary theory. Thegin witha caveat. Theres, of course, much Marxist chought that is cther rondialetial or (asin the case of analytical Marvin) overly hestile ro alec, and a whole tradition of dialectical thinking (most strongly influene- cd by Leni, Hegel, Heidegger and Derrida, hough its origins yo hack at lease the Greeks) that is by no means Marxist. Furthermoze, there are dlyergene interprearions of dialeties within the Marxist wadiion (Bhaskat ~(1993) lists several of thera} and parallel strains of thought such as “process bated philosophy” and “organic” lines of argument advanced by AN. Whitehead, David Bohm, and a veriery of contemporary eco Naess and Capra, that hear some sort of kinship co Mars ‘Compare, for example, the stacement fram Williams cited above and chat of| Whitehead (1985: 90)48 Oriensations (Or Bok (1983: 48): “The notion that rey i 0 be undertned a process isan ancient oat, going badkatleat to Heraclitus, who sd that everyting flows. rgacd the exsence of the notion of procs as given by the sazment: Not only is everyting “Ghnging but al sf Thac is osy, shat ss the proces of becoming ial “phil sll objects, event eatites, conditions, structures, et. ae forms chat can Ue abstrsced fom this proces ‘Then compare these statements with Ollman’s (1993: 11) formulation of Mares position: iets estrucures out thinking about reatyby replacing de common sense rotion of thing” as something that av history and bas extemal connection twith other chings, with notions of “proces” which content its hisory and posible acorn std “ila,” which candain as part of what itis is ies wath ‘ther clans In what follows U shall oceasionally take up cese parallel ways of thinking. in ‘onder tv illustrate the broader frame of reference within which Marx’ version ‘fislectes ies, So while I try to situate myselffrmly in the Marxisecradcion, [shal ery to take doe eognisance of the richness of che dialectical tradition 25, a whole. L the Principles of Dialecties Mars chose never 19 write out any principles of dialetes fora very good reason. The only way to understand hie method is by following his practice "Thiesuggeses that the reduction of dialecis toa set of “ptincipes” might self-defeating, The dialectic sa proces and noeaehing and is furdberno1e, 2 process in which dhe Catesian separations beticen mind and mate, becween ‘ought and action, beeween consciousness and materi, berween theory and ppactice have no purchase. The long-standing debate, for eximple, over ‘tether dhe inlet isan ontological statement abouc the mature of reality or 2Leonvenient epistemology for understanding nature i, rom this standpoint, 2 spirions ay dhe Cartesian separation berween mind and mae. Yex the debate does have significance, The debate over what constitutes a “let mode of rg is, Ollman argues a debate over how w absac fom the phenomena we encounter in everyday its Setting down the principles of {daleeics provides an opening, gambit for furdher enquiry a preimions discussion of how to formulate such abstractions. Mars, of course, had the ‘example of Hegels logic and method before hrs and wihout earful sly of it he probably could nor have arrived a the discal practices embedded it Disletier 49 Capital, the apparatus of conceptual abstractions that allowed im 10 understand the world in the way he did, nor could he have formulated his political sraregies and praccces. “To write out “the principles of dialecical argumentation” i like going back to Hegel asa prelude to doing something much more Manse. Ieis a necessary “going back” b the principles themselves, in che fashion of Mar, disappear iato a flow of ‘theoretical and political practices. shall nocevoke Hege’s particu formula tion here, bur uy 1 suramatize as simply aT can some ofthe basic theses about cllecrics chat can be distilled not only from Mars practios but also fn those who have in escent yeas been drawn back to reflece on what dialectics ‘The principles of dialectics can be surnmasied in 11 propositions oly 2 means to go forward on a terrain of action on whieh 1. Dialectical hinking emphases the undewtanding of proces, flows fh and aon ve dh analy of eens, cing stacey rd nine terns, The cations deady ven are que explo hat font Therein dep onclageal pinsple involved hee fr dee Mein fic ld char dems, dings structure and eye do act auc cuni of prio io the procter lows and rlatone hat ea, tuoi, or unre thers Por example, ur coutrpony wed, flows of cpl Gods, ad wney aad of pope ve to tno tere pic sel as cto, neighbotheeds and nderiod thing. Epserologely, the proces of enquiry wud invert this phos we gto undesand proach oka bea the ates SF va appear wo w inthe fit nstance robe sleet hing o ‘the ‘elations between them. We typically investigate flows of goods, Roney and peopl by craiaing elsionshipe beeen xing eer ketones neighbotoeds ances, Newton, lkewie, did ne sat tnth oie bur wk the apple bis hed the ah ard he moon Tis Ftd only rly allows wo, howerese compar the tof lions ‘erwecnsch cote a diferencpons in tine coining method caled ‘eomparnive eae”, On ti bat we may ine something about the fica thar have generated charge of sats bt tea the ee _sunchanging in henseles ui leads sos ese mechanic ‘a of hinkng Detling hols, here hat hs epsemer logical condition should get reversed when it comes to formulating °Abnacons concep, and thea ako he wo. This tants the “Ge sstecidene world of things with which positivism and. empiricism Eee pically deals into a much more confusing word of relations and flows Hot até mnie a things Comer, fo camp the ebnition of Epil” In cased pola caramy and in estes eonomi Eypically defined asa stock of productive assets ofa certain value (a set50 Orienations of things) out of which a flow of services ean be generated. But in Manes {efnicion, capitals construed as both the proces of circulation of value fa flow) sand che stock of assets (things” lke commodities, money production apparatus) implicated in those Rows. In so far es workers become embedded in char process (as inputs to production and as cansumer of finished products) so they too hecome “appendages” of und thereby a particular manifesto of “capita” ("ariable capital” in Marx’ terminology). “Money” similarly takes on all manner ofching,like” forms but those “things” (like coins or entries on a computer screen) only have :meaning in terms ofthe processes of social production and exchange that validaw: them, Without the processes continually working to suppore it rmoney would be meaningless. “hs ay of hang aher mse wipe a gency realized. Quancum theory, fr example, has the same entity (eg, an elec tom belving"unde onc efter waned nant set of circumstances asa particle” (Bohm and Pest, 1987: 40). Since mater {ching-tic substance) and eacrgy (alow) are interchangeable, ithe one nor the other can be proetized as an exclusive focus of enquiry without serious los of insight an understanding, Electrons thus appear as both “things” and as “lows.” Yer it took many years for phyalit to recognize that these two conceptions were not incommensurable or mutually txcusive. Only when they overcame this barcer, could modern quantum + theory begin to take shape Ie has likewise proven very difficult for social scientists to abandon what Ollaan (1993: 34) calls the “common sense view" ~ erected into a philosophical system by Locke, Hume, and others = that “there ar things and thexe arc reations, and that neither can be subsumed in the other” Flements or “things” (as T shall call thern} are constituted out of flows, processes, and relations operating within bounded filds which constitute 4) Structured systems or wholes. dialectical eonception of both the individ- tal “shng” and the structed sem of which eis apa ress extcely ob. tn understanding of dhe proceses and relaions by which thing apd Structured system ate constirted. Thi idea is noc intuitively selevident since we ae surrounded by “things” that seem to have such a permanent and slid characcer thai eile a imagine them as somehow in fs, We cannot downplay, therefore, th (1985: 137) ells permanences? th tible objects’ dat we daily encounter in the world and without hich physical and biologea! fe wold nor and could notexstas we now know it Bus, he went on to obser, even something as solid and long lasting ax an Egyptian pyramid is constituted out of m Forces us always to ask the question of every “cing” or event” chat Weg encounter: by what process was i constituted and how isi sustained? SB Diatecses 5% 23. The “things” and systems which many researchers teat as irreducible and therefore unproblematic are seen indislectical though as internally conte dicory by vitwe ofthe multiple processes that constirute them. 1am, for purposes of social theory, considered an individual within social sytem and for certain restricted forms of enquiry such a supposition might sppear ‘entirely resonable, Buc further inspection shows that Iam a rather contre: the how of generative and transformative principles at work. This implies a {artoular materialise research sate. Treating nation sates, fr example, es _ocogencous entities and examining their behaviour and performance accor ing to set of economic indicarors is of limited value. The principles of leccal thinking sol gst oss of engl bo £5 deiion ates intcanalize powers (or lose their grip on such powers) in witst FMP they are hetcrogencons and internally contradictory, andl in what ways Intemalized tensions rel inthe kind of creativity or sel- destructiveness68 Oniencasions which leds to new confguaions of ative And how finaly, do uch Zeke rn soci Ui? “The charge tt Maat al ff ery 6 ein om hie tively mice. This isnot co cl hat all Marae engyo Thiru err fee. Generative principe can get dite, domals of bperaon canbe imagined bes dan sua, and aeali stdes Feu proces ruts able gt init s ike of dete any exer Tind of tech. Through construction of genera rings and theories, Marin themselves to, ofcourse co change the world. But this des ot imply that theres of engi wll away be appropste o tht they ean nef be confused and desuctve, Mars afurenttin cot, ay more than ay oxher way thinking expe the dlrs described by Baim and Peat (1987: 57) as follows: ‘We cannot impose any worldsiew we like ae hope dat ic wll work. The cycle ‘of perception and action cannos be maintained in trl abitray lshion tnles we collude ro suppress the things we donot wish 0 see while, at the same time ying co masta, a all cot, the ehings that we desze most ino image of the world. Clay the enw af supporting suc fe vision of tealcy muse eventually be pai ‘And, its fair to comment, many have paid the cost of such a false vision on the par of Maras. But then no other processes of thought can claim a mande of uncarnished virtue. 3 The Leibnizian Conceit “Throughout inach of thie argument, Ihave invoked the iden of “intel felons ar being Randal t dat sal mo yt cay thi en tore co avoid some ofthe confsions and substantial rom that can are Fer Ollman deci are inherently sade trialist, and Mans. From night be eroncouy conch though Ollman craialy does ot do tubquen chaps, Isl ave conse tothe gure of cn (a rector of thinking on intemal lations whew Influence Onan acknowedgn) ae propsing a coral vcw of pace and dine I shal here bi take op hit Portela version often elation: the problem being of coun, that Timi is generally considered deeply conservative sorta in poll inter swell ava foundaional gure n thers of that Geman eal Son spins which Mare rebelled.” Inthe Aloadelogy writen owen the very end f isi, Lib proposes ancaphyse funded ont concep monad thas inenaines evening etm Each tena miro the rene pina af enreapertnc® £ nctnaly cones cach monad at that tor ofthe univer L is enerespondlenee principle in two respects. Fist, each monad has a distinctive position and perspective in lation tothe universe and is mirror- ‘For oseintred inthe ior of geographical hugh ti worth ong ths Gunnar Sua were bok egal imprest wh Oran ckon sEmuon ante xh Stina raion whi wa et pitied 1972, bt tinge a tess [Bese a wick Gln agrees «nal ip se oe {HL osm work in ioc geograpie natealen. Pecbge for sir reared J Bestar 0993 inlining catkisorn vere of data alin it book ndag, ‘Sie and cen, nore boc a cesin cover ets i wok nd that of lta hil ering Ollman fending nea dle pure een rather {pone oni peso. Suh enter ney w xt nt alto Sow the nin finer eltins connec dale aguseaen70 Oviensatons ing therefore emphasizes certain proximate regions and perspectives rather than, ‘others. Secondly, monads vary in the quality ofthe mizroring they achieve ~ some sharper and others more blurry ‘Buc if Jam a monad and I internalize everything there is then all I need r0 understand the universe is to contemplate my own inner self. ‘To be sure, what earn will be conditioned by my positionality and perspective as well as by the acuity of my mirroring cepecity. But ice stlleasonable wo argue, as Leibni indeed did, thar "Tam the measuce of all chings” and that deep reflection on -my own internal conditions ie all ehat is required to achieve fall knowledge of the universe. Let me, for purpotes of identification, call this the “Leibnizian ‘onceit.” Ie poscs some very importanc problems as well as posibilities and I shall have rearon to come back ro i again and again in subsequ Tet me firse comment on the conditions chat were associated with Leibniz’ formulation ofthis thesis. Most recent presentations on Leibniz focus purely fon his writings and his metaphysies as a set of ideas. 1 have to go back to a ‘work first published in 1948 by Meyer (translated in to English ia 1952) to find an argument that attempis to weave together Leibnizs derivation of metaphysical principles and the circumstances of his weeld, That world was torn with strife and controversy, religious wars and violence, pestilence and plague, politcal intrigue and chaotic fragmentations, and all manner of “unseeling discoveries (Goographical, sciatic, ex). And Leibnie was deeply engaged in the polities of that world, trying to find solutions, to establish harmonies where there were none, to negotiate rational outcomes, to reconcile ideas about God's perfection with the obvious impeefections in dail life as well as with the exttanrdinary advances then occurring in science (particularly ‘Newton's work) and in philosophy (particularly Descartes). He was also an active participant in contemporary geopolitical struggles and practices. Meyer seeks to understand how Leibniz ideas grew out of his experience of that world, And, most crucially, he interprets the theses arrived a in the Monetalagy 4s tepstering a moment of failure: Inhis ltl Leibnic becomes Ful convinced thar he his found a sluion the problem of rating che individ vo dhe univers... The aha bul of rmonadological reflection i comple reat into the islaed Self biographic- ally pedkng,ficedom and comaitment czase tobe rated in any stable manne, unt at che very end of Leib’ life hey break out inv fatal confit At che pine where Labaiz advances che slconacions claim of ring the essence uf Bis own individuality 1.2 univers law le the distintion between his exist ann his speculative philowpiy; and at this poiat the philosopher becomes iolatd fous the ext af the world. He flecs the niey choose cantroversy of the contemporary soene in order to Listen to the distinct, quasi-mathematal voice of his incr monologue, for only now can he find the two fundamenal principles of his monadlogisl system, che principles of uncoatedicted eh and of “rficent reason” (Meyer, 1952:9) d ‘The Lebnizian Conceit 7. ‘Meyer's commentary is not without relevance and force with respect to a wide ‘ange of contemporary theorizations. I shal rely take up ro examples. Con sider frst, Detrda’sresore to something akin o the Leibnizan conceit in his dlscasion of self other relations as he examines how the “european subject” {on enticy that Letbniz was also ceucially concerned with) consituesiself on the inside through the construction ofan “other” ~ the colonial subject. Spivak (1988: 294), ine intersting commentary on the whole problem of how the colonized other can speak, attacks the “frst world intelectual masquerading as the absene nonrepresenter who lets the oppressed speak or themselves" and approvingly cites Derrid’s srategy 2 follows ‘To rendee thought or the shaking subject wansparent or invisible seems 0 bide the relenlss ecopnition of the Other by atsimilation leis i she intrest of such cautions thar Devids dees not invake “leting the others) speak for Iosif" bur ather invokes an “appeal” 0, of “al” ro the “quite-othes” af “ending dliciogs that interior wice thi isthe voce ofthe other us, ‘The dangers in such a gesture are obvious. Ifthe only way in which the “other” can be represented is through “rendering delirious’ the voices that I have innernalized in the process of discovering suyself, then very soon the identities ‘of “Tauue cest moi become as surely planted as did the thesis of "Petz est mai.” And this is exactly where Moyer felt the fatal contradiction ay in Leibnir’s strategy: Ladi cis dae he absration ofthe eens of dings nahin cle bat se cberation uf the aor of evn spt». The inter nduaity ofan, informed by an ently new eto of nelle chevron, bocomes themesue ofall human exec. In chi doctne of pean ables rich escatily the mew Louis XIVs deine of pli aboliam~ no -- te community i poe. Ac at eis point Lebna’s conception of man’s 5 sci spirit com wy atic his owe ies of wlettin The commune wei bstmes 4 mere “aggregate of mona rd he sehetallyspnfcane concept a "harmonia mand” longer bridge hg ewer livia ‘The second example is drawn from the frequent appeal on the pare of ecologists not only to dialectics but also co 3 version of the philosophy ~hntemal relations chat echoes the Lrivian coneee. Arne Nees the fundet £5 ofthe deep ccology monemsent, was 2 stios stident of Spinona and evidenely $5. ied this philosophical training to greac effect. In docp ecology it becomes the ask of the Sl (understood as something transcendental to the ego SP) to become the medium for “rendering delirious" (to appropriate sid’ phase) tha interior voice that i the voice of tha great other — tur” within us (se chaper 7). Through solf-diepline we can ender our72 Ovientatons fon of nature les blurry and hope, by virtue of the “correspondence rules Wwe internalize, o artive at an undcestanding of the external word by erecting ‘a monadie Self into the measure ofall things. Tam not seeking here ta discredit the Leibnizian conceit entirely. Strategies of this sore have been of enormous importance turoughout history and ‘presumably will continue to play a roe. But left cite nor only does it ran Fac the fatal contradiction of the sore that beset Leibnie [is chis why Devrida (1994) has renurned to Marx), but ic also begets a cacophony of “inner aonologues” (ofthe sort that Derid, for one, is particularly adept produc | lig) on the parc of philosophers and licerarytheotiscs who have all roo clearly retreated from “the noisy chotic controversy of the contemporary scene,” vwithdrawn into an isolated self, and thereby severed any connection between Freedom and political commitment. Th any case, the Leibnizian conoci precisely undecies thar form of philo- sophical idealism which Marg, cheoogh his dialogue with Hegel, rejected. ‘Whitehead (1985; 193-4), while acknowledging how much his own doctrines owe to Leibniz, voices a number of parallel objections. Leibniz, he argues, had. 9 his hands: «wo disincive point of view. One was tha the ial rea ott san organising, say fasngingredicas into ani, so tha thi unity the rele, The other point of view i thatthe fina real enies 2 subsances supporting qualities The fire point of view depends upon the acceptance of intemal rations binding together all reality. The later fs inconsisent with he relity of such relations ‘To combine these gwo poins of view, his monads were cherefore windowless sind thie pasioasenerelymieroned the universe by the divine arrangement of pre-erablshed harmony. ‘Thus there can be “no concrete tedliy of internal relations” in the sense of actual processes of internalization open to investigation: God (or whae Hegel Inte chose to eall spirit") has to Function as the Deusex machinafor the whole. system to work. “While Erba may have fucnished a foundation stone for “the great achieve ments of Geeman philosophy" he leaves behind some awkward problems to how co use the doctrine of internal relations in pracica airs. There ate three main difcultcs, The fis, deake with ac some length ia Ollman (1976, appendix A), is cat if everything is about flows hen how are we to speak of ny particulars or individuals a lP IF individuation, the identification of ‘nial of of wina Season (1965) calls particulars is considered dope dencon spatial-temporal location then shifting the grounds for defining sp ER tnd time, which, as we shall se in chapter 10, is indeed the necessary implica tion ofthe relational view, shifts the grounds for how individuals, particu tnd entities (uch 2s Things” and “bodies” are robe identified al understood: BEE recess (a flow of value), char each moment internalizes the conditions of the The Leibnician Concet 73 “The conception ofthe fundamencal elements or individuals of which the world is composed is then perperually open to question. Strawson (p. 119) sates, for example “that no system which does not allow for spatial or temporal entities can be a system which allows for particular tal” And in advancing. his views on how particular and entities are co be established, he uses Lebaia’s arguments a foil to construct what he considers more coherent and compre- hrensive way co intividuate phenomena. Leibniz’ monads are entity-like ‘enough, ie vurns out, to provide easy means co rebut Strawson’sebjections, but they ate unsatisfactory as a general argument for the reasons Whitchead cortetly advances, The answer her, given by writes as diverse as Ollman, “Whitehead, and Bohm, is that theres no particular barter to construing cigs and entities a8 “peemanences” or even as relatvely autonomous entities provided we recognize how those things and entices are consicuted, sustained {nd ultimately dissolved in flows and how all entities are relaionally defined ith respect 10 others "To this Whitchead (1985: 203) perceptvely adds ewo other objections. He first observes: The difcaly which arss i respect to iaennal telaions sro explain how any pacar uth is posible, Lasts as there are intemal elaions, everthing mut {depend upon everything else. Due if this be the ase, we cannot know about anything til we equaly know eveything ese. Appatenly, therefore, we ae tuner the nscesiy of myn everything 3¢ once. This supposed necesiy is palpably uneruc Accordingly iis incumbent en ust explain how there canbe Snemal rations, sein thar we adit Give uubs ‘We will encounter this difficulty again in chapter 12, whete [take up some of the groundings of identity politics. IF internalize everything (including every “hemness") there is, then Lam under the neesiy to speak for everyone there is wich s equivalent wo saying nothing particular all. Equally serious is chat ‘the doctrine of intemal selacions makes it impossible to attribute ‘change’ to any acsal entity” (Whitehead, 1969: 74) fall monads internalize everything theres then under what impulse can chy change excepe by their own internal volion? Put another way, to say chat flux and change is everywhere is ~ squivalent to saying thae iis also nowhere in particular. ‘Thismay all seem tobe a rather arcane and erudite issue, so lee me illustrate 1 ite more practical and politial-economic importance by a reearn ro Mart’ |) concepcion of capital as outlined calir. The argument, recall, is that produc tion, consumption, exchange, and distribution are separate moments of a others bot that the moment of production is regarded in some sense as fundamental. common Marts eading ofthis thar we only have to revo tie orto seady) the moment of production o change for understand) hea 7A Oriemasions alized thete, Bus this is nothing less than. spool view of incernal rations imported into Mandan. i sh an of te ea cialiam, From tis standpoint some of the eichns Sah or lvonalist” and “ecenomsic™ forms of Mars in Woy a buco been wees ee dors become even more Leibnisin (and idealist) © 9 a ne Ce onatund sa bemescally seed Cwindowles") pom “proce! oy caresgondene nape tough which eg a eal within tether than a =m open moments SSO daca and politica life, But things look very feces Hf 5 oe ationn uated not ina word of monadic enties (whi “PO internal relations na nzauous eanaormations and intentions of 2 ma) rom thing, es) the ove OES of jeal-cconomie reproduction : Pt hang an arn, ogy bat Mer formant all eran moment vida esos os feck to ae okra, Bohn (1983: 297) makes 2 parallel ers °F SS ol row what Bohm clls “che implicate order ning both consciousness and matter whofe world because allele is inte laing Lebniz, albeit while exploring provides a common ground for anders Minjcialy within the wholeness of bacoming: clement be a memene which, lke che momen of sedated ao measetnent of space and dine, etna sion whic is extended in space a an daraton of moment na A) FOR ers a “As with consciousness, cach fo soomebig very Ian someting vey malt semen Yop ain it nfl al she ober ae eran expe oer and mone har ein SB up fech nome evel sug no ow a ca come he my wich "ly a clin nan me Ba ene wk ins eves ov “ ie etm tp Teas sha aes mon? ian es artes ony momenaand ei perma ead es of “co cele Ce etal hae the in Ee Ting tha we use dhe implicate onde © deere: nd reigns on memes meres tad does thin sather differen wy.” rege at aba a ereereorer asomevine op) hough cones roe heir ‘There are, plainly, differen versions of how to ‘My own preference (an previous work) is to teat of sce view os, predation 8 — vf ‘must be considered as moments i} ‘Consumption, exchange, distribu town eight precisely in order to understan Wd dhe process of insernalization 3s ‘The Leibniian Conccit 15 ‘occurs in production, Marx produced stong arguments to suppor bis view ocean how capitalism works and how socialism might be achieved, bur this does noe in any way justify neglect of the other moments ~ indeed, working on those ‘ther moments (such as consumption) isa fruitfl way towards intemaizing spc nd dia forms of cane win production (he ox cross is when consumer boycots affect production activities). To the degree that Oiiman fa ole ech noi dn cuugh ough loupe ages wie) he aes pe the pony for bath cote snd ee jocuine of intexnal relations as well as a purely “productvis” version of Marsian politcal economy. eee : ‘This stl leaves the thoray question of where change comes from in panicular, ia a word constued in terms of intemal relations, Why aight ‘eran agents for change (such as an organized working clas) be considered 2s nore fundamental than other? This is pethaps the Foremost question 10 be answered ancl it will be a major preoccupation in laer chapters. For the ‘moment, all dh need record is tha critical assessment of docesines of internal ‘eltions places that as 2 metaphysical ax well as a politcal issue of paramount imporance. Leibniys particular solution, arived atin the Monadology, was founded on failures of political practice that made reat inco the windowless world (his study) of an imtllecual monad engaging in extensive corzes- pondence with the ouside world particularly atactve proposition, Hardly surprisingly, the political failures of the left in the lat rwo decades have rendered a similar reweat into a windowless Leibnizian world of inceralized saison a for eal in the a of Dele (1993), «rer acacte ‘option. Ichas been faciinated in many respects by the perfection of computer ‘etnies (corer inmoaion of enn who, ae Hein G991) pon ost, developed not only the firs calculating machine but also the binary arithmetic ~a universal calculus that “would compile all harman culture, bringing every atural language inca single shared data base” ~ co go with i. The pieate of the monadic individual, locked omo 2 computer screen connected by ‘mode into a vst word of correspondence in cyberspace io many respec is 2 fulillmene (petition) ofthe Leibnizian dream. “Monads have no windows, | but chey de have terminal” writes Heim, going on co describe a eyberworld _ in which Leibni’s “monadological metaphysics" underpin both the logic and ‘totic ontology” of cyberspace. And thee ace many who now regard intensive | eaploration of this new space 2 a form of radical and revolutionary scion. I =. willzeturn to this topic in chapter 10. ‘The ‘uew radical ideals,” a I shall ell it rests largely on sucha withdrawal “and itis something which in its the pure doctrine of internal relations is 57 Bamees to prevent, exept by eabedling i deeply in the political commt- toes [o, es Bhaskar (1993) prefers it in the “liberatoryaxiology| that gave “Meni dialectics and his historical materialism so much ofits power, Otherwise16 Orientations heseverance betwecn freedom an political ae or contemporary dase work ulna 5 for 2 et, witht focus on change, hata sone ck ‘beat least elon Pesce of enquiry Bus 2 Bhasar (1998) note dee oe at wadition and its important vo be 2 PHC posible sg how dilectiscan opera and what it might 1 bring some neha Galt princiles co best upon ay fo of engui sae diferent modes of trough decal (Kod f meta-dilectic Te as complementary though ansagosiic She than a8 eouttally exclave and unrelated ca {deretive insights. "This is am jen: principle thacehe Greeks und ~The finest harmony is bor aoe Paid Hersclus,and “score ev of becoming” fo ie ed hat “onesie” epreetaions ae avs ro sad wretlomats and hac dhe Be way proceed is AWE eo tub coger eal Hocks in such away tha hey ach fe) PS slide rubbing the igh way can cast creative ways think bow socio-geugraphical and ia ae yal change and how to bring patiotenPOe place, and avon gaa) win the anes of sos an erry C= In the “lpr chor follow, ¥sall xy wo pat such 2 ods if argument 0 wrk £0 alecties as an abstract Se can il, the pres ll yt dsl di denis int «ow of xgusenation and incoreeal PAGS commitment becomes just 28 fatal 4 The Dialectics of Discourse Wing i a form of 6 f discourse. When 1 engage in it | am bound by its rules. We ue dacounc to pm ues te perade cules and they aimanding Gal sheryl’? Ajeet ae a Epp Thorlo (fo oe eed Se iahcreniimatons aswell the 3 ‘erties so capa, Thi fe ie CHR BORN HET Brough discos shomiacsieanes Se ana Semi ain Bp ct ae ara gee aromas wea for critical ssn. at rer ina yc aes sia sla ue lions Beane so imveee tee ‘There fas ako been much salutary discussion receiitly on the “subject silt all its oS ra be wuld nr ally fe! embacraed to tlk about himelé bur ehenBecca EES a bbe taken up later ~ truction of fundamental serms (0 an 2 aan fin mites [tn es pe ie 7 cm (eine ee ee ih Td eanphaste, trying co design some meta CIS} the wosal aee—ae u eame pne i ae re ce na ween em Yfincladng ny owe). section seo 8 gin sy ne’ mee on ie iter lay 2 ground work for the substantive investigati aoe ec iaiciney ve faras possible, any sense FP Nc noe 2H esc er I ee readme, oF aes | PS sr of ssn. Jd she moment “momen unecnecn ongi ainel mapS = af corto che se panoply of de wy ble z en eal pe he nome foes ee, courses marie ex, but power laos (Gli inal and prose men win anc some cones of Bow Chey anscal for understanding social processes [— issoursefnmgzage Bofotatvaluesidesies = Inetiutionstitvls ‘Socielreaions Material practies | cof the Social Poses. Figure 4 Moments” in Copisve Map The Dialetc of Dixourse 79 (0, We all possess bales, fntsies, values, and desires about how che world is (ontcogie), how beer understandings ofthe world might be achieved (cpistemologes) and how L/ve want tbe” inthe world. This complex inteior word shall designate asthe moment of vuph, fmt and desire (che “imaginary? reognizing that such txms are seacely adequate for ‘what I mean to say and thatthe separation between them may mislead (che thought-body dichotomy implied cannot easly be jusied, for exarnple) (a) The moment of inttuion building broadly refers to the organization of jel and socal relations between individual on a morc oF less durable bass. We here reengnize that human thoughts and destes cn bacorme collerively manifest and ried xclturl ritual (such 8 those of gion, authorry, and defexence) or, more obviously, as seemingly permanent soci jwions (such as chose of law, the state, pois, science, education, religion, che academy, che professions, dhe military, and the marker pce) (0. The moment of moteriel practice focuses on the material embeddedness ‘ef human life. Material practices ac the sensuous and expviential nexus ~ the point of bodily being in the world ~ fom which all primary Jonowledge of the world ulimately derives. But material practices alo instantiate and objectfy human deste in the material wold, noe only through the reproduction of self and bodily being but ako chrough modifications of surounding environments encompassing everything from the microrechoologies of che living and the workplace trough tthe built forms and created environments of cites, agrarian landscapes, and globally modified ecosystems: (f) The moment of socal relation: describes the vatious forms of soiling human beings engage in, and dhe more ot less durable onderings of social reluions to which this socalty may give rise. Ie focuses on the way human beings rate to cach other — “modes of social rating” ~ as thoy lve thee lives, produce together, communicate, ete. Cooperative te, divisions of labor, social hierarchies of dass, race, age, and gender, of differevated individual oF group access to material and symbolic activites and social power ar some of the issues encompassed widhi this Jam here reducing a vast array of activities to six fundamental moments ‘of social life, ‘The social process, as I conceive of it, Hows in, chrough and. around all ofthese moments and the activities of each and every individual | embrace all of the moments simaltancously. While this highly schematic {and very Cartesian) representation has the advantage of immediate clarity it is Hable co lead to egregious error left in such a rave farm. So I offer some tinmodiate clarifications, building on the dialectical way of thinking outlined cichater 2am 180 Oriemsaions hate dialectical Each moment is const 1. The analytes I wan wo work wid ave ideal ESET relation ashe. bess, wii gn Bing Sarees nothing ovtside 0 “ha dicourse ds pow. Discourse ress Cds, Thy ze ab instaionll Sra grinded maestatins 0 oe % re cies srie and exit et pees — we pple, bei and practices aswell 5 Beis ee her momeats is iasucient misled Bure pi ee Pini f internal relations bas to be used in } ous, The theory of ‘i | ngeand 2 a a es’ ae pl oF oe nen” ree er ro aise hen exami “a “Le a nny he sus ses Aen meena el ee ae ee a ar eet vrasfeod ek) and thing gt and a ron of ex a he es iy ea ain 8 2, eral tn a ron omy, wha ng desi sy momen et rd ty abe WED EME i bingo pd comets ea de san Tao vont one ther are difficult enough, bur transi ween sippy ne Seepage abies i ct Hears de paleo pws (8 oti et ene Ave tn nec ‘ean be policed by = repens agar arb in nam ee the Sa place ti sinst others and utilize ‘that mobilization to sustain and — sein nvr ET Sse mean Se? Se eR BERRGorphoss OF OTC a ee Oe 2 erat mimesis This sakes the gus 3, Bach aromenr te The Dialects of Discourse 81 “orzespondence ules” operative across moments crucial for how we fers the social proces WOR ides Heterogencity largely by way of a variety of Config secs om ale xe moment en He a Ate oght to capture through use of the reem “overdetermination"). Power relations ‘ze not homogeneous, for crample. We cannot know a priori whether we should appeal to authoritative versus economic, gender-based versus dass- basal resus ysl dimesins of poner us ake ae ‘examples of extegoies tha are deployed). Contesation over deeply held Us de stl whi idewsceyehe evden, gun ng dbfeent fanaty world in the form of Utopian desires and stvings against cach other in severe inteendized traumas or biter ereral polemical! political cooflics. Heterogeneity of blest and incoherent ways of desiving and valuing can be found within each and every one of us, generating plenty of inne: turmoil and moral orments, Racist, elitist, and sexist thoughes susfice in suepising ways even among those who dedicate their ives 20 campaigning against such phenomena. in exacly the same way that new ‘material sctl practices designed to achieve a change in power relations can become unglued by subile shifts of emphasis that reinstate old power telations within, for example, new material pracices and divisions of labor. 1. have so far construed the relations beoween “moments” as lows, as open processes that pass unhindered from one moment to allo ‘ofien crystallize into “things,” “elements,” and “Syatema’ which asin eative PermBaieNce (8 sine curl poe) sits He al proce, Ro RENE as i ong to eat ae “permanenesyin. sox a i aad us amples might ies 5 cided), social inaiTGHOAS ik soem almost impossible o transform by Virtue of the sold way they have been constructed, divisions of labor thar trove round and ongatied rough an nfasuerte af fcr ae tmckinery ha they i impoasble not epcat socal constucted SFocoures tha tighlyconsnin and replte behave (or example, ‘Sseoures about ime and space cine npc) and even dcoures ‘ich become so widebracrpcd and ae chat they themselves come fe ane fie ming pele cg Frotlen of how aking cyalie ou of prowaes poctupied xno Coles (1993: 232) writes: : oe For Adorno the world is choroughly rational: Each thing a “xtalzation” ofits elation wth others. Yet the language of “raison” inas important here as tac of “tcation”. The razonal weld is not one of pure Bidry and harmony, bur one where things crystallize ico highly dense, infinitely specific; and often vey tealcira entices thar reise che surrounding world ia which