Territory has been increasingly interrogated within Anglophone human geography, yet it has been little examined beyond the context of the modern, Eurocentric state. Developing an open definition of territory, the appropriation of space in pursuit of political projects, this paper opens epistemological dialogue with diverse Latin America strategies to decolonise territory in thought and practice, oriented around the themes of land, terrain and the state. In so doing it aims to contribute to the dismantling and reversing of colonial hierarchies that are both reproduced through Anglophone scholarship and sustained through dominant imaginations and practices of territory.

Taking space has been a common feature of recent social movements worldwide, and was a defining act of the Occupy movement. This article examines the taking of two spaces by Occupy London in October 2011, and argues that there was a tension between taking space as a moment of rupture, lived space-times of intensity that provide an opening to new possibilities, and everyday life, the routines and rhythms through which social life is reproduced. My argument builds on the work of Lefebvre, bringing together his conceptualisation of "moments" and everyday life, and his radical theory of the production of space. I argue that examining the tensions over taking space provides a useful angle to explore some of the challenges faced by the Occupy movement, such as an unequal division of labour on camp, and may help in negotiating them. Resumen: La toma de espacios ha sido una característica común de los movimientos sociales recientes en el mundo, y fue un acto definitivo del movimiento Occupy. Este artículo investiga la toma de dos espacios por Occupy London en Octubre del 2011, y sostiene que hubo una tensión entre la toma del espacio como un momento de ruptura, espacios-tiempos vivos de intensidad que dan una apertura a nuevas posibilidades, y la vida cotidiana, las rutinas y ritmos por los cuales la vida social se reproduce. Mi argumento amplia el trabajo de Lefebvre, combinando su conceptualización de "momentos" y la vida cotidiana, y su teoría radical de la producción del espacio. Sostengo que el estudiar las tensiones de la toma del espacio crea un útil punto de vista para la investigación de algunos de los desafíos que el movimiento Occupy enfrenta, tales como la división de trabajo desigual en los campamentos, y que, por ende, puede ayudar a negociarlos.

No abstract

This paper develops spatial dialectics as an analytical method capable of exposing and explaining the contradictions, dilemmas and tensions that cut through the spatialities of social movements. Despite scholarly recognition of internal divides in movements such as Occupy, there is greater need to conceptualise the inherently contradictory nature of social movements, in particular by reflecting on the role of spatiality. Building on recent work on multiple spatialities of activism, the paper shifts attention to contradiction as a key factor in spatial mobilisation, further arguing that the recent turn to assemblage thought is ill equipped for such a task. Dialectics is introduced via Bertell Ollman's influential account of its ontological and epistemological bases, before turning to Edward Soja's reading of Henri Lefebvre to incorporate spatiality. Spatial dialectics disrupts the linearity of thesis-antithesis-synthesis, placing contradictions not only within the historical unfolding of relations but also within co-dependent yet antagonistic moments of space, through Lefebvre's 'trialetic' of perceived, conceived and lived space. Building on 'militant research', which combined a seven-month ethnography, 43 in-depth interviews and analyses of representations of space, spatial dialectics is put to work through the analysis of three specific contradictions in Occupy London's spatial strategies: a global movement that became tied to the physical space of occupation; a prefigurative space engulfed by internal hierarchies; and a grassroots territorial strategy that was subsumed into logics of dominant territorial institutions. In each case, Occupy London's spatial strategies are explained in the context of unfolding contradictions in conceived, perceived and lived spaces and the subsequent dilemmas and shifts in spatial strategy this led to. In conclusion, the paper highlights broader lessons for social movements' spatial praxis generated through the analysis of Occupy London.

No abstract