The Harvest of Dionysus: Mobility/Proximity, Indigenous Migrants and Relational Machines
The purpose of this chapter is to suggest an interpretation and, consequently, a definition of the pivotal concepts of ‘mobility’ and ‘proximity’ on the basis of Karl Marx’s concept of ‘socialization of work’, Carl Schmitt’s conception of the elementary dialectic between ‘land and sea’, and Michel Foucault’s theorization of ‘bio-power’. The general aim inherent in this operation is to contribute to the delineation of a set of epistemological and heuristic categories able to interpret the most relevant social, political, and economic phenomena distinguishing our epoch. In particular, herein we want to highlight the ongoing emergence of a new dimension of spatiality, characterized – from a sociological point of view – by a new relational status and by novel criteria and dynamics of separation and exclusion, mobility and resistance, inclusion and articulation – again, at the social, political, and economic levels. The importance of the three considered authors for such a perspective consists of their particular conception of space (and time) not merely in bodily terms, but as a complex relational sphere intimately transcended by opposing social, political, and economic forces, instances, and subjectivities: namely, those aimed at establishing order and mechanisms of accumulation, and those fighting expropriation and alienation through ever changing forms of resistance and escape. Nevertheless – as will be argued – the way we consider the mobility/proximity dynamic articulation is transversal and intrinsic to that opposition. In fact, we cannot simply think of ‘mobility’ as a synonym for ‘movement’ or, even less, for ‘freedom of movement’. Rather, it is a social phenomenon positively articulated and historically shaped by those struggles.