Beyond Territorialism and Towards Spatialism

From P2P Foundation
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Discussion

Gian Piero de Bellis:

"The use of the word spatialism to qualify a reality beyond territorialism seems appropriate in so far as it is meant to cover all sorts of territories and places, including multi-dimensional and non-physical ones. And this is important nowadays when people, more than in the past, are highly diverse in their attitude towards the land and when new spaces are continuously built, materially and virtually.


We can list the following typology of spaces:

- Natural spaces (litho-idro-atmosphere)

- Artificial spaces (built environment)

- Virtual spaces (ideational reality).

The advocates of state territorialism have so far succeeded in monopolizing the sovereignty of natural and artificial spaces and manipulating the ideational reality by employing state-paid intellectuals. However, as more and more people engage in producing virtual spaces of ideation and communication, the state control and manipulation of minds is destined to fail and, in due course, the free and universal circulation of new ideas will also contribute to the breaking down of other monopolistic pretensions. In the way that the introduction of the printing press (around 1440), threw light on obscurantist creeds, and contributed to the dismissal of the temporal power of the Church, so the virtual net (Internet) with the universal spreading of information and counter-information, is going to destroy myths and mental restrictions and, with them, the territorial monopolistic power of states.

A very simple reality can have simple mechanisms of control and management, but a reality of many intersecting spaces (natural-artificial-virtual) is not something that can be patrolled and circumscribed by simply putting up border posts and “no trespassing” signs. Mises, for instance, in his writings, has stressed many times that “the market economy as such does not respect political frontiers. Its field is the world.” (Human Action, 1949). Now, more than ever, the current virtual reality of information and communication does not recognise any barriers or limitations.

In recent times the use of hundreds of typing machines and radio equipments in the hands of those who wanted to counter-act the lies of the Communist States, was sufficient to coalesce an opposition to the Communist Parties of Eastern Europe and make them give up power within a short period of time.

The idea that, in order to avoid this, states might take over the universal network of virtual spaces known as the World Wide Web is pie in the sky. That is unless an extraordinary number of people decide otherwise and, out of “fear of freedom,” succeed in making everybody retreat even from those virtual spaces to the servile condition of territorialism and accept that the Internet will become reduced to a series of closed and controlled Statenets or Imperialnets.

However, this would require a collapse of technology, similar to a devastating war, with total insecurity and corresponding fears taking hold of people's minds. To be sure that this does not to happen, territorialism should be superseded, in every sphere of life, by the reality of spatialism.


Spatialism should be characterized by a series of qualities and requisites attached to the spaces so as to make them cherished and taken care of voluntarily and effectively. Spaces should then posses the following traits:

- Peculiarity: that can be achieved through the personalization of spaces, highlighting the sense of variety by way of distinctive landmarks (buildings, squares, parks, etc.);

- Permeability: that means interconnectedness between spaces through the removal of unnecessary impediments (natural or artificial);

- Manageability: that means a clear attribution of responsibilities in relation to functionality, competence and willingness to manage spaces.


All this clearly goes against the current state territorial pattern in which an artificial standardization is imposed, connections between territories are obstructed by political and bureaucratic imperatives and centralization makes a tragic mockery of the efficient care and management of territories.

For spatialism to be possible we also need to have certain recognized entitlements of people in relation to spaces. They are:

- Assuredness: personal property of personal spaces should be secured (for instance protected by insurance companies financed by the customers) and not subject to the whims of a monopolistic power. The idea that property exists only because it is assured by the state, is a ludicrous notion that should be sent back to its inventor, the state robbers and tricksters, as a discarded useless assumption.

- Availability: property is like manure, the more widely spread everywhere on fertile soil, i.e. among all those able and willing to use it productively, the better. That is why the process of achieving ownership through direct effort, which results in an increase in the value of the property, is the only fully acceptable method and the only one that leaves enough opportunities for everybody willing to care and make the most of natural, artificial and virtual spaces and resources.

- Accessibility: certain properties should also be accessible, allowing people to enter and enjoy them (world heritage sites) and use them (common lands). This, by the way, means that there should be also open access to ideational resources without state made patents. Breakthroughs in knowledge and practical improvements are made possible by relying upon the past knowledge of an infinite numbers of scientists and common people and this is something to be encouraged and protected without introducing foolish limitations.


Spatialism is then a wide umbrella term meant to mark a decisive break with the narrow conception and arrogant pretences of state territorialism. In the passage from territorialism to spatialism, many new problems associated with the management of resources will appear. However, they will be solved by the ingenuity of human beings, in many different ways, according to different exigencies and wishes. The fact that not everything can be defined and decided in advance is not a reason to remain attached to the old devil of territorialism which is responsible for a long and never-ending list of miseries, tragedies and of never solved problems. A list that is going to grow as it is increasingly unlikely that the local and global problems of the 21st century can be tackled successfully within the feudal framework of state territorialism.

Spatialism is then not a jump into the dark from the supposedly cosy and wonderful world of territorialism, but an elegant and efficient way to solve old and new problems. It is an élan towards fresh challenges in new unexplored spaces of the human adventure, in order to avoid the present and future disasters that the territorial state rulers and their cronies are engendering for all of us."

(https://www.polyarchy.org/paradigm/english/spatialism.html)