Scales of Political Life: Space and Power Beyond the Polis
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
SCALES OF POLITICAL LIFE: SPACE AND POWER BEYOND THE POLIS by Derek Denman A dissertation submitted to Johns Hopkins University in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Baltimore, Maryland October 2015 © 2015 Derek Denman All Rights Reserved Abstract This dissertation considers how geographic scale shapes the theory and practice of politics. It develops a dynamic, relational approach to scale that finds folds and overlaps between micro- and macro-processes. The project asks how subjects negotiate non- concentric political domains: bodies, localities, cities, nations, the globe, and the planet. In contrast to hierarchically nested models of belonging, it emphasizes transnational, transversal, and eccentric forms of ethical and political interconnectedness. Attending to the elaborate interactions between the embodied, local, urban, global, and planetary complicates state-centric images of politics as well as those that present a flattened, reductive approach to globalization. By tracking an undercurrent in political theory through readings of Machiavelli, Michel Foucault, Michael Hardt, Antonio Negri, David Harvey, and Manuel De Landa, the project renders explicit a theory of scale that has remained at the margins of work on each of these thinkers. It connects this geographic formulation within political theory to bodies of literature focused on the polis, contemporary studies of cities, and urban interconnection. In contrast to predominant approaches to political theory and international relations that privilege either the national or global scale, this project takes the city as the starting point for an inquiry into the ethics and politics of a globalizing world. By selectively emphasizing the political space of the city and its complexities, it pursue the areas of overlap and intersection between multiple scales with rough edges. Urban theorists, such as Harvey and De Landa, have envisioned the city as a multiscalar space. This analysis locates similar tendencies in thinkers less frequently noted for their writings on cities. Machiavelli, Foucault, Hardt, and Negri reflect on the city as a site in ii which a people, a multiplicity, or a multitude is organized in a world of intersecting scales. The dissertation thus focuses on the city as a strategic point of departure in order to ask how shifts at one scale reverberate through politics elsewhere and how these relations are in turn reflected in the material and social composition of cities. Advisors: William E. Connolly, Jane Bennett iii Acknowledgements I would like to thank William Connolly. This dissertation would not be possible without his thoughtful guidance. He saw promise in this project from the start, and he helped me remember the project’s promise when I stumbled. Bill’s vast knowledge of political theory is inspiring, but it is his generosity, patience, and unshakeable gratitude toward being that make him a truly unique advisor and friend. I am tremendously thankful to Jane Bennett. Jane’s creative approach to political theory exemplifies the very best of the discipline – ever-thoughtful, wide-ranging, and politically engaged. I would be happy to write with a fraction of the lyrical power and descriptive clarity that she brings to careful explorations of difficult concepts. Without her guidance this project would not take its current form. The opportunity to work with her at the journal Political Theory also broadened my horizons as a scholar. I thank the other members of my committee, P.J. Brendese, Beverly Silver, and Juan Obarrio. Their close readings of the dissertation and insightful comments have already inspired clarifications in writing, expansions of the project, and new lines of inquiry. I would like to thank Siba Grovogui, Michael Hanchard, and Jennifer Culbert. Their mentorship has shaped my development as a scholar. Their influence on my thinking is, without doubt, evident in this dissertation. I am fortunate to have benefited from careful readings, commentaries, and conversations with an amazing group of fellow graduate students and good friends. It is with tremendous gratitude that I thank Kellan Anfinson, Nathan Gies, Christopher Forster-Smith, Chitra Venkataramani, Emma McGlennen, Ben Meiches, Chad Shomura, iv Hitomi Koyama, Casey McNeill, Willy Blomme, Zach Reyna, and Timothy Hanafin. It is no coincidence that they are brilliant scholars and excellent friends. Additional thanks are due to Nathan, Chad, Hitomi, and Casey for participating in our writing group. I suspect that this project would have faltered in its early stages were it not for their patience and care with (sometimes very) rough drafts of my work. I would like to express my gratitude for the friendship of a few people not already listed. I thank Victoria Lebron Forster-Smith for her many kind words of support. I am grateful for Gavin Cornwell’s constant encouragement. His sense of humor also brought welcomed levity to a long process that tends to become too serious. I thank my brother, Jeremy Denman. His love and support has been unwavering. I know not what I did to deserve such a loyal friend. Finally I would like to thank my parents. They have supported me in every way possible and been formative in my intellectual pursuits. My father, H. Edward Denman, Jr., inspired my passion for critical inquiry by introducing me to the scientific method. It was through his guidance that I also discovered the intrigue of geography. Little did we know at the time that it would influence my graduate work on seeing and knowing politics through space. My mother, Kathleen Denman, showed me the power of writing and helped to cultivate joy in what I would come to know as a difficult but rewarding process. My interest in the humanities comes from her, as does much of my passion for social justice. Without their love and support this project would not have been possible. I thank you both from the bottom of my heart. v Table of Contents Abstract ............................................................................................................................... ii Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................ iv Introduction ......................................................................................................................... 1 1 | Machiavelli’s Cityscapes ............................................................................................. 22 2 | Scale, Power, and Neoliberal Urbanism ...................................................................... 72 3 | Global War and Planetary Democracy ....................................................................... 123 4 | The Urban Question and the Scales of Politics .......................................................... 192 Bibliography ................................................................................................................... 251 Curriculum Vitae ............................................................................................................ 262 vi Introduction How many maps, in the descriptive or geographical sense, might be needed to deal exhaustively with a given space, to code and decode all its meanings and contents? It is doubtful whether a finite number can ever be given in answer to this sort of question … It is not only the codes – the map’s legend, the conventional signs of map-making and map- reading – that are liable to change, but also the objects represented, the lens through which they are viewed, and the scale used – Henri Lefebvre1 Within contemporary political theory, an emerging focus on geography and spatiality has begun to conceptualize the multiple, irreducible scales of politics. Transformative projects of social and ecological justice in contemporary thought require attention to scale. Labor, environmental justice, housing, and anti-war movements must navigate the interplay of bodily, local, urban, national, global, and planetary scales.2 As these movements shift across scales, distinct power dynamics come into focus. Scalar crossings reconfigure the coordinates of political thought and action. This complex interweaving of spatiality differs from an image of politics in which a nested set of scales centered on the human subject form concentric circles of belonging. In such an image, scales of politics, serving as neatly bounded sociospatial containers, produce hierarchies of ethical connection and political solidarity. In place of this image, this project offers a 1 Henri Lefebvre, The Production of Space, trans. Donald Nicholson-Smith (Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 1991), 85 – 86. 2 In the case of the environmental justice movement, it seeks alternatives to fossil fuel-driven energy policies at the national scale and harmful consumption habits at the scale of individuals. It faces the uneven geography of capitalism at the global scale as it promotes ecological thinking on a planetary scale in order to address climate systems at a tipping point. Advocates of environmental justice are not alone in negotiating an elaborate political spatiality. The contemporary anti-war movement encounters an equally complex set of scalar arrangements in the form of the “military-industrial-media-entertainment network” (MIME-NET), a war-making complex woven together out of multiple geographic scales. James Der Derian, Virtuous War: Mapping the Military-Industrial-Media-Entertainment Network (New York: Routledge, 2009), xxxvi. Within the MIME-NET,