Revision 140593583 of "Benutzer:Zoe Washburne/Deterritorialization" on dewiki

{{multiple issues|
{{Lead rewrite|date=September 2009}}
{{Refimprove|date=December 2008}}
}}

'''Deterritorialization''' is a [[concept]] created by [[Gilles Deleuze]] and [[Félix Guattari]] in ''[[Anti-Oedipus]]'' (1972), which, in accordance to Deleuze's desire and [[philosophy]], quickly became used by others, for example in [[anthropology]], and transformed in this reappropriation. Deleuze and Guattari encouraged the various use of their concepts - meanings other than those for which they had been created - since they did not believe in the concept of an "original sense" (which may relate to [[Phenomenology (philosophy)|phenomenology]]). Deleuze said, for example, that the people who had best understood the ''Anti-Oedipus'' were persons that were neither (university) philosophers nor psychoanalysts. He particularly liked a letter sent to him by an [[origami]]-maker, who had seen new inspiration in the book ''Le Pli'' (''The Fold'').

==Definition==
The term deterritorialization first occurs in French [[psychoanalytic]] theory to refer, broadly, to the fluid and dissipated nature of human subjectivity in contemporary capitalist cultures ([[Deleuze]] & [[Guatarri]] 1972). Its most common use, however, has been in relation to the process of [[cultural globalization]]. Though there are different inflections involved, the general implication that [[globalization]] needs to be understood in cultural-spatial terms as much as in institutional or political-economic ones is common to all accounts. In this broad sense, deterritorialization has affinities with the idea of the “disembedding” of social relations in, for example, [[Anthony Giddens]]'s (1990) analysis of the globalizing properties of [[modernity]].

Moreover, no matter through which side of indorsation or opposition with the research agendas “[[homogenization]] of globalization”, there would always have a common research study named “deterritorialization” or “across-boundaries”. However, “deterritorialization” is a word with more fierce and intense than “across-boudnaries” which accordance to [[neoliberalism]] discourse that supposed longingly to eliminate the boundaries. Neoliberalism considered that nation-state was the largest obstacle to impede the composition of global single market.

===Abstraction===
[[Deleuze]] and [[Guattari]] use deterritorialization to designate the freeing of labor-power from specific means of production.  For example, English peasants were banished by the [[Enclosure Acts]] (1709–1869) from common land when it was enclosed for private landlords.

More generally, deterritorialization can describe any process that decontextualizes a set of relations, rendering them [[virtual (philosophy)|virtual]] and preparing them for more distant actualizations. In ''Anti-Oedipus'', the obvious parallel example of economic deterritorialization is psychic deterritorialization. Deleuze and Guattari praise Freud for liberating psychic energy with the idea of libido. They criticize him for reterritorializing libido onto the terrain of a specific [[Oedipus complex|Oedipal drama]].

''[[A Thousand Plateaus]]'' (1980) distinguishes between  [[wikt:relative|relative]] and an [[wikt:absolute|absolute]] deterritorialization. Relative deterritorialization is always accompanied by reterritorialization, while positive absolute deterritorialization is more alike to the construction of a "[[plane of immanence]]", akin to [[Spinoza]]'s  [[ontological]] constitution of the world.{{Ref|Negri}} There is also a negative sort of absolute deterritorialization, for example in the [[subjectivation]] process (''the face'').

==Use in anthropology==
When referring to culture, anthropologists use the term '''deterritorialized''' to refer to a weakening of ties between culture and place.  This means the removal of cultural subjects and objects from a certain location in space and time.  It implies that certain cultural aspects tend to transcend specific territorial boundaries in a world that consists of things fundamentally in motion.

Although this term refers to culture changing, it does not mean that culture is looked at as an evolving process with no anchors.  Also, often when one culture is changing, it is because another is being reinserted into a [[cultural difference|different culture]].  For example, when a new area of the world gains access to the internet, the community also gains access to every other community that has access to the internet.  At that moment the deterritorializing process begins as the local culture is enveloped by the global community.  Here, deterritorialization and [[reterritorialization]] are seamlessly conjoined; [[reterritorialization]] occurring immediately after, as the local community becomes a part of the global culture.  This relates to the idea of a [[globalization]] of culture.  In this process, culture is simultaneously deterritorialized and reterritorialized in different parts of the world as it moves.  As cultures are uprooted from certain territories, they gain a special meaning in the new territory which they are taken into.

===With [[Capitalism]]===
In the context of globalization, some argue deterritorialization is a cultural feature developed by the “[[mediatization]], migration, and [[commodification]] which characterize globalized [[modernity]]”. This implies that by people working towards closer involvement with the whole of the world, and works towards lessening the gap with one another, one may be widening the gap with what is physically close to them.
According to the works of [[Arjun Appadurai]], this cultural distancing from the locality, is intensified when people are able to expand and alter their imagination through the mediatization of alien cultural conditions, making this culture of remote origin one of a familiar material. This makes it difficult for a local entity to sustain and retain its own local cultural identity, which also affects the national identity of the region.<ref>Hernandez,G.M.(2002).''The deterritorialization of cultural heritage'' p.2</ref><ref>Apparudai,Arjun.(1990).''Disjuncture and Difference in the Global Cultural Economy''.</ref>

Deterritorialization, in general, is one of the central forces of the modern world because it brings laboring populations in to the lower-class sectors and spaces of relatively wealthy societies, while sometimes creating exaggerated and intensified senses of criticism or attachment to politics in the home state. Deterritorialization, whether of Hindus, Sikhs, Palestinians, or Ukrainians, is now at the core of a variety of global [[fundamentalism]]s, including [[Islamic]] and [[Hindu]] fundamentalism. In the Hindu case, for example, it is clear that the overseas movement of Indians has been exploited by a variety of interests both within and outside India to create a complicated network of finances and religious identifications, by which the problem of cultural reproduction for Hindus abroad has become tied to the politics of Hindu fundamentalism at home.

At the same time, deterritorialization creates new markets for film companies, art impressions, and travel agencies, which thrive on the end of the deterritorialized population for contact with its homeland. Naturally, these invented homelands, which constitute the [[mediascape]]s of deterritorialized groups, can often become sufficiently fantastic and one-sided that they provide the material for new ideoscapes in which ethnic conflicts can begin to erupt.

==See also==
{{Portal|Philosophy}}
*[[Critical theory]]
*[[Empire (Negri and Hardt book)|''Empire'']]
*[[Fleet in being]], a naval example of a "vector of deterritorialization", according to Deleuze & Guattari quoting [[Paul Virilio]]
*[[Plane of immanence]]

==References==
{{reflist}}

===Endnotes===
#[[Antonio Negri]], [http://www.upress.umn.edu/Books/N/negri_savage.html ''The Savage Anomaly: The Power of Spinoza's Metaphysics and Politics''], Translated by [[Michael Hardt]]. University of Minnesota Press, 1991.

===Sources===
* [[Gilles Deleuze]] and [[Félix Guattari]]. 1972. ''[[Anti-Œdipus]]''. Trans. Robert Hurley, Mark Seem and Helen R. Lane. London and New York: Continuum, 2004. Vol. 1 of ''[[Capitalism and Schizophrenia]]''. 2 vols. 1972-1980. Trans. of ''L'Anti-Oedipe''. Paris: Les Editions de Minuit. ISBN 0-8264-7695-3.
* ---. 1980. ''[[A Thousand Plateaus]]''. Trans. [[Brian Massumi]]. London and New York: Continuum, 2004. Vol. 2 of ''[[Capitalism and Schizophrenia]]''. 2 vols. 1972-1980. Trans. of ''Mille Plateaux''. Paris: Les Editions de Minuit. ISBN 0-8264-7694-5.
* [[Félix Guattari|Guattari, Félix]]. 1984. ''Molecular Revolution: Psychiatry and Politics''. Trans. Rosemary Sheed. Harmondsworth: Penguin. ISBN 0-14-055160-3.
* ---. 1995. ''Chaosophy''. Ed. Sylvère Lotringer. Semiotext(e) Foreign Agents Ser. New York: Semiotext(e). ISBN 1-57027-019-8.
* ---. 1996. ''Soft Subversions''. Ed. Sylvère Lotringer. Trans. David L. Sweet and Chet Wiener. Semiotext(e) Foreign Agents Ser. New York: Semiotext(e). ISBN 1-57027-030-9.
*[[Inda]], Jonathon, Xavier.  The Anthropology of Globalization.
* [[Brian Massumi|Massumi, Brian]]. 1992. ''A User's Guide to Capitalism and Schizophrenia: Deviations from Deleuze and Guattari''. Swerve editions. Cambridge, USA and London: MIT. ISBN 0-262-63143-1.
*Warf, Barney. Encyclopedia of Human Geography
*<span class="http://library.dixie.edu/new/whybanned.html">Why Were These Books Banned?</span>
*<span class="http://www.terramedia.co.uk/Chronomedia">Chronomedia</span>

{{Deleuze-Guattari}}

[[Category:Social philosophy]]
[[Category:Anthropology]]
[[Category:Political science terms]]
[[Category:Postmodern terminology]]
[[Category:Philosophical concepts]]
[[Category:Félix Guattari]]
[[Category:Gilles Deleuze]]