Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
This paper considers the politics of land occupation in Bangladesh. Contentious politics have been conceptualised as ‘societies in movement’ by Raul Zibechi, defined through their attempts to disperse power through the reconfiguration of social relations between peasants, the state and capital. Drawing on the author's ethnographic engagement with peasant farmer movements in Bangladesh since 2002, the paper analyses the differential powers generated in, by and through the production of relations and connections involved in land occupations. This requires a consideration of both relational and structural understandings of contentious politics. Organisational structures and dynamics, as well as the ‘resourcefulness’ of social movements (e.g. their capacities to deploy material resources, skills and knowledges), enable land occupation since these are crucial in creating and maintaining the socio‐material relations necessary for political activity to be prosecuted. Drawing together these insights, the paper conceptualises land occupation as a process of ‘territorialising movement’ articulated through three interwoven spatial practices: strategic occupation, reconfiguration of social relations and territorialisation of translocal solidarities.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Paul Routledge (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: