Abstract
AbstractDespite the many differing perspectives possible regarding the concept of a property
right, one central aspect is, arguably, the primal exclusionary impulse and its special
connection to a particular form of subjectivity, especially in terms of how people feel
about space, enclosed space and any subsequent property rules applicable. Such
aspects limit speculative thought concerning the enactment of challenging housing
reforms. This essay therefore asks: Why is exclusion so relevant to spatial ethics, and
is it only a particular form of subjectivity that is involved in the phenomena of
exclusionary impulses? As a response, new speculative thoughts are proposed that
aim at challenging such specialised subjectivity, exclusionary impulses and spatial
engagement: re-sanctification of enclosed space, de-objectification of being and a call
to develop new or alternative subjectivities and modes of somatic thought.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference47 articles.
1. Aalbers, Manuel B., and Brett Christophers. 2014. Centring Housing in Political Economy. Housing, Theory and Society 31 (4): 373–394.
2. Aitchison, Nick. 1993. The Dorsey: A Reinterpretation of an Iron Age Enclosure in South Armagh. Proceedings of the Prehistoric Society 59 (1): 285–301.
3. Alexander, Gregory S., Eduardo M. Peñalver, Joseph W. Singer, and Laura S. Underkuffler. 2009. A Statement of Progressive Property. Cornell Law Review 94: 743–744.
4. Campbell, Fiona A.K.. 2001. Inciting Legal Fictions: ‘Disability’s’ date with Ontology and the Ableist Body of Law. Griffith Law Review 10 (1): 42–62.
5. Chalk, Alfred F. 1951. Natural Law and the Rise of Economic Individualism in England. Journal of Political Economy 59 (4): 332–347.