‘If this is not the fundamental condition of living together in mutual respect, in reflective conversation, in being able to change one's opinion to generate a common project,
one does not live in love.’
Humberto Maturana, 2020, my English translationIt is here, in Concón-Chile, sitting at my father's desk and surrounded by echoes of his last writings and reflections on the meaning of human coexistence and its ecology that I embark on the final Chapter of this dissertation, an Epilogue that transcends conclusions, leaving definitions of the city open to reconsideration. Drawing inspiration from the ideas of the Chilean biologist and philosopher Humberto Maturana, my father's last words resonate with a call for mutual respect and the pursuit of common projects, not only among individuals but also in harmony with nature and its ecology.
As I delve into the social exploration of inbetween spaces and the autonomous strategies of those in transit, I confront the repercussions of contemporary border regimes, particularly in the formation of
so-called refugee camps. Many of these places have developed convivial strategies and politics of urbanization in a postcolonial era that are worthy of scholarly investigation due to their relevance for the study of migration, political subjectivity, critical geography and urbanism, and the current debate on a reflexive postcolonial.
In a border regimen setting, self-made settlements have been marginally labeled as ‘non-places’ (Augé, 1995), ‘places of exception’ (Agamben, 2005), and ‘peripheral places’ (Gregory et al., 2009). These places, especially the case studies of The Dzjangal, Tiburtina and Arenales examined in this dissertation, have resisted this marginalization by developing alternative models of urbanism and placemaking. In this Epilogue I examine their political and social strategies that have produced alternative ways of life that are actively part of the city. The Dzjangal, Tiburtina and Los Arenales not only contribute to the dynamics of postmodern cities, but also invite us to rethink what the city is today, what rights it has and how we can develop collective projects to break the barriers between the binary notion of 'periphery' and 'center' in postcolonial and postmigrant neighborhoods and cities.
so-called refugee camps. Many of these places have developed convivial strategies and politics of urbanization in a postcolonial era that are worthy of scholarly investigation due to their relevance for the study of migration, political subjectivity, critical geography and urbanism, and the current debate on a reflexive postcolonial.
In a border regimen setting, self-made settlements have been marginally labeled as ‘non-places’ (Augé, 1995), ‘places of exception’ (Agamben, 2005), and ‘peripheral places’ (Gregory et al., 2009). These places, especially the case studies of The Dzjangal, Tiburtina and Arenales examined in this dissertation, have resisted this marginalization by developing alternative models of urbanism and placemaking. In this Epilogue I examine their political and social strategies that have produced alternative ways of life that are actively part of the city. The Dzjangal, Tiburtina and Los Arenales not only contribute to the dynamics of postmodern cities, but also invite us to rethink what the city is today, what rights it has and how we can develop collective projects to break the barriers between the binary notion of 'periphery' and 'center' in postcolonial and postmigrant neighborhoods and cities.