Moore Suffering for territory

This is helping me to write this paper trying to now analyze in particular the attack to the lote 68 in 2002.

1. Donald Moore book presents a very complex theoretical framework, which is not and abstract model but the result of his intention to analyze the processes affecting Kaerezi people and places avoiding generating and homogeneous analysis. I will try to explain a few ideas I get form his analysis. I will then bring some theoretical questions that disturbed me while reading the book, not because I disagree but because I understand his making meaning of dark zones of analyzing micropolitics from an ethnographic perspective. The author analyzes subjectivity, power and spatiality in Kaerezi in which he brings together different critical perspectives. It could be said that he is talking about governmentality, and how along with sovereignity and discipline the foucaultian triangle, (which -he adds- is in motion and -he does not say this explicitly- in plural) operates on the imbrications of people and things. It can also be said that he spatializes governmental forms of power production and that he shows how space is at the same time a field, tool and means of power relations.
But this is also a historical account, were the effect of history on the present are not simple of simple determination, but rather of the production of conjunctures which offer conditions of possibility to different subjects and their relative positions. Power relations are neither a consequence of class inequalities nor are effected only by state centralization of institutionalized regimes of rule and their reproduction. Power relations are entangled in a multiple and complex set of relations where the sovereignty over population and territory are not a stable set of interaction, but rather multiple, overlapping, and contested, but fundamentally they are placed. Entangled Landscapes are the outcome of this multiple forms of power relations (in his analysis of the chiefs, the headmen, the rainmakers, the national government and state officials, among others) of the multiple spatialities shaping place simultaneously (of men, women, of different state agencies, of people form different villages, resulting form non human features, etc.), as well as multiple temporalities (colonial times, independence movements, post-coloniality). Historical power relations, spatialities and subjectivations are sedimented in places, not in a clear superposition, but in entangled sediment.
Race becomes a fundamental locus of place and subjects in the colonial area that informs all the relations under analysis, as racialized dispossession during colonization transformed the land property, labor relations it thus transformed spatiality and subjectivities. Affect is an effect of governmentalities, sovereingnities and disciplines, but also of the sedimented landscapes where subjects, power and place are entangled.
He complements governmentality with Gramsci’s analysis of hegemony, he use it to understand the way violence (coercion) is present in the establishing economic relations and a cultural field, the way culture becomes a battle field as it is the sphere making possible productive relations, and the way articulating a discourse, practice and meanings is fundamental in any regime of rule.
2. Questions: Could we say that if governmentality focuses on the way people are connected with things and how things are disposed for action, then hegemony complements as a battle over direction of the productive conditions of things and people? I am not sure how to address the overlapping and complementation of this two fields. Other questions this book sugest to make in other assemblages (places, histories, conjunctures): How does landscape complement to space and place? How articulations work with contradictions? How erasure works on sedimentation? There are many more question I have but I cannot yet phrase, as this book brings me a lot of “problems” into how to refine analysis of power practices and discourses making subjects and places.
References

Moore, Donald 2005. Suffering for Territory: Race, Place, and Power in Zimbabwe, Duke University Press

Williams, Raymond 1977. “Hegemony” in Marxism and Literature, Oxford University Press, 1977, pp. 108-114.