Engels-Schwarzpaul, AC2020-12-162020-12-162020-12-162020-12-16Interstices: Journal of Architecture and Related Arts, 20-38. Retrieved from https://interstices.ac.nz/index.php/Interstices/article/view/6451170-585Xhttps://hdl.handle.net/10292/13888At the beginning of spatial struggle is separation: perception of what is in, or outside of, one’s body, one’s house, kin, neighbourhood, and polity. We all have vague or even detailed ideas of that separation—but this we often goes unnoticed, the very notion that performs the very separation we imagine. For instance, we tend to associate a territory with a nation-state and a homogenous population, while a periphery appears to lack connection and substance. Marking territory along these associations is challenging after forty years of global neoliberal politics, resulting in the displacement of millions of people and austere biopolitical measures. Against this backdrop, this paper explores the politics of place and mobility, exemplified by two case studies, one in the Mediterranean and the other in the Pacific, to raise an urgent contemporary question: how can we negotiate between the freedom of movement, on the one hand, and the protection of Indigenous land rights and self-determination, on the other?Interstices: Journal of Architecture and Related Arts takes a non-exclusive copyright in the papers submitted and accepted, i.e., we reserve the right to publish and republish the paper (for instance, electronically). Authors are welcome to upload their papers in published form into their institution’s research repository. They retain the right to republish their papers elsewhere, provided that they acknowledge original publication in Interstices.Journal ArticleOpenAccess