Lefebvre's Production of Space Theory and Capitalism (Essay Sample)

Student's Name
Professor's Name
Course Number
Date
LEFEBVRE'S PRODUCTION OF SPACE THEORY AND CAPITALISM
Lefebvre's production of space theory sees space as a production means in the economy, by overlapping all space elements in the triad simultaneously (Aghaei et al. n.p.). The elements include spatial practices and actions (humans, objects and activities), representation of space or dominant space and space of representation, also referred to as material, ideology and meaning production. Through the circuits of capital, Lefebvre's theory depicts the hegemony of capitalism in society through the resulting urbanization.
According to Lefebvre's theory, the primary circuit of capital is achieved by the appropriation of spatial practices and actions by the dominant space, the capitalists. Hence, forming a consumer society in the primary circuit of capital (Aghaei et al., n.p.). The production and reproduction of behavior and social life through consumer behavior (consumerism) brings in the secondary circuit of capital. The dominant space influences consumerism's purpose and idea, causing overproduction in the secondary circuit and building built environments (Wiedmann, n.p). The surplus realized is invested in long-term assets like real estate and technologies affecting urbanization through the transformation of physical and material structures and knowledge production. Hence the role of capitalism in societal transformation, its dominance in urbanization and consequent social imbalances and highly diverged urban spaces.
Lefebvre's theory relates to Karl Max's theory in the secondary circuit of production. The surplus-value experienced leads to the dominance of capitalism in the socioeconomic organization through urbanization (Fuchs, n.p.). According to Karl Max's theory, urbanization results in fetishism and "crushed/abstract lived experience" in Lefebvre's theory through the capitalists' created perceptions and abstract realities to drive consumerism. The transformation of physical and material structures leads to social imbalances and highly diverged urban spaces as they are individual capitalist-driven. Contrary to the Dominant Structuralist approaches, Lefebvre's held that space in itself was a relation of production (Bhattacharya, n.p.). Whilst the Dominant Structuralist approaches viewed cities as superstructural spaces of consumption for production, Lefebvre held that these investments could not be counted towards industrial profits. Investments, as classed individually, could only be viewed as separate spaces of production. Hence the relation of Lefebvre theory to other existing theories.
Based on Lefebvre's theory, primary and secondary circui