Space and sociality: notes on the role of social institution in urban development

More often the concept of sociality may be considered in terms dealing with time rather than space, such as evolution, change, transformation, mobility etc., meaning that sociality is an ongoing series of events in time, which it truly is.
Nevertheless, this is far from any thorough conclusion of an ontological primacy of time opposed to space. As pointed out by Marx the capitalist market is constantly struggling to overcome all territorial, i.e. spatial obstacles, while at the same time denying the space through the time . Hence capitalism’s lability towards the necessary assemblage of events and things in time and space, which tends to reject the conflicting forces of the capital to obtain unlimited accessibility, i.e. to strive towards a smooth space, though still depending on endless limitations to increase surplus, i.e. to strive towards a striated space.
It’s not simply a question about the state apparatus or the market being most likely to manage the diversity of smooth and striated spaces, whether it’s about the nation state, the city or the very institutions that are regulating the flow of goods, money and people, constantly reshaping the entities of sociality.
It’s increasingly about the assemblage of all embedded entities right down to the level of buildings, embodying all of their kinds and their topical accessibility and limitations.