Geographical Transformation

Much quarrel regarding after-modernity exists in science, and in proper geography, being some chains of quarrel and trends that they look to delimit the debate after-modern, in what refers to the relation of the concepts after-modern in geography, is possible to detect a grotesca change in practical cultural and the politician-economic ones since 1972, and this change is ‘ ‘ tied with the emergency in new dominant ways for which we try the time and espao’ ‘ (HARVEY, 1999, p.7). Therefore, enxerga this period of the one after-modernismo as a period of cultural transformations. Caused ahead of the politician-economic transformation of the capitalism from the end of century XX, this change gains expression in the architecture and the urban projects of the cities, in the transformation of the fordismo for the flexible accumulation, and in the compression of the time-space that form the after-modern condition. We very consider excellent the description of Harvey regarding the ticket of modernity to after-modernity when it analyzes after-modernismo: Start what it seems to be the fact most amazing on the one after-modernismo: its total acceptance of the ephemeral one, the fragmentary one, the discontinous one and the chaotic one that they formed a half of the baudelairiano concept of modernity. But after-modernismo it answers to this in a way private property; it does not try to exceed it, to oppose it and at least to define the elements. After-modernismo nothing, and until if espoja, in fragmentary and chaotic chains of the change, as if this was everything what it existed (HARVEY, 1999, p.49). Thus, we can say that the crises and ruptures of modern chains are the origin and the sustentation of what it comes to be after-modernity, cerne of the philosophical thought after-modernista are in entirely abandoning the project of the Iluminismo in defense of the emancipation human being, having in the individualism its bigger action.