Getting in between M and M′ or

Abstract

This commentary takes up some of the arguments Christophers develops in his piece on ‘The Limits to Financialization’ and spins them further through the prism of the ‘financialization’ of farmland and agriculture. The paper requalifies the optic, empiric, and strategic limits of the financialization literature that Christophers identifies, eventually making a call for ‘getting in between’ M and M′—exploring the practical activities of financial economization while at the same time maintaining the analytical validity of the category of capital. This is a frictional project. The contribution ends with a note on strategy, asking whether knowledge about such activities can be of any strategic political use.