The dialectic among globalization, regionalization and territorialization

Could it be stated that the globalization's subject is the "universal citizen", as subject of human rights, who promotes the West by means of the UN or, rather, that the historical subjects capable of changing the world must obey the logic of a social class? Here it is shown that the underlying ontological construct under the "universal citizenship", the "transcendental ego", only has real existence if it is corporeal, plural and operative. To untangle the knot between epistemological subject and actant subject, territory as a material criterion is adopted, rather than its representation on a world map. On this beta-operative base of simultaneous enlargement of the ego and the territory, the philosophical materialism urges us to exert a solvent criticism which affects not only the idea of globalization, but also to every egological representations supported on a substantial ego. The same criticism applies to Peter Sloterdijk's abstract esferology, whose morphological reconstruction of the human embryo exodus from the primitive zygote to the empires and global systems' draft results in an electronic world citizenship under the current tv-neighborhood. Now, when we take into account the real geopolitical data, the geo-strategic reconfiguration that the regionalization and localization processes bring with, under the referred globalization, we have to note that the international political system, far from moving towards a "totalization" oriented by a unitary subject (e.g. USA), it is heading for a growing regionalization whose actors are divided territorially based on centripetal and centrifugal forces that depend on the sums of hard and soft skills associated to different sets. At the current situation, not only historical subjects are presented as new regional powers mediators (such as the famous BRIC), but the markets themselves force to set the world map around the Pacific. Hence, the impression of expectant subject, which appears to be the philosophical consciousness. However, given the never-ending activity of the operative actants subjects who never stop building new inter-regional networks, it needs to be acknowledge that the main consequence for the epistemological subject (of philosophical nature), is the increasing mixing between those philosophies that are articulated in the early century with capacity to account for that individual item, fragmented by discontinuities (pluralistic, therefore), but operative. It is the recognition of the plurality of singular native interactants which, in my opinion, is producing a growing mixture between contemporary philosophies so obviously remote as the materialist phenomenology of Ricardo Sanchez Ortiz de Urbina, the structuralism of Deleuzian lineage and the Marxism of Hegelian affiliation and critical orientation (from Adorno to Zizek, passing through Gustavo Bueno).