This article considers why urban scholars have made relatively little progress in recent decades in the identification and advancement of strategies for challenging the mobility of capital. It is suggested that the lack of progress is due, in part, to the failure of urban researchers to critically examine the politics of capital mobility. Politics is emphasized over other factors because an overemphasis on technical conditions and economic considerations has led to the "naturalization" of capital mobility and the depoliticization of the relationship between capital and place. Here the focus of critical inquiry is shifted onto the politics of capital mobility by examining how the mobility of capital has been naturalized by critical researchers in geography and related disciplines, and by exploring how alternative research agendas that challenge the assumption of capital mobility repoliticize the place-capital relationship and enable new forms of urban political research and practice.
Available at: http://works.bepress.com/mark_pendras/5/