**4. Conclusion**

The three "de"-perspectives culminate in a common political center-point that we can adequately circumscribe with the notions of "communalism" or "libertarian municipalism", two concepts that have been coined by Murray Bookchin [40]. Among other things, they express the necessity to withdraw particular goods and services from the market because they satisfy the basic needs of all people, irrespective of income, social status or any other discriminatory difference. They are common goods. Besides goods and services of health and education, mobility, food and water, safe and livable environment, it is housing in its material and social-relational conditions. Libertarian municipalism conflates the singularity of women and men with their socially derived individual aspirations on the one hand and the collectivity of the local neighborhood in which they are socially embedded on the other.

In order to re-strengthen the commitment to the local spatial and social environment, political decentralization becomes one core ingredient in future housing policies. To put the housing's function of social infrastructure to the fore and defend its primary purpose as a means of cohabitation aligns with the UN's Sustainable Development Goals and does not inevitably jeopardize its value-preserving meaning. In fact, this latter meaning remains relevant, considering the ecological sustainability of our societal transformation in the Anthropocene. The commodification of the home is neither necessary nor desirable any longer, which, in turn, fosters decommodification as another core ingredient in future housing policy. The local is not an isolated and unconnected spot on the earth's surface like a sand grain on a sand hill, but a node in a network of interrelated nodes. The relations may functionally vary, but the essential point is that distance is not metric but relational. This functional shift produces a different pattern of collaboration and cohabitation, surmounting the traditional understanding of territorial inclusion and exclusion. Not least, deterritorialization turns out to be the third core ingredient in future housing policy. There is no ideal or perfect point where all three "de"-perspectives merge. The decisive moment is that they have left the corner points of their counterparts.
