**3. The capitalist expansion fronts and the formation of the current Xavante landscape**

The capitalist system is extremely dynamic during certain periods and inevitably expandable. The stationary state of capital reproduction is logically incompatible with the perpetuation of the capitalist mode of production [3]. The accumulation need sets up a dynamic characteristic to capitalism, causing the space and time barriers to be unlimitedly overcome for the sake of capital reproduction and its surpluses. The addition of new areas, in that context, caters to a vital demand of the capitalist system because, in its essence, the colonization brings in new resource sources, inaugurates new markets with manpower reserves, and creates potential consumers.

In that sense, larger profits mean growth in the capital mass that aims for cost-effective implementation and the trend for overaccumulation exacerbates, but then in an expandable geographical scale. The only escape lies in the continuous acceleration of the creation of new productive resources [3]. From that, one can deduct an impulse inside the capitalism to create the world trade, to intensify the exchange volume, to create new needs and new types of products, to implant new productive resources in new regions, and to place all manpower, everywhere, under the capital domination.

The organic need for expansion of the capitalism produces significant space and social changes as the capitalist mode of production destabilizes and replaces the previous mode of production. The capitalist model, consequently, starts to create new symbols, to restructure social and power relationships and ends up imposing a new space organization. The materialization derived from that restructuring consolidates a new landscape and hegemonizes the new production mode. The resulting landscape responds to other signs, making any material or ideological remnant of the previous model devalued or stigmatized, becoming a "residual landscape" [2].

The nonappreciation of alternative landscapes to the capitalism or the self-stigmatization of those landscapes as "residuals" is part of the cultural and sociospatial weakening and breakdown necessary to the capitalist expansion. The nonrecognition of pre-existing space contexts and the steamroller effect of the expansion activities open the necessary path to insert a new production mode which, through a new appropriation of resources, deconstructs the previous relationship models.

The consolidation of that production mode is followed by a cultural landscape that rewrites and is rewritten by a new social economic dynamic. The hegemony, at last, arises from the thorough or an almost complete elimination of the previous cultural symbolisms and social relationships. Only a dilution that is carried out under a conditioned coexistence is left to the residual landscapes.

The Xavante landscape and territory, by that perspective, should not be recognized by the capitalism as a parallel force, but as an obstacle to the insertion of new areas, creation of markets, and, consequently, impediment to the reproduction of capital. It should be seen as a remnant of a past cultural and economic model, which was replaced due to its "inability" to cater to new social demands.

Everything previously constructed by the Xavante should be, inside the capitalism, relativized, or even distorted, in an attempt to downgrade the Indian way of relating to nature. Likewise, the symbols and marks given to the space by the Xavante must be perceived by the capitalists as remnant of a distant past and at present without the necessary strength to resist the inevitable capitalist headway. The possibility of profit, capitalism's main target, superposes any millenarian culture or its principles. The ancestral lands are, through a capitalist optics, underutilized available resources that sooner or later will give in to the market "needs."

At this point, a more detailed recognition about landscape appropriation and territory formation experienced by the Xavante in the interface with the national society becomes necessary. In this way, it is possible to identify the true circumstances of the change of the production mode paradigm to achieve a real spatial and temporal understanding of the capital movements and the changes in the Xavante landscape over the centuries of contact.

In that sense, there are two relevant moments during that process: the first consists of a large period of territory expropriation and deconstruction of ancestral landscapes performed by the action of several capital expansion fronts in a row that ended up reducing that people to a rarefied mosaic of reserves; the second consists of a neocolonization process of those remaining lands through new harassments motivated by the metamorphosis and the new needs for accumulation and production of surpluses.
