Lefebvre (2003) analyzes the urbanization, approaching that the result of the increasing process of industrialization, which invades the cities through the plants and that also it arrives at the field, beyond imposing the rhythm of the agricultural or extrativa production. Ahead of some functions of the urban space, Ribeiro (2003) it points that, the urban way of life the one that we are citizens ahead reduces the daily life to one shuffled system of meeting and failures in meeting, despersando us of obstacles as the transit, difficulties of housing and lack of occupation for others as much. But it also makes possible the ephemeral, accidental meeting, of the fast after-modern identity, staged in one of the much qualitative possible to the Being in the world contemporary (RIBEIRO, 2003, p.325). Ahead of insatisfaes caused for the capitalism, Ribeiro (2003) in this manner points some consideraes on the reproduction of production in the urban life. Amongst natural course of history, is perceived that before mechanization the man it saw the nature as divine, extracting of it only the essential its survival. However, other values start to be substituted.
This magnifying of the way scientific technician has as main agent the capital, that shapes the spaces, imposing new habits, speeding up the social time. Lefebvre affirms that, … in such a way the logics as the tautologias deny the nature. does not make it in abstract or speculative way. The industrial rationality, when rejecting the particularitities, dilacera purely and simply the nature and everything that relation with the naturalness has (LEFEBVRE, 2003, p.361). Being thus, the nature passes to be seen as good you went off to the man and, the city, and one of the expressions most forceful of the social capacity to transform the nature into merchandise, as it affirms Spsito (2003), that the city is seen as counterpoint of the proper city, that is, the city is considered, par excellence, the not-nature.