In this chapter, I examine the conceptual linkages between Chantal Mouffe's understanding of agonism and her elaborations on (public) space. With the objective to [un]ground her concept of 'agonistic public space', I set out to discuss Mouffe's more or less implicit notions of the ontology and conflictuality of space for critical geographies. While Mouffe's proclamation of the importance of agonism in public spaces has been paramount in her discussion about the (re)vitalization of pluralist democracies (cf. Mouffe 2005a; 2007), I argue that she has not sufficiently examined the diversely interrelated, power-inflected relations between agonism/antagonism, space/place and publicness. In other words, I subject Mouffe's widely referenced term of 'agonistic public space' (Tong 2015; Kastrissianakis/Galati 2010) to a comprehensive analysis of her understanding of space proper. In two sub-sections, I examine the interpenetrating connections between agonism and space (Section: A+S) and publicness and space (Section: P+S). I discuss manifest and latent interdependencies to ask what these adjectivized qualifications of space actually do for postfoundational theories of space. Subsequently, I turn to the spatial form of the museum to examine one concrete making or unmaking of agonistic public space in the Conflictorium, Museum of Conflict, in Ahmedabad, India. Based on the hypothesis that museums, or more precisely, radically democratic museums (Sternfeld 2018), could be agonistic public space in situ, I review existing accounts of activist museums (e.g., making museum space open and public for activists, making agonism public, agonizing museum publics etc.) and aim to draw attention to museums as critical urban infrastructures. I conclude by summarizing what critical geographers, urbanists and museum scholars can take away from Mouffe's notion of agonistic public space. In sum, the chapter