Between Networks and Cooperation – What divides, what unites us?
- by Katrin Steiner -
What function do shopping centres have in the North and the South? In what way is consumption an element of integration within the neoliberal system? What importance do sociocultural centres have for resisting the neoliberal restructuring of cities?
These were only a few questions that were discussed on 18th September 2005 during the final forum. Leonel Yanez and Michael Ramminger provided starting points for the discussion by presenting photos and theses on different matters which were developed during the visiting programme. In the discussion, some ideas from the workshops, which took place the day before, were also discussed more thoroughly, and some new questions were raised which could not be answered entirely.
Shopping Centres – Promise or Menace?
Shopping centres are a typical element in cities of the North and South. An example is the CentrO in Oberhausen. As it is the case with the Muenster Arcades, the between private and public space has blurred; Leonel Yanez stressed that the people in Chile, for example, spend their leisure time in such shopping centres, and they not only buy things there but also go for a walk. Thus, they always are in a tension between only going for a walk and the temptation caused by the shops’ offers.At the same time, according to Yanez, there are specific shopping centres for different classes of society: Many quarters in Santiago de Chile have their own shopping centres where the people of the quarter meet. At first glance, this could be a difference between the North and the South: Shopping centres in Latin America seem to be a promise for the people and serve to integrate them, while in the North those shopping centres are just developing, and maybe they rather have an oppressive function as they make it continuously clear to members of the middle classes what they are not able to buy.
This thesis was a controversial issue. In Berlin, for example, there are shopping centres at the Potsdamer Platz or in Gropius-Stadt which are aimed at the lower middle-class. Furthermore, the function of shopping centres seems to be to establish agreement to the current neoliberal economic system.One point in favour of this thesis is that the CentrO, for example, is accepted and used by the mass of the people, and at the same time people like to go to its many pubs and bars during their evening leisure time.
On the other hand, shopping centres make it clear that in the neoliberal system certain population groups are excluded. Thus it is important to distinguish between function and appropriation of shopping centres. Their function is to attract people who are willing and able to consume. In this way, a hegemony of space is established. The domination of space is not as easily established in, for example, city centres as in those city centres many more people use that space and they do not fit into the consumption pattern. These people are, of course, also present in shopping centres as people appropriate space in ways different from what the shopping centres’ manager would like them to. A paradigmatic case for the contradictions of the neoliberal project are teenagers. They are wooed because of their consumption potential, but at the same time they just like being there without consuming anything, just because there are a lot of people and there are many things going on.
Can this „refractory appropriation“ however be a starting point for political action? What kind of action could be carried out here, which activists could be won for such a project? And, looking at the heart of it, what do people appropriate here and who is appropriating them?
Sociocultural Centres: Niche or Influence on Society?
Political resistance needs free space in which the patterns of neoliberal thinking can be scrutinised, alternatives developed and political action learned. Sociocultural centres like the Bethanien in Berlin or the Don Quijote in Muenster play an important part in this context. This is also true for the South. The resistance against the regime in Chile, for example, was organised and developed in such centres. Some of the people involved during that time are today organising protest and resistance against neoliberal structures in Chile.
At the same time, however, it is a question how they see a connection to society as a whole. Do these people only create niches which are secluded and focused on their inner life? Or do they try to influence society as well, by political action, for example?
Occupations in the North and the South
Free space is often to be found in occupied houses or public space, so that occupations in the North and the South played an integral part in the discussion. Leonel Yanez made it clear that in Chile there has hardly ever been any occupation of houses. In the past, the occupants and their political restistance rather focused on land in the cities. They put up tents there and demanded from the government to give them the land so they could build their houses themselves, or they demanded to be given social housing or get living space somewhere else. In this way, the big poblaciones developed: The people build their houses themselves and founded the sociocultural centres mentioned above. These developments have also taken place in Brazil; here the so-called favelas were build on squatted land. Furthermore, vacant houses have recently been occupied as living space is very scarce. The Frente de Luta Popular, for example, organises such occupations; this is where Andreia da Silva works.
Concerning occupations, there seems to be a big difference between the South and the North. Whereas occupations in the South can be seen as a social need for living space, occupations in the North always seem to be linked to the idea of living differently.
However, this could be a difference at first glance only. It may be true that occupations in Latin America, the poblaciones in Santiago and the favelas and occupations of houses in Rio, originated from housing shortage, but they have developed much over the time. People in the favelas of Rio, for example, do not find it attractive to live in social housing as there is no social cohesion there. People from the favelas rather want to improve their living standards in the favelas, meaning a better infrastructure and an end of police violence. Thus, favelas as well as poblaciones and the squatting of houses can be seen as a way of living differently. Maybe, at a second glance, there are some similarities to projects in the North as well as some starting points for an internationalistic cooperation.
Occupations are very much under pressure at the moment, and they again and again need to justify their existence. An example of this is the wagendorf (trailer park) Lohmuehle which squats a part of the former frontier zone in Berlin. Originally founded to use the former frontier zone alternatively, it is now, in times of a neoliberal restructuring, an object of interest for investors as the area is at the very heart of Berlin. In order to withstand this pressure and to justify their existence, the Lohmuehle-people initiate and run cultural projects in order to be accepted by the people of the quarters in the vicinity of the wagendorf.
Migration – a different issue in the South and the North?
Migration was also an issue very much discussed in the final forum. Leonel Yanez told about Peruvian migrants living in Santiago de Cile who have to work and live under precarious conditions. Therefore they have to live in poorer quarters of the city, and when they fall ill they come into conflict with the system as they do not have any papers. Legally speaking, doctors are not allowed to examine and help them; if they do it in spite of that, they have problems with the billing. At least, Yanez stressed, those migrants have not been persecuted by the state yet. It is also remarkable that Peruvians change public space in Santiago de Chile. A street north of the cathedral is called “Peruvian Avenue” as they spend their time there, waiting for job offers and talking to one another. By now, telephone agencies have put up centres with cheap offers, and the Peruvians use them to phone the people at home.
Concerning the situation of migrants, there seems to be a similarity between the North and the South, as migrants in the North also do the precarious work, being servants etc. Chile, however, is different from Brazil, because ever since there is the “democratic illusion” in Chile, people also believe in the illusion that Chile is the most developed country in Latin America. That is why migrants come to Chile in order to be able to feed their families.
Migrants’ organisations are now busy setting up some small offices in Santiago, as Yanez reported, and they are trying to publish alternative newspapers for migrants on a regular basis.
In Brazil, the situation is different as many poor people live within the country. Thus, migration from the country to the cities Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro plays a major role. It is rather seldom that migrants come from a different country and do the precarious jobs, and so the Brazilians have a different perception of migration.
Migration to other countries can also create a hierarchical structure within the country of origin. This is to be seen in Mexico. Some Mexicans successfully emigrate to the United States, they do the precarious jobs there, sometimes working illegally, and they send their money back to their families. At the same time, people come from other countries in Central America come to Mexico to do the precarious work there.
There are some differences between the North and the South in the political work of social movements. In the North, especially in Germany, political work in the field of migration often means anti-racial work. In Brazil, however, there is no connection between anti-racial and migration work. In Brazil racism is not linked to 20th century migration but dates back to the days of slavery and the oppression of indigenous peoples. This racism has long been a great part in the political work of social movements in Brazil. An internationalistic work could therefore start from this point as the topics in the North and the South are very similar.
Perspectives of Internationalistic Work 
Taking these conditions into account - how can an internationalistic work look like, a work for a city, a world for all? This question is important as today many struggles are insular, at least in the North. The attempts to connect them are in their infancy. Therefore the situation in Venezuela is very interesting as Chavez’ government initiated and allowed room for social change from below, thus changing the discourse in society. In this way, a different thinking could be created, and a common, collective project is now the general point of reference. Even if Chavez’ populist attitude and behaviour should be watched critically, as it was stressed several times in the discussion, it is worth thinking about how a common social project could be initiated. Leonel Yanez said that the struggles in the South and the North are very different and that activists would probably have to accept that. Nevertheless, there is common ground, because the neoliberal model of development, which has been established world-wide, is not aimed at the human well-being but only at economic profit. In this sense it is possible to find a common identity of resistance and to fight the current conditions. Besides the common aims of a true democracy and humanity it is also important to think about forms of organisations, Susanne Dzeik added. How can insular struggles be connected? How can global structures be build?
When trying to give an answer to these questions, the discussions of the symposium can give some hints:
- How can a „refractory appropriation“ of (public) space be linked to political action? Which people could be won for such a project? What do people appropriate here and who is appropriating them?
- How do people in alternative projects link themselves to social processes? How can they do political work there?
- Which topics for discussion could alternative ways of living, like occupations, favelas and poblaciones put forward?
- How can an atmosphere of acceptance be created which enables alternative projects and alternative thinking to exist without being transformed in a neoliberal way and being justified by the label “culturally valuable”?
- How can anti-racial work be made internationalistic?
