¶    Welcome, Opening
9:35

The local collective was from the beginning present in management and decision making.
Issues by the local activists were prioritised, and shaped the CFP.

Considering the "separation" activist-scholar, comes the direction:
    to be useful, to facilitate cross-fertilization - for the benefit of both groups!

¶  Eviction of an Enschede squat & a film-documenting it  (Jeanette-writer, journalist & Mia-film maker)
11:30

voids of eviction
documentary film
abandonment of the squat she belongs to
mia spent a lot of time there since 2011
in @ENSCHEDE, "studio complex"

### >V: I WILL LINK THE PRESENTATION FROM ROTTERDAM

3000 m2 ex-car garage squat
25 artists involved with studio spaces

workshop spaces of artists : cultural space, 
~10 people live there
squatted ~ late 2010
never oficially legalised, but was supported by the local gov (who owns the building)
2017 december, this changed
2018 april: vacated, to be destroyed for housing (they said)
offered alternative building

Local government offered an alternative building to the group
new place smaller than old one, also not possible to live there

When people (artist squatters) have a baby/family, they want a more stable situation
Everyone was squatting for their own benefit: to produce ans sell art...
except for the "cultural side": showcase their work, exhibitions, concerts, etc.

inside reaction:
    15 of 25 say yes to the proposal (the ones that did not live there)
    the other 10 opposed, but accepted this as a majority decision
the city government wants to destroy the old building : so from january to april, J & M started with the interviews 

space also did cultural events and concerts, which would also be impossible at new building
the people of the city were upset about dissapearance of the cultural space
long term project : people have different strategies and so they have to confront about city governments and its political proposal

Before criminalisation squatting was embedded in everyday life of the Netherlands...
Many artist institutions have their originis in squats
Now squatting is more politicised

30 squats before 2010, 3 squats afterwards (in Enschede)


<VIDEO 1: zuider festival 2016>
"it wasn't always this "vibrant""

"Vision is to make 60 minute documentaries that allow you to go into the depth of the topic"

The doc aims to "humanise" squatters.

# COMPLEX & HANGARRRRR

<VIDEO 2: indivìdual interviews>

* sad to leave but "let's see what the future will bring"
* doesn't like to see how nothing will happen here for 10 years
"or 200 appartments nobody can afford"
* "this space was freedom"
"you could experiment with art and be what you wanted to be"
"also hang out with people, which you need to do as an artist"
* people realized they subsisted without income, and might not have a clear way to return to that life.
one transitioned from "creating art, to create sleeping cabins"
* space showed "this is beautiful, cool", and "possible for real"
new space = 2000 m2 hangar

they were always moving on and they found a good location


<PHOTO: AFTER EVICTION>

First thing they did, is cut down the trees
CYANIDE IN THE GROUND BECAUSE OF TEXTILE INDUSTRY
THEY HAVE TO EXCAVATE 5M OF SOIL TO BE ABLE TO USE IT
NO PLANS OR INVESTORS YET

"there was nothing to do is simply not true"
but they could have

<VIDEO 8>

other interviews in a new space : how they feel 

"how do you approach this kind of project aestheticaly"
given that squattig usually does follow some traditions
is it now different than the "punk" culture?

<next video>

    images of the squatters : images of everyday life 
    we chose this example for documenting what happens : making decision toghether; 
"people with different opinions forced to make decisions together"
"which was not the case before"
"democracy seemed like a positive step"
but what you saw showed that the feelings of the people might not have reflected that


***

We want to continue making films.
We decided not to focus on places, but themes.

Upcoming episodes - one could be on "violence".
What is it?
Against human beings or things? How do they communicate?


    Q V:
    You took a democratic decision. Are you happy with this? What would you do different?

People didn't change their minds later.

Some people thought it would be good to split up: (some to take the offer, some to squat a new place).
However, the group that wanted to "continue"  squatting didn't feel like they are prepared to pick up a new place.
The attitude of the "Take the offer" group seemed very used "to take"


    Q L:
    What is your intention with the docu?
    Art squats seem different.

Is there a politics behind it?
Or is there a racial, gender, etc condition?

Mia: This was a self-centered niche, people are coming from the artist background.
J: 3-4 people from "CONTINUE" group are non-traditional artists.

4 of the squatters occupied another place, they are not artists in a traditional way
the purpose of the documentary : arting squatting : in the netherlands squatting is not always politicized;
to show squatting is still relevant for culture 
mia: wants to illustrate and humanize - "individuals, not just movements"


    Q E:

Was there someoene who didn't "take"?

J: Yes, 1 person.
Alcoholic, etc... Split from the group with a violent act.


    Q A:

Q1 : ### ???
Q2 : why evict now? did something change in the city? 
Q3 : do you think the situation would be different if you wouldn't get this offer?

they started to see us as gentrifiers.
(for them, positive!)

"well, but the city[government]'s not going to like this"
because they gave money, people in the group started censoring each other


    Q X:
    If the governement supporting the occupation influence the decision of the squatters? 

2010 october the government introduced a legal occupation
squatting is not easier anymore : 3 occupation 2 for housing and 1 for

• 2015 the governments giving money for festivals 
• 2016 the governemnts gives money for a community garden
• this actually corrupts the group

The local government was increasingly subsidising Studio Complex (for festivals, gardens, etc.)
This "corrupted" some artist-squatters: "if we do this perhaps the city gov. doesn't like it"

because they gave money, people in the group started censoring each other:
    "well, but the city[government]'s not going to like this"

the mess is not there (in the new place) anymore
"but i don't understand why"

what changed?
everything is divided up between individuals.
not a collective space anymore (inside), like a kitchen, or communal space "

the city governement try to convince the city to give another space like the art squat and this is a way to influence the group 
the city governement gives money for materials to corrupt the group : it's a strategy to control the squatting movement

• the majority of the group isn't conscious of this influence : she prefers illegal strategy 

    Q N:

Says:
        you can take an offer, and still sleep there.
        taking an offer is not the end.
        it doesn't stop other people from squatting.
        you can construct things in the courtyard.
        do things that "aren't quite according to the rules", if you don't really ask.
        in the NL: "there are always rules, and ways around the rules".


V tries to express this as a graph:


(For a more developed effort of this idea, see 🔗sqek-tacticmap !)

    Q M : 
        ### CHECK
        did people feel like they lost something?
        is there a conflict about this with the people?

they blame the government.



    Q O : 

Class and knowledge perspectives.
How did these differences evolve?

substance-dependent people: how do you engage them, connect to the effective dimensions of class (and others)?

there is no consensus on how to handle differences in class:
    * somebody decided to not make money in the space, to "not corrupt it"

anecdote about taking the space:
    the for-profit artist "entrepreneur" got the biggest new space
    as he "depends on the space"

"is part of that money invested into the squat?"
no, of course not ;-)

and then you get something like:
    "if you would also work, you could have afforded a place to stay, and wouldn't need to squat, and jeopardise the space"


    Q V :

is there a legal body that "took the offer"?

yes, a stiftung (foundation) was created 
before it was a local art group, now the same people didn't want to do this "fiscal sponsorship" again.

"why?"

"people using substances were publicly visible, and this art institution disagreed with that."
they advocated to be "more professional" on the outside.
the 3 representatives of this stiftung, happen to be the people that always advocated this.
they just went forward and made the stiftung themselves.


##### MISSING PRESENTATION?

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 

At 16:00 > 24 people (8 women + 16 men)

¶  Presentation of "Squatting the grey city" book (Dee)
About Rotterdam squatting.

Mapping of Netherlands and its 'borderlands'.
Feedback of stories and legacies from the past.

Wants to talk about:
    * The Rotterdam book
    * Have a broader discussion about "for whom" and "what/why" we're writing our works

Didn't feel Rotterdam was as covered.
Would be nice to hear from other cities more.

Went to the archives to find out stuff.

<DUCK SQUATTER NEWS CLIP>

Doesn't feel like the definitive work.

(Guest workers anecdote)

1977 

"looking back I wish we were more radical".

a lot of it was about migrants.

social centers : free shops 

now 50% with 1 foreign parent, was first legalised to be at least 5%!
so, much more diverse now!

(shows maps.squat.net)

show the squat maps (housing; occupied public space; caravan sites; cultural squats; map also of previously evicted squats)


#_____

i did not map private places
"there would be 1000s if i would"

orange colors 1977 squatting 
1996 occupied and than legalize 

zines;
show continuity. "there were always active people"
i was impressed with 90s interviews, talking about "20 years from now".
they correctly expected how the city was changed, via the gentrification process;
he wants to show how people are now; after the gentrification process with shops and pubs; people talk about the process 

was interesting to see people talking about those processes, which are now "hard to even imagine, as you take the city for granted".

NL social housing was privatised a few decades ago, was ~50%.
early 2000s saw a lot of crazy scandals around speculation.
squatters benefitted from them, because demolitions were stuck for 10 years.
"i didn't know that at the time".


      (some select projects)

(talks about the quarantine island)
murky story!
after construction, it was immediatelly obsolete.
squatted in 1979 by artists.
... WEBSITE >etc ??? sticktingkunsthein.nl
they do their own thing, don't really get involved in the scene.
probably signed a 6 years contract, as the place might get redeveloped?
"they have an artist-in-residence program"


(house 2)
neighbours complained. sure, some people were a bit messy.
now:
    500k properties for-profit by "social housing" corporations

#3
2013 was "no border camp!" for 200 people.
1 week, next to the river
nazis tried to get there via boat. were intercepted by the police.

#4
cool bands played there.

#5
poortgebouw

#6
DHZ public squat.
the DIY bike repair shop.
"just this at the moment in rotterdam".



      situation

18% offices now empty! 50% more than 10 years ago.



      who is it for?

conclusions? was writing more a history book!

definitly more for activists than academics.

as sqek we want to be relevant to the movement, "not just take and that's it".
"what we see quite often!"
"so far we've done a good job, at least trying!"

be aware of the privilege!
"I was squatting, and that helped!"

question of language ... would be good to have more distribution.


      questions

N:
    (perhaps a controversial statement)
    squatting ban sort of kicks rotterdam style squatting over the edge.
    ... and was caused by mistakes made in amsterdam!
    Amsterdam did not take into account the risks of fallout.

E: ...

anti-squatting gets mentioned.

P:
    as it is quite informal, it could be not just for activists, but also for people just interested in alternative cultures.

O:
    it's a weird, strange book! in a good sense.
    it mixes different styles, modes, etc.
    it should be read by more people.

M:
    it resonates with "don't write the history, write a history"

L:
    core of sqek "we want to share our methods of investigation with the outside"
    this is a great book

V:
    did you have to make difficult decisions?
    didn't include some things that i wasn't sure about.

¶  SQeK publishing (L)

### more info on which session is this exactly ???

* (Questions of being too academic)

* Distribution Strategies for making the book accessible to as many people as possible:
    * even though the hard copies are extremely expensive being published by academic publishers, whose primary purpose is to sell copies to buyers such as university libraries)
    * ... "you can get free copies if you present the book publically, or review it ... they want to sell books"
    * ... "the paperback will be published later if they sell it well"
* We make pdf files of books available to everyone
* There are more academic publishers who provide pdf and have open access policy: UCL, Univ. of Amsterdam, Springer
* Our books have a lot of influence on movements (perhaps also on politicians)

* We assume people want our work
* Should we only produce-write on demand?
* Should we have our own publishing house?

E: Price is crucial: no book should cost more than 20€

¶  PRESENTATION OF TRESPASS ISSUE #2 (Galvao)

This is not academic; it's something else:
    * different languages
    * multilingual experience
    * the decision making process is horizontal (2 people)
    * text review by two editors
    * anonymous peer review:
    * one activist with the concrete experience, one with accademic skills
    * with structured arguments and references
    * second issue composed by member of sqek;
    * writing in academic model;

* Published a translation !
by Federal Anarchists of Canarias; 
Squatting in Honk Kong written like a diary,
Che ne sarà di Noi? Italian contributions;  very short text about migrants?

Innovative approach and format:
    - Translations
    - Interventions (quicker, shorter format)
    - Book reviews

The editorial line and format is available on the website, where the different types of contributions requested by the journal can be found.

Multiple language registers (not only English, the "conventional" academic language).

"We publish Theory, by which we understand: texts reviewed by 2 persons (peer review)." = one activist that has concrete experience in the movement  + another individual with academic skills (i.e. checking the rhetorical part of text, consistency, references)

a lot of work; very intersting edition; try to publish texts, to spread the reasons of the movements; very positive response when they ask for the contribution

¶  PRESENTATION OF THE JOURNAL "Napoli Monitor" (Stefano)

"Lo stato delle città" (from Napoli Monitor, n° O)

THE ORIGIN OF THIS GROUP OF PEOPLE IS SQUATS 
NAPOLI MONITOR : A BIG PAPER JOURNAL vs aestethics of crime (stigmatisation) + touristification undergone by Naples in 2000s = how to talk about the city in a 'normal' way = there is a problem of narration of what happens inside the city, and especially in peripheral areas

Journal #0, maybe more stable?
500, next one 1000 copies.
Long articles.
<SHOW TOC>
Social enquiry, but from the bottom.
Self managed.

¶  (Debate in circular structure)

* Don't overstress with reach. Just do it, even if it reaches limited audience.

S: i'm nomadic, i need digital

...

"draining of knowledge from the academia"
"Open acess for those who know it"

D: Produce, maybe, 10 page summaries in different languages!

V:
How about:
    * listing all our writings:
        MAKE A SQEK INDEX
    * assigning status, possibly assign / prioritize according to a protocol for reach

academics don't only report, they (may) inspire, shape policy, etc.

¶  Far right facing justice. Attacks on autonomous spaces continue (Katja Lihtenvalner)

Situation in Greece.
After the leftist rapper Killah P (Pavlos Fissas) was stabbed to death in 2013, the Nazi of Golden Dawn were put on trial for the first time = very big trial with two prosecutors and multiple convictions (69 defendants), still ongoing since 2015
Attempted murders of migrant workers, trade unionists, attacks against social centres and demos + investigation for criminal association.

Nazi attacks to social centres and squats : 
    1) the case of Antipnoia (30.06.2008) when Nazi stormed into the place, stabbed two activists 
    2) Social centre Synergeio (10.07-2013) involving one Golden Dawn MP on a motorbike bought with Parliamentary money
    3) Attack to a refugee squat (2016), Notara 26: everything was fixed after one week
    4) Attack against Libertatia, in Thessaloniki (21.01.2018)
    5) Favela, in Piraeus (25.2.2018), a leftist non-squatted social centre

    Since GD started to be prosecuted, they lost media support and therefore new far-right groups started to distance themselves from GD (they don't use the 'brand' anymore); they rather ally with urban Nazi gangs and use SMEs for organising mobilisations 
    Fascists' slogan after the attacks and during trials: "no prison for the nationalists".

What happened in 2013?
OK, the trial.
"They [the right] stopped being Golden Dawn."

And Syriza?
### (missing some notes)

### this was a part of which session?
### and, what to do with the graph? how to present it? --- i think  a "V doodles this, meanwhile" is fine. contributions like this should be embraced!

¶  ("Theory vs practice" debate + Graph/doodle by V)

O:
academics need activists because that's the only way they can report

V:
academics don't only report,
they (may) shape policy, etc.

N:
it's at least a 2-way relationship

E:
we need different people in academia


V:
(not only "theory" and "practice"), where is "tactics"?
more at 🔗sqek-tacticsmap

¶  G20 in Hell

Police is using all possible audiovisual sources to track and arrest individual activists
"cooperation of repression is keeping them together"

### <footage, videos!>

¶  PUBLIC MEETING WITH LOCAL ACTIVISTS AND SQEK MEMBERS @ 95100 ABOUT THE SQUATTING HISTORY OF CATANIA

Participants in different squats over history (since 1988) tell their own memories of the experience, and also their views on current struggles.

¶  Self-management & resistance in  Amsterdam from the 1977 onward (Hans)

"Choosing to be active on the level of the city".

in Amsterdam there were hundreds of squats!
Last three years squatting are in neighbours of the city 
"Let's try to see if something we learned is useful today."

Disruptions.
How much disruption do you have to do, to achieve something?
Nobody ever said, you have to always be nice! (If you find this works, let me know!)
(But also, not to be as violent all the time).
### >ED "scandalous?"

Depends on the "critical / collective opportunity structure", or, "what you can get away with."
Disruption can backlash.

It's a balancing act!



Theories <of ?>:

1. Causing uncertainty for the authorities can give you a tactical advantage.


2. Movements are rational process (about what is effective, etc).
Self management is management


3. Radicalization VS isolation dynamic.
Get attention from other activist! You have to be, or, appear, radical.
On the other hand, this leads to losing "popular support".

Counter-cultural identity!

"We don't want power ... but we need!"
To do something, we need organisation!


4. Interaction with the police
Police is adapting.
"Try to get a handle on the development of repression!"



Case study:

* People don't follow through with debate conclusions

* Debates should be rational.
However, there was "alpha male" type power involved.

* The more aggressive stances dominated.

* The idea of rational debate precludes you have a goal!

Dealing with violence:
    a) thugs
    b) state - has a monopoly! you cannot expect to win!

Goal:
    * staging a protest to get solidarity, while curbing violence! it's not fine to be injured.
    * but also, to provoke police, towards using as much violence as possible

##### This gives an idea of police reading this, and higher order hermeneutics

[But be internally transparent]:
    * violence was secretly provoked
    * activists [inside] not involved, get into trouble

Next:
    Keep the police out, no matter what.
    Building welded-in like a fortress.
    "No more evictions, and let's see what happens!"
Police prepare enormous military eviction.
Mayor gets nervous last day, pulls it off.

Tactic: resquatting!:
    as quickly as possible!
    "one building was resquatted 9 times!"

Uncertainty! (Tanks on square anecdote)

There were groups, some manipulate others into changing strategies!
(Perhaps to more violent, etc)
"Some of us were naive about this."


* Cultural identity:
    * Related to leadership (leading, being led)
    * [...]

* Managing level of repression:
    * set up talks
    * [...]

* CHECKLIST!



________________________

Q: An idea of police reading this tactical manuals, and higher order hermeneutics?

Police started to practice the roof eviction tactic.
"Ritualization of protest" won't work, as the police is adapting.

Mentions another tactic:
    "Create as much as violence as possible, to make police more prone to compromise."
    It achieved the purpose, but provoked negative responses from the public.



Q: Resistance to violence inside the police unites

Yes, we speak a lot to each other.
Anecdote:
    Police never came one time, where there was an attack on a new townhouse construction site.
    As they possibly had their own interests?





Activists need to create uncertainty in the authoritires in order to deal with repression.

Radicalism attracts attention from the media, but public support can be also lost.

Counter-culture identity: we don't want power but we need power (organisation, leaders, etc.)

Interactions police-squatters.

In Amsterdam many squatters threatened with damages to the city so authorities deemed it was cheaper to negotiate, buy and subsidise squats.




Political squaters?
For Hans "using other people's help via radicalization, to achieve a non-transparent goal, possibly against other groups" (?)

"Political squatters": created "action teams" aiming to radicalise squatting, but with goals beyond squatting, secret agendas and manipulation of other squatters.

¶  Squatting & urban commons (Miguel) + Discussion

"Sqek is an intention to create knowledge together."

Discussion & collective sharing of experiences about these two questions:
    
    1. Achievements and failures of squatting experiences?
      In terms of: self-management + anti-capitalism
      "Why is it still meaningful and valid?"
    
    2. How are urban commons created and defended through squatting?
      And institutionalisation VS resistance to institutionalisation.

Some of us believe squatting can contribute to improve cities.
Of course there are also land occupations, etc.
But, in this collective we are mostly focused on cities - "in all the dimensions, and criteria you can imagine", including:
    Self management, horizontality, internal democracy, solidarity, ...




(Debate on question 1)

S: squatting is instrumental in refugee squats in Athens
    is it about housing, autonomy, or to have a revolutionary politics?
    "success or failure", depends on the goals.

F: squatting network is wonderful in Rome, but leisure has been very much commodifies and politicisation decreased
M: squats may achieve simple and individual things, not only larger social change
V: bad management of squats may lead to expropriation (privatisation) of a common good; common based on a "community" may be worse than public or even private
I: success depends on the spread/difussion of squatting because it's ilegal and by a minority, which is always potentially negative for participants
N: there are objective and subjective goals and achievements... on the positive side: learning experience, helping each other
X: gyms or concert-halls are successful projects of self-management... but there might be dissatisfaction as one wants a general revolutionary project!
F: squats are examples of revolutionary potential and good illegality, challenging the state... but in Rome common people want more legality, as non-legal is synonymous with corrupt
T: squatting is a process... many male-activists in squatted gyms
M: not sure about "retrospective analysis" - every squat is an achievement
E: squats are always the beginning of something... Casa Pound (fascist squat) is not a success
L: "occupy with little expectations; success is on top of this, against the expectations"



(Debate on question 2)
"let's move to urban commons"

L: "UC is more than just squatting."
many: "I don't use this word"
F: dangerous concept. urban commons is middle-class leftist ideology. "common to whom? are we in the same community?"
V: commons as infrastructure, vs commons as community-managed
F: water, air and squats are very different
S: In Naples, the squats away from the label "bene comuni" are ilegalised and persecuted
A: Teatro Valle led the approach on "urban commons" but there are many types of squats
I: Teatro Coppola dn Palestra Lupo, in Catania, use the label "urban commons" to distinguish themselves from more politicised squats such as Liotru and Colapesce
M: commons is mainly a reaction against enclosure / privatisation / dispossession
X: commoning is a process... socialisation of transport tickets in Rome... evictions of previously legalised ("assigned") squats in Rome... it is important their relation with the neighbhourhood
F: check the historical use of the concept... is this concept dividing the movement?
E: why not to talk only about power and capitalism? "urban commons" seems used by those with power

also heard:
    "urban commons" is something to tell others (perhaps the large public) who they are, what they're doing
    squatting is a too general term!
    there's too many experiences, cultures, identites linked to this term

also heard:
    defending commons against enclosure sound cool...
    but what are these concepts?
    they have threats! made divisions, etc.
    how were these terms used? historically, by localities, etc?
    #language.logic

¶  Proactive individuals/citizens facing the emergency of "urban commons" regulations: a micro and macro study on Rome and Bologna (Simone Ranocchiari)

<SLIDES> D!!!

Studied Architecture + sociology + geography. Now at Institute of geography & sustainability @ switzerland.
Activist in a "mutual-aid space".


What can bring people together, which see problems in neighbourhoods?
To self-manage, possibly about "common goods"?

PHD project title:
    What unites different experiences of doing this?

We need to include the emotive element into try to understand these dynamics:
    * what motivates, etc
    * to create?
    * to make them fail?
    * [...]

"political" vs "apolitical":
    is it only a matter of styling?

converging/diverging:
    * motivations
    * practices
    * framing


Regularisation of CSOAs: Delibera 26
Evictions in 2015 (del 140)
Decide Roma: a wider initiative of regularisation (now around the idea of commons)
Rome: Parco Giavanipoli Autogestito
Bologna: Administration of "Beni Comuni"
Co-management of 'active citizens' and state institutions
Naples: "Usi civici", community self-management
Commoning as "instituting praxis" (Dardot and Laval)

¶  Autonomous urban regeneration vs. commons' degradation. The case of Metropoliz and the ex-Penicilina (Margherita Grazioli)

marghe_gr@autistici.org
<SLIDES> D!!!

Case 1: Metropoliz: "mestizo autonomous zone"
2018: 90 housing squats in Rome according to the city council
Precarious Italians + migrants + refugees + Roma people

Case 2: Ex-Penicilina: also drug dealers and sex workers
Epidemics:
    lung cancer, breathing, scabies, skin diseases, ...
    "Not viable for regeneration"
Pressure by neighbours to evict them.

Recognizing the limits of housing squats as urban commons !!!

¶  Learning from Ostia's Idroscalo, a self-managed illegal neighbourhood on the margins of Rome (Stefano Portelli)

<GET SLIDES / PHOTOS> D!!!

First in Rome:
    2000 houses, illegal, but detached from the squatting scene.
    slum? favella?
    since the 60s
    extreme peripherry of the Rome (North / Tiberi).

What is the limit of our discourse? How can we deal with the limits of our worlds?
(But, that hold some compatible values? So, new relationshps could be related, on new grounds?)
Resident: "Casa Pound and Centri Sociali are the same. They just come here and take something from us."


Part 1 : Barcelona

"Story begins in barcelona":
    old 1920s houses
    2007 demolition begins
    2010 squatting
    "we didn't manage to prevent this demolition"
    most people are relocated, where they're unable to pay the mortgage, etc

"The displacement was terrible for the community."

OK, so what happens after?
And, why do people always want to stay in these "horror" spaces?

Why do people resist in "slums"?

"I prefer to say self-build neighbourhoods, rather than slums/shantis."
Self-built neighbourhood, better designation

Strong self-identity of being illegal but with dignity, as a ways of opposing stigmatisation
"There is this mythology of people being rescued from unhealthy conditions."



Part 2

Relocation case:
    Ostia -> Nuova Ostia ("Bronx")
    "At least there, we had a community ... What we have here, is absolute poverty".
    In the end, from there many people moved to nearby Idroscalo di Ostia, so expanding an old "self-constructed" space!

In Idroscalo:
    These people feel no affinity to "squats", "the left", etc.
    "Leftist activists do not engage with residents' resistance", even though, "we face somewhat similar conditions."
    "They don't expect anything from the state."
    Great public stigmatization in the media.
    35 houses were demolished. <?> There is still 2000 living there.

Mestizo vs. multiculturalism (the latter implies hierarchies)

The question is, what are some other similar self-built experiences?
Portugal? Balkans? Etc.



(The debate)

(Casa Pound gives food to people in Idroscalo ... but only the whites).
As soon as we leave these areas, fascists enter.

O: Mental health and evictions. "Being forcibly removed causes stress, and pain. What can we learn?

O: What exactly is the space? Architects don't seem to understand that. <?>

How many people?:
    ~600 people in Ex-Penicilina, <200 in Metropoliz

V:
    Raising question of limits to habitability.
    Example of Ghost ship fire tragedy in Oakland, with 36 killed:
        (see https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/03/us/ghost-ship-fire-plea.html )
    Where is the line to encourage regeneration, and who sets it?
    ---------------
    Margerita:
        The people at <good squat> cleaned up the asbestos.
        The people at <hell squat> were burning it, building with it.
        For her, "this is a question of knowledge and solidarity of the community"


### (By 5pm: 15 people (6 women + 9 men)

¶  Squatting & urban commons (Miguel)

Workshop> discussions about research projects divided in small groups (Linus-Deanna, Sam, Gianni)
Collective sharing afterwards.

I: Too much association of the "commons" with the political experience from Naples
The concept needs a further development.
There is a diversity of local activists: it is not clear who can be involved in the research process.
It is a good opportunity to talk about local and grassroots politics in academia.
N: we need to go beyond "urban commons"
M: we can use the Italian experience about commons as part of the context to develop our project
C: are commons opposed or beyond rights?
We should connect self-organisation, mutua aid, etc. with each other
U: is squatting steady? how is changing? moving commons... urban relations... why a specific city, then?
M: unpack the term 'commons'
C: it helps to oppose the forces of repression and enclosure.
We should not just represent or extract information from the movements.
U: commons as resistance against enclosures.
V: a park is common-public but also enclosured...
N: planet as a common, wikipedia...
N: squatting always relates to private property
N: commons thorugh private property attack a special misuse of property
I: squatting also attacks state-owned property, because of state inefficiency
S: it is all autonomous from the state...
N: ...and from the market
X: commons = use
N: how people see success and failure?

¶  9:45 | Squatting the crisis: distributions of the sensible from Grenfell Tower to the Home Front (Sam Burgum)

Squatting started as a housing movement.

Post-war squatting demonstrates there were precedents of recquisition in times of crisis. A "success", organised by the Communist party, guided by the Labour party. "Before it just seemed nonsense".
Squatting as a politics of forced entry.
Grenfell Tower 14.6.2017
In the following protests, they occupied a community centre with a banner outside: "this is not a squat"
Corbyn and others from the Labour Party are in favour of recquisitions.
Many fear state recquisitions as a communist top-down policy practice in Central and Eastern Europe 1945-89.

~1020 debate

N: squatting and legalisation is cheaper than recquisition.

V: question of accountability

V: when the activists from outside of the borrough came to shut down a "fundraiser" event, this is where the media drew the line.
"became unpalatable"

¶  12:15 | Mestizo autonomous spaces: building (food) autonomy in the city of Athens/Greece (Inés Morales)

<SLIDES d!!! >

Social reproduction as a form of social control!
"We have to use these spaces to reproduce ourselves".

##### why do you call this "social reproduction" and not subsistence ?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_reproduction

Radical movements are dealing with "safety of lives of refugees".

"In NGOs, they are all young women from richer countries".

Term "agonistes" ... actors, not "activists".

For these spaces:
    how to be self-sufficient, autonomous, etc
    when you depend on financial aid

"Pressure from the state":
    "Dealing with food, means satisfying sanitary regulations, means pressure from administration".

¶  Resisting humanitarian borders: the resistance to criminalization of political struggles of illegallized migrants in Europe (Pierpaolo Mudu & Deanna Dadusc)

### <SLIDES!>

Multiplication of borders everywhere.

"This is how humanitarian projects are implemented with the violence of the state".
"If there is to be a solidarity form, you need to first know the other ones".

Immigration industrial complex "as coming together of private and public".
"We reject the word refugee *crisis* but that's another debate"

The spectacle of suffering and production of colonialism.
Media imaging have been used to support this narrative.

Humanitarian industrial complex: migrants must perform as victims to keep business as usual

"in order to receive [basic supporŧ], you have to perform a specific role - a victim"
"we can say it's not solving but contributing to the problem"
"these are the same people that run jails"

People try to provide liveable spaces for themselves.
However, "the worst evictions are against migrant centers".

In Italy:
Of you provide anything, you need to be a humanitarian organisation, with code of conduct, registration, according to laws, etc.
Otherwise: you're organised crime (due to anti smuggling laws)


Contestations: actors of resistance, mobile commons, borders crossing, prefigurative no borders, not wait, autonomy, solidarity, no charity.
### ??? >M



    (debate)

V:
    the idea of "open borders".
    is an infinite number of residents in a territory infrastructurally viable, or is this question just ignored?
    is there a book for assessing the infrastructural reality of "opening all borders"?
    which, if any, dynamics should guide the regulation of migration?
    around which referenceable speculative plan can we build (or, are we currently building) a political programme, to struggle together with people in need outside of current borders?
    it sometimes seems to me that current - very justified - critique of existing systems, doesn't follow into a full re-imagination of outcomes if they were fully overcome, and the scale of needs for completely new institutions.
    said otherwise, it is not a full political programme.

X:
    <?> the chaos that might follow is i guess better than what is happening now in libya, the money spent etc

X:
    yes lets include the cleptocratic enemy, responsible for that these people even need to move!
    "a lot of the problems of the global south happen here, as we facilitate them"

[...]

¶  SQUAT TOUR : Visits to Palestra Lupo, Teatro Coppola and Colapesce...
  
...and very interesting discussions with activists from those social centres.

¶  *** Internal Meeting

At 11am: 11 people (4 women + 7 men)