illegal border crossings of that region. By putting himself in the position of a surveillance officer, and using the types of images that are typically associated with controlling flows (of migrants and the smuggling of illegal goods), Missika appeared to offer the viewers of his video unprecedented means of action, as if counter-visualisation could be a way of engaging into politics (cf. Monahan, 2006 ).
It is increasingly clear that, alongside the spectacular forms of justice activism, the actually existing just city results from different everyday practices of performative politics that produce transformative trajectories and alternative realities in response to particular injustices in situated contexts. The massive diffusion of urban gardening practices (including allotments, community gardens, guerrilla gardening and the multiple, inventive forms of gardening the city) deserve special attention as experiential learning and in-becoming responses to spatial politics, able to articulate different forms of power and resistance to the current state of unequal distribution of benefits and burdens in the urban space. While advancing their socio-environmental claims, urban gardeners make evident that the physical disposition of living beings and non-living things can both determine and perpetuate injustices or create justice spaces. In so doing, urban gardeners question the inequality-biased structuring and functioning of social formations (most notably urban deprivation, lack of public decision and engagement, and marginalisation processes); and conversely create (or allow the creation of) spaces of justice in contemporary cities. This book presents a selection of contributions investigating the possibility and capability of urban gardeners to effectively tackle spatial injustice; and it offers the readers sound, theoretically grounded reflections on the topic. Building upon on-the-field experiences in European cities, it presents a wide range of engaged scholarly researches that investigate whether, how and to what extent urban gardening is able to contrast inequalities and disparities in living conditions.
The negotiation of difference is a central concern of democratic politics. In wrestling with empirical and normative questions of difference, scholars have drawn on agonistic democratic theory to illuminate problematic ways of managing pluralism and advocate for adversarial conflict as a check against neoliberal governance strategies ( Derickson and MacKinnon, 2015 ; Featherstone, 2008 ; Purcell, 2008 ; Swyngedouw, 2009 ). Without discounting these important interventions, I argue that Deweyan pragmatism’s emphasis on contextualism
Alex Schafran, Matthew Noah Smith, and Stephen Hall
Around the world, more and more people are realizing that we need to pay greater attention to the core systems we depend upon for survival. Not only are systems such as housing, transportation, food, energy, water, waste, education, healthcare and more central to our basic needs as humans, and to our basic freedoms, they are increasingly vulnerable to both exploitation by the powerful and disruption by the climate crisis. This book has worked to develop a three-part framework for thinking about the politics of these systems.
It is an
Chiara Certomà, Martin Sondermann, and Susan Noori
determine how those spaces get
used. (Tracey, 2007: 32)
It seems that there are plenty of reasons to separate the humble, simple, minimal act
of planting tomatoes from the noble and ambitious act of contesting the multiple
manifestations of injustice. Consequently, urban gardening practices have been
considered a trivial object of research for a long time, far from serious societal
and political studies. Nevertheless, by seeing everyday practices as a form of political resistance (de Certeau, 1984), cultural geographers, urban planners and social
Alex Schafran, Matthew Noah Smith, and Stephen Hall
Thus far, we have worked to establish two critical points. First, human freedom is realized in reliance systems, social and material systems that have to be constantly made and remade. These systems, no matter our individual capacities, are always collectively produced. Second, these reliance systems are governed by a set of formal and informal political agreements which we call spatial contracts. Spatial contracts are spatial and not exclusively social because they are rooted in the materiality of specific systems, and thus in both space, place
This book explores contemporary urban experiences connected to practices of sharing and collaboration. Part of a growing discussion on the cultural meaning and the politics of urban commons, it uses examples from Europe and Latin America to support the view that a world of mutual support and urban solidarity is emerging today in, against, and beyond existing societies of inequality. In such a world, people experience the potentialities of emancipation activated by concrete forms of space commoning. By focusing on concrete collective experiences of urban space appropriation and participatory design experiments this book traces differing, but potentially compatible, trajectories through which common space (or space-as-commons) becomes an important factor in social change. In the everydayness of self-organized neighborhoods, in the struggles for justice in occupied public spaces, in the emergence of “territories in resistance,” and in dissident artistic practices of collaborative creation, collective inventiveness produces fragments of an emancipated society.
The talk-show host Stephen Colbert satirically introduced the term ‘truthiness’ in 2005, referring to his observation of political rhetoric whereby the belief in what you feel to be true is privileged over what the facts support. ‘Post-truth’ became the Oxford Dictionary’s word of the year in 2016, defined as “relating to or denoting circumstances in which objective facts are less influential in shaping public opinion than appeals to emotion and personal belief” ( Oxford Dictionaries, 2016 ). Both terms were discussed in connection with the rise
Flocking north: renegotiating the
According to Beck and Sznaider (2010: 390), capital ‘tears down all national
boundaries and jumbles together the “native” with the “foreign”’ producing
new patterns of consumption and mobility. But, where the national boundary
is one of contention, and the identities of those on either side even more so,
the influence of economics on a political divide is more difficult to determine.
The changing economic fortunes of both the Republic of Ireland (the South)
and Northern Ireland (the North) since 2007
an international political economy of work
n the late twentieth and early twenty-first centuries, we are living in an era
of social transformation that has been defined by the concept of globalisation, just as it has been shaped by programmes of restructuring carried out in
the name of globalisation. Yet, our era is also one in which people’s concrete
experiences of transformation are diverse and contradictory. While for some,
living in a GPE means holding and managing a portfolio of shares, business
travel for a MNC, and increased prosperity