Squatting in Europe: Power, Discourse and Urban Politics

Max Tscheltzoff

Squatting practices are immensely diverse, encompassing many different types of practices. Squatting is also a topic which is under-researched, and there are many gaps in the literature on the topic. When I began researching for this essay, I hoped to write about queer squatting practices across Europe. However, there is very little theoretical work done on this specific topic and information from squatters themselves is rarely publicly accessible. I imagine the reason for such lack of academic research stems from the social and political dynamics involved in squatting movements. The financial and social situation of squatters most likely prevents them from being heard on institutional scales. For this reason, I have shifted the focus of my research towards the livelihoods of European squatters in general. In Squatting in Europe (2013), the Squatting Europe Kollective (SqEK) discuss five types of squats: (1) deprivation-based squatting, whereby squatters live in precarious situations and are of working class backgrounds; (2) alternative housing squats, in which middle class individuals chose to live in alternative ways by adopting counter-cultural and anti-bureaucratic values; (3) entrepreneurial squatting, when entrepreneurs seek to set up businesses while avoiding risks of becoming wired in bureaucracy; (4) conservational squatting, as a tactic of cityscape preservation, in which squatters resist gentrification and (5) political squatting which involves anti-systematic activists in confrontation with the state (SqEK 2013). Here, I chose to focus on the first and last types of squats: deprivation-based and political squatting. While SqEK strictly distinguishes five different categories of squats, they also make it clear that different types of squats can merge, as the categories are in fact quite fluid (SqEK 2013). Throughout my research, I found that deprivation-based and political squatting are intricately related and have influenced one another through history. In this essay, I explore dynamics of structure and agency involved in squatting movements. I first discuss structure through dominant discourse and urban politics of squatting, before exploring squatters’ agency through their alternative politics and their management of the self.

Dominant Discourse and Urban Politics

Language, Power and Discourse

In Critical and Descriptive Goals in Discourse Analysis (1985), Fairclough states that “discourse makes people, as well as people make discourse” (750). This resonates with Foucault’s concept of capillary power in which “power is everywhere; not because it embraces everything, but because it comes from everywhere” (1979: 93). As such, discourse is everywhere and language is a recursive factor which has significantly influenced and materialized the ways in which squatters have been perceived by populations. In many cases, dominant discourse and narratives have shaped and encouraged a politics of blame towards individuals who squat. In other cases, squatting has been predominantly perceived as a positive social phenomenon, which is favourable towards the development of the city. For example, dominant discourse in the Netherlands colloquially refers to squatters as ‘kraaken’, which means ‘to crack’ (Van der Raad 1981). Squatters are commonly referred to as ‘krakers’ and are known to be “responsible, trustworthy people who occupy buildings to protest at speculation, provide housing for those in need, set up social projects, preserve monuments and take advantage of emptiness to sidestep queues for housing” (Pruijt 2004). As a result, the dominant discourse in the Netherlands regards to squatters in a positive light and has even recognized them as core actors in city development (Pruijt 2004). In effect, the ways in which squatting activists have claimed their social positions in the past has been executed through specific strategies which worked harmoniously with the culture of the country. In effect, they have historically behaved non-violently unless they were explicitly provoked, and have also developed cordial relations with the police (SqEK 2013). However, this has been said to be a unique case in European contexts and is in fact a reflection of a history of political battle over the meaning of squatting (SqEK 2013).

In other European contexts, the dominant discourse on squatting is nothing like the Netherlands’ case. Squatters have been systematically viewed in a negative light, whether in everyday speech, in the collective imaginary of populations, or in various forms of media, such as newspapers and television. In Squatting in Europe (2013), Dee proposes two factors to have shaped dominant discourse on squatting: Polarization and Criminalization. In the case of polarization, he suggests that popular narratives have created a divide between good squatters and bad squatters. This has enabled a black-and-white essentialization of squatting which functions as a crucial strategy of political discourse. As Paul Danler suggests: ambiguity is not permitted as it “might allow for critical and independent reflection on the listener’s part” (52: 2005). To illustrate this theory of polarization, we may dive into examples of the way the mainstream media has conceptualized squatter experience. In the UK, for example, one article published in the Daily Telegraph on the 15th of July 2009 was titled ‘Squatters occupy £3 million house on “millionaire’s row”’ in which an interview with a group of squatters was reported. Notably, the latter carefully framed themselves as being ‘good squatters’, essentially distancing themselves from the other, ‘bad squatters. One of them was quoted stating: “I don’t mind being called a squatter, but I am a good one. We are normal people; we go to work”. This quote demonstrates an awareness of the dominant discourse on squatters in an attempt to distance oneself from this image. Danler suggested that by constructing such a clear distinction between good and bad squatters allows for law enforcement officials to exert power by enforcing regulation. He states that “the goal of designation is not so much to recognise as to regulate the designated object, and since state officials reasoned that ‘terrorists’ might embed themselves within the law-abiding crowds [...] it followed that the vigilance of law enforcement officers needed to extend to ‘good’ protesters as well” (2005: 52). In this way, all squatters become subjected to the same ideological framework, and those perceived as ‘good’ squatters are still policed and regulated on the grounds that law enforcement allows for the ‘greater good’ and protection of the general population.

Criminalization, the second factor proposed by Dee (2013), is also a central strategy used by law enforcement officials to reinforce stigmatization towards squatters. Just like for polarization, mainstream media has been an explicit actor in the reinforcement of squatter criminalization. In the Telegraph an article titled “Squatting to be Made Illegal, Vows Clarke” (18th March 2011) demonstrates the way in which language towards squatters can legitimize the perspectives of law enforcement officials while minimizing that of squatters. For example, Kenneth Clarke, Lord Chancellor and Secretary of State for Justice is quoted saying he is “sick of seeing cases of law-abiding people fighting to regain possession of their properties”, and the article takes a biased perspective claiming: “police will be able to force entry” and “the days of ‘squatters’ rights’ will be over”. Noticeably, the use of the word “will” is used continuously throughout the article, allowing the article to frame the victory of anti-squat perspectives. It also produces an inherent criminalization of squatting which cannot be questioned. In effect, there is no apparent debate over whether squatting should be categorized as a criminal offence. Other articles also systematically employed criminalizing terminology to refer to squatters: ‘illegal occupation by organised gangs of thugs’ (Daily Telegraph), ‘laws are needed to prevent the forces which are undermining the democratic processes of our country” (Daily Mail). In this way, overt criminalization in the media produces a normalization of this perspective, creating a general assumption that squatting is a threat to society’s wellbeing which must be stopped.

In the UK, as in most other European countries, the dominant discourse around squatting reinforces the stigmatization of squatters in society (SqEK 2013). Narratives are overall negative, as seen in the examples of UK media articles, despite there being a few positive conceptualizations of squatters. In the Netherlands, as previously mentioned, the overall perception of squatters has been positive, but this is unique due to the way in which the history of the country has unravelled over time. In other cases, ‘good’ squatters have been systematically referred to in relation to ‘bad’ squatters, which serves to further legitimize law enforcement regulations. The strategies involved in the construction of discourse on squatting can therefore be seen as a way for law enforcement officials to exert their power over already stigmatized squatters. In essence, this directs the politics of blame towards squatters rather than holding owners accountable for the privatization of empty space. In the following section, I explore neoliberal configurations of urban space to shed light on how the experience of and discourse around squatting is tied up in its socioeconomic context.

Neoliberalization and Urban Renewal

Language and discourse significantly influence the ways in which squatting is conceptualized in each context. As Foucault suggests, dominant discourse is strictly tied with power which proliferates throughout society. In this way, discourse shapes the social and political mechanisms which may be used as tools to regulate squatting practices. With the recursive dimensions of language in mind, I suggest that the neoliberalization of urban space has also been significantly influenced by dominant discourses on the topic. As a result, neoliberalization has also become a crucial tool which has shaped the lived experiences of squatters.

 Neoliberalization is a socioeconomic ideology that refers to the privatization of space, prioritizing ownership and hierarchizing populations by class. It is said to dissolve “forms of social solidarity not only in favor of private property, economization, and marketization, but also in favor of unbridled individualism, personal responsibility, and entrepreneurial activation.” (SqEK 2013:4). While neoliberalization has meant enchantment and renewal for many, it has also been synonymous with displacement and evictions of precarious populations. This has been seen, for example, in the postwar reconstruction of Vietnam, whereby renewal was intended to reflect a global image of hope and modernity but resulted in the forced exclusion and management of populations. With regards to squatting, neoliberalization projects across Europe have encouraged more severe speculation of squatting grounds, such as regulations enacted by anti-squat agencies. For example, in the UK, “interim use of vacant private property [became] managed on the owners’ behalf on the basis of “guardian angel” contracts that require payment of utilities but not rent, and that strictly control the rights of the temporary tenants” (SqEK 2013:5). Squatters found themselves in very weak legal positions, and their privacy was not respected. In this regard, I suggest that to best understand the effects of neoliberalization on the lived experiences of squatters, it would be most relevant to dive deeper into the perspectives of squatters themselves. To do so, I explore forms of alternative media which offer the perspectives of squatters on the topic.

During my research, I came across a squatter’s website called Squat!net in which squatters from all around the world post alternative media articles about squatting experience. There are sections for various countries and entries in different languages. Many of the articles I came across spoke about state regulations and police violence enacted upon squatters. It appeared as a systematic topic and seemed to be particularly relevant in entries written by queer squatting movements. Articles written by queer squatters were also often published in the forms of zines and reported incidences which would not have been presented in mainstream media.

 One article I came across perfectly illustrates the ways in which neoliberalization and urban renewal can affect the livelihood of squatters. The article published on April 22nd, 2013 refers to an urban project which aimed at demolishing a set of empty buildings which are used by squatters in Lambeth, London. Directly addressing the property investor and owner of the building with the pronoun “you”, the article quotes him stating his use of words “savage animals” to refer to the squatters living in the building. By employing an affective regime, the writers of the article speak on behalf of all squatters: “how will the reverberations of [the buildings’] demolition affect our own lives and that of locals living here?”; “you call it regeneration. we call it social cleansing”. In this way, squatters amplify their voices on such issues, conveying an emotional message about the effects of urban regeneration on their livelihoods, as well as reasserting their values and social stance. It is through such articles that we can better understand the perspectives of squatters, and the effects that neoliberalization may have on their housing situations.

Identity and Self-Management

Political Movements and Narratives of Resistance

 While squats arise from social and political processes which stem from neoliberalism and urban renewal (ie: displacement), they also develop as a form of resistance and empowerment. Squatter movements emerge in opposition to neoliberal sociopolitical structures that stigmatize them. (SqEK 2013). Squats are not neutral spaces; they are strongly tied to political movements which critique the values of a neoliberal society. There are many forms which squatter movements may take, but their values are generally associated with progressive politics. For example, many resonate with feminist, environmental-friendly and other social justice movements (SqEK 2013). Berlin’s history of squatting is particularly relevant to illustrate the development of squats out of neoliberalism, as the emergence of squatter movements in Berlin strongly correlates with the unraveling of urban renewal programs (SqEK 2013). Squatting was in fact a principal aspect of Berlin’s alternative scene which grew along movements such as the sexual-equality movement and other revolutionary parties which aimed to resist normative social ideals. Scheer and Espert (1982) state that Berlin’s alternative scene reached a membership of over 100,000 people in 1979 which enabled members to engage in alternate forms of labour that diverged from dominant capitalist models. In this case, class division no longer exists, and new sub-cultural forms of social organisation arise, including the development of squats as “suitable living spaces” which were central to Berlin’s alternative scene (SqEK 2013).

Amongst the articles I came across on Squat!net, the political dynamics of squats were omnipresent. For example, calls for resistance against oppressive socio-political structures were regularly mentioned. An entry published on July 20th, 2019 reported a police raid on Leibig34, one of the most popular queer squats in Berlin. It states:

 “This morning 6:30, the police broke into Liebig34 to search evidence and DNA in one room. Soon after many riot police vans and a helicopter arrived, a barricade was burning in Rigaer Street. After some hours police left, no one was arrested. There is a call for resistance tonight and solidarity actions. Cops destroyed doors and took some stuff. You are welcome to pass by but cops are still around in the area.”

 Interestingly, the use of language differs immensely from that of mainstream articles which I discussed in my previous part. For example, this extract describes the police as violent and intruding, using terms such as ‘broke in’, ‘riot police vans’ and ‘cops’ as a colloquial way of referring to the police. The article is written from the perspective of squatters and reports incidences which would otherwise not be heard. It is through such voices that we can best learn about the effect of neoliberalization projects on squatter movements. It is also in this way that we learn that squats are not only spaces of displacement, but also spaces of resistance.

Identity and the Organization of Space

 While the development and self-management of squatting movements stems from political resistance and interactions with external socio-political structures, a lot of internal work also goes into the making of squats. To illustrate this example, I adopt Garvey’s (2001) approach from her ethnographic study of Norwegian homes, to analyse the ways in which squatters chose to organise their living space in order to reassert their social and political identities. In effect, Garvey argues that individuals express themselves by appropriating the material environment in their homes. . By analysing the organization of space within the home, one can uncover social realities such as one’s positioning in relation to their social environment as well as their domestic sphere. In other words, the renewal of the home is a renewal of the self.

Two squats particularly struck me during my research. I discovered the first one via a short-documentary video online in which two punk squatters are interviewed (Spleesance 2018). This one is situated in France in an unidentified region to protect the anonymity of the interviewees and reveals the livelihood of being a squatter in France. The squat is located in an abandoned airport and built out of unused tin and wooden planks. This demonstrates the centrality of assembling, negotiating and improvising when living in squats (Vasudevan 2015). In effect, Vasudevan argues that the “process of ‘dwelling-through-construction’ is a product of countless everyday acts of adjustment and assembly, negotiation and improvisation” (340). In this way, the materiality and organisation of space on squatting grounds comes with having to adapt with the environment in which squatters are situated. It is improvised and negotiated between squatters and with their external environment.

Additionally, part of the interview features the squatters inside their living space (Figure 1). The organisation of space reflects the anarchist politics that they stand for. A UK flag is set on the wall for aesthetic purposes, objects found from dumping grounds are used as furniture, such as sofas and tables. In this way, reusing and assembling objects which have been abandoned reflect the improvisation involved when living in squats. Suitcases also lie around the room further reflecting improvised living as well as unexpected migration which might occur when squatting. Squatters are always ready to leave and change their environment as they never know when regulations of their space may occur (SqEK 2013). In their interview the punk squatters stated that they “live each day in its time”, improvising their livelihood as time passes. They also added that “it isn’t money which makes our happiness, it’s just to be happy with the little that we have. When we need money we go out to beg with a goal in mind, and if we don’t reach that goal it’s ok, we just buy less cigarettes or alcohol”. In this way, improvisation is central to their daily living practices.

The other squat which struck my attention is Liebig34, the most popular ‘anarcho-queer-feminist’ squat in Berlin founded in the 1990s. This squat not only reflects the improvisation involved in squatting, but also the political values which are so deeply tied with squatting movements. There are multiple videos, reports and zines which demonstrate the organization of space of this squat. Set in an abandoned brick building in the German capital, Liebig34 is covered with political graffiti which reflects the political stance of its squatters.

Slogans such as “smash the state” and “we won’t be sold out” are tagged across the building, along with symbols such as that of anarchism, the transgender-symbol and a giant fist taking up the majority of the building’s front wall. Choices made in Liebig34’s material culture position  it as an intrinsically political squat. Its members are all queer-identifying, and they do not welcome cisgender men4 in their living spaces as a means of resisting patriarchal dynamics. In this way, taking up space becomes both physical and metaphorical (SqEK 2013). Squatting becomes a way for those who cannot take up space in society to take up and redefine space by their own rules. It enables minority groups to have agency by resisting dominant structures and reclaiming space by reinventing the ways in which space can be managed.

Squats are also spaces of solidarity, shared spaces which refuse to mirror the hierarchies which are found in neoliberal societies. This makes solidarity at the centre of squatting decisions, self-management and the organization of space. On the inside of Liebig34, social hierarchies are visibly flattened out, as the space is negotiated through conversation between its members. It is a space of equality and a space of mutual support in which decisions are made mutually (Squat!net 2018). However, there is very little visual information found online about the interior of the squat. It appears as though most of the accessible content concerning the squat is centered around its political involvement and activism. There appears to be little focus on what the inside should look like, as mostly it seems to function as a political building which resists through action and its visible exterior. I believe this lack of content is indicative of the living situations in this squat, as focus is oriented towards external pressures such as that of the ongoing conflict between its squatters and the building’s owner.

In an interview, Bente, one of the squatters explains: “Our conflict with the owner is that he owns a lot of houses to make new apartments with a higher living standard that none of us here can afford . There are a lot of other projects and housing projects that are supporting the people living here, but at the moment our plan A and B and C is keeping the house … by any means,” (Dos au Mur 2019). Bente also states that, “There are different reasons [why she is motivated to be part of this community], on the one hand, there are people affected by sexual violence, for example by cisgender men, it’s also the fact that cisgender men systematically silence people, especially in politics” (ibid). Based on this interview, the political dimension of the squat is clear. This is a place of solidarity for its members as well as one of political resistance. The negotiation involved in keeping and maintaining the space indicates the positioning of the squat in its socio-political context. It functions as a space with agency, and its material and symbolic presence questions and resists the dominant neoliberal system in which it is positioned. In this way, by exploring the organisation and management of squatting grounds, we are able to learn more about the political and social dimensions involved within them. On the one hand, squats are spaces of “assemblage, improvisation and negotiation”, but they are also political agentive spaces of resistance against external social and political pressures.

Conclusion

As a conclusion, this essay explored the recursive political dynamics which occur between the state and urban squatters in Europe. With examples adopted from Germany, France, the Netherlands and the UK, I demonstrated the ways in which dominant discourse and narratives on squatting influence a society’s perspective on squatting. While in occasional contexts, such as The Netherlands, squatting is understood in a positive light, most often it is not. This legitimizes the displacement and marginalization of squatters. It also enables governments to allow neoliberal urban renewal projects to occur, even if this has deep-seated implications for individuals who are living in squats. In this way, squatters are obliged to adapt to their ever-changing environment. Their livelihoods center around “assembling, negotiating and improvising” as they cannot predict the impact of dominant political forces on the built environment (Vasudevan 2015). While these types of squats are spaces of oppression, they are also the product of political empowerment. Squatting movements have a history of being tied with progressive political movements, and their position and maintenance in developing cityscapes reflect the power of their agency in the face of society. From here, I propose that further research should be done on the topic of squatting. It is an under-studied topic in anthropology, and there are many gaps which prevent an overarching understanding of the complex political webs in which squats are positioned. I suggest that more ethnographic fieldwork alongside queer squatters, for example, could significantly contribute to feminist studies with regards to the management of space and identity.

References

Danler, P. (2005). Morpho-syntactic and textual realizations as deliberate pragmatic argumentative linguistic tools. Manipulation and ideologies in the twentieth century: Discourse, language, mind, 45-60.

Dee, E. T. C. (2013). Moving towards criminalisation and then what?. Squatting in Europe: Radical Spaces, Urban Struggles, 247.

Fairclough, N. L. (1985). Critical and descriptive goals in discourse analysis. Journal of pragmatics, 9(6), 739-763.

Foucault (1979) The Will To Knowledge - The History of Sexuality: Volume One London: Penguin.

Garvey, P. (2001). Organized disorder: Moving furniture in Norwegian homes. Home possessions, 47-68.

Kollective, S. E. (Ed.). (2013). Squatting in Europe: radical spaces, urban struggles. Minor Compositions.

Pruijt, H. (2004a) ‘Okupar en Europa’ in (eds) Lopez, M.M. & Adell, R.

¿Donde Esta las Llaves? El Movimiento Okupa: Practicas y Contextos Socials (Where are the keys? The squatters’ movement: practices and social contexts) Madrid: La Catarata pp. 35–60. English version available at: http://www.eur.nl/fsw/english/staff/homepages/pruijt/publications/ sq-eur

Scheer, J. and J. Espert (1982) Deutschland, Deutschland, alles ist vorbei: alter-natives Leben oder Anarchie? Die neue Jugendrevolte am Beispiel der Berliner ‘Scene’ [Germany, Germany, it’s all over: alternative life or anarchy? The new youth rebellion as exemplified by Berlin’s ‘scene’]. Bernard & Graefe, München.

Schwenkel, C. (2015). Spectacular infrastructure and its breakdown in socialist Vietnam. American Ethnologist, 42(3), 520-534.

van der Raad, J. W. (1981). Kraken in Amsterdam: een verkennend onderzoek naar met name de toevoeging van woonruimte door kraken en de effekten van de leegstandwet:[een] verslag. Roelof Kellerstichting.

 Vasudevan, A. (2015). The makeshift city: Towards a global geography of squatting. Progress in Human Geography, 39(3), 338-359.

Newspaper Articles:

Howie, M. (2011, March 19) Coalition to make squatting a criminal offence. Daily Telegraph.

Retrieved from:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8392571/Coalition-to-make-squatting-a-criminal-offe nce.html

Hutchison, P. (2011, March 18) Squatters: How the law will change. Daily Telegraph. Retrieved from:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8389196/Squatters-how-the-law-will-c hange.html

Gammell C., McAuley O. & Tyzack, A. (2009, July 15) Squatters occupy £3 million house on “millionaire’s row”. Daily Telegraph. Retrieved from: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/property/news/5835557/Squatters-occupy-3m-home-on-mil lionaires-row.html

Liebig34 (2018, 23rd September) Berlin: Liebig34 must stay!. Retrieved from: https://en.squat.net/2018/09/23/berlin-liebig34-must-stay/

Liebig34 (2019, July 20th) Berlin: Police Raid on Liebig34. Squat!net. Retrieved from: https://en.squat.net/2019/07/20/berlin-police-raid-on-liebig34/

Unrecorded author, (2008, December 11) The £1.75m freeloaders: Squatters take over King Edward VII’s Brighton mansion. Daily Mail. Retrieved from:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1093457/The-1-75m-freeloaders-Squatters-King-Edwa rd-VIIs-Brighton-mansion.html

Whitehead, T. (2011, March 18) Squatting to be made illegal, vows Clarke. Daily Telegraph. Retrieved from:

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/law-and-order/8388795/Squatting-to-be-made-illegal- vows-Clarke.html

Other media:

Dos au Mur (2019). Le Liebig34, squat anarcho-queer-féministe en résistance. Youtube. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRk1efADmmk

Spleesance (2018). J'ai visité le squat de deux punks!. Youtube. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiNq8g9OLb0&t=187s

List of Figures:

Figure 1. Squatter punks in their homes, France. Retrieved from: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AiNq8g9OLb0&t=187s

Figure 2. Liebig34, Squat in Berlin, Germany. Retrieved from: http://liebig34.blogsport.de/