theoccupiedtimes | Various statutes including DPA 1998, RIPA 2000, ACSA 2001, and the proposed Communications Data bill
all display the state’s attempts to control the wisps of algorithms,
identities and data in the global communications databank. The right to
the city – the focus of this issue – is another aspect of the same
struggle. It is a fight for control over people as ‘subjects’, the
spaces and currents we move between and occupy and the coercive forms of
commodity and debt that shape and define our environment.
Communities are fracturing as their inhabitants are flung
to the periphery in the name of ‘regeneration’ and ‘redevelopment’. It
is plainly apparent that the intention of policymakers is to purge
central London, making it into a hub for commercial wealth. A grand
supra-geographic terrain is being mapped, ensuring the global reach of
national and supranational states of surveillance. In these physical and
digital gated communities, free spaces for different identities to meet
and create new social relations are limited. Under the guise of
‘protection’, all space in the city becomes monitored in true panopticon
style. But this is not for the ‘greatest happiness for the greatest
number’ as the proposed utility of this operation would have us believe.
Under Article 8 of the European Convention on Human Rights,
the right to respect for private and family life, home and
correspondence exists, but not as an absolute right. It is curtailed ‘in
accordance with the law’ and ‘where necessary in a democratic society’
i.e. by the state in the interests of ‘national security’, ‘public
safety or the economic well-being of the country’, for ‘the prevention
of disorder or crime’ etc; a very broad range of vague restrictions
which are available to public authorities to curb our right to privacy. A
form of global sovereign power has emerged, which comprises the
dominant nation-states together with supranational institutions and
major capitalist corporations with increasingly unlimited access to
intelligence, and unhindered powers to usurp rights and property.
Within this global configuration, it becomes incredibly
difficult to claim any right or power, especially when you are the one
being regenerated – many residents who have fallen foul of
‘regeneration’ schemes are not given all the information they need, or
are purposely misled by public relations representatives. Some are
forcibly evicted without any meaningful redress, others face
state-sanctioned brutality when protecting their space and communities,
like those recently violently evicted from an established community on Rushcroft Road, Brixton.
There is no power for people under the market-state duopoly: people
have no right to ask how and why they are being dispossessed, how and
why they are being surveilled, or for whose benefit, for fear of
interfering with ‘business sensitivities’, revenue-generating streams or
the power of the state and its corporate partners.
Various anti-eviction and private renters groups have
sprung up in London, joining with already established similar groups - a
positive sign that an alternative to the status quo does exist, and the
numbers in the multitude are growing. Housing action groups and
dedicated campaigns continue to mushroom across the city, challenging
the spread of powerful global networks of hierarchy and division. They
are signs that an alternative network is slowly being produced whereby
difference can be expressed through collaborative means. The common can
take root and begin to shape itself.
0 comments:
Post a Comment