Spatialities of Prefigurative Initiatives in Madrid
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Spatialities of Prefigurative Initiatives in Madrid María Luisa Escobar Hernández Erasmus Mundus Master Course in Urban Studies [4Cities] Master’s Thesis Supervisor: Dr. Manuel Valenzuela. Professor Emeritus of Human Geography, Universidad Autónoma de Madrid. Second Reader: Dr. Nick Schuermans. Postdoctoral Researcher, Brussels Centre for Urban Studies. 1st September 2018 Acknowledgments First and foremost I would like to thank all the activists who solidarily shared their stories, experiences, spaces, assemblies and potlucks with me. To Viviana, Alma, Lotta, Araceli, Marta, Chefa, Esther, Cecilia, Daniel Revilla, Miguel Ángel, Manuel, José Luis, Mar, Iñaki, Alberto, Luis Calderón, Álvaro and Emilio Santiago, all my gratitude and appreciation. In a world full of injustice, inequality, violence, oppression and so on, their efforts shed light on the possibilities of building new realities. I would also like to express my gratitude to my supervisor Dr. Manuel Valenzuela for the constant follow-up of this research process, his support in many different ways, his permanent encouragement and his guidance. Likewise, to Dr. Casilda Cabrerizo for her orientation on Madrid’s social movements scene, her expert advice on the initiatives that are being developed in Puente de Vallecas and for providing me with the contacts of some activists. After this intense and enriching two-year Master’s program, I would also like to thank my 4Cities professors. I am particularly grateful to Nick Schuermans who introduced me to geographical thought. To Joshua Grigsby for engaging us to alternative city planning. To Martin Zerlang for his great lectures and his advice at the beginning of this thesis. To Rosa de la Fuente, Marta Domínguez and Margarita Baraño for their effort on showing us the alternative face of Madrid. I want to thank my parents, Lucrecia and Saúl, for their love and the multiple ways in which they have inspired, encouraged and support my interest in social sciences. Also, my gratitude to Camilo Luqueño, Alex, Maguie, Charly, Eduardo, Karina and Gema for the various ways in which they supported me in the realization of this thesis. Last, but certainly not least, my deep gratitude to my 4Cities friends who after two years became a second family. To Mandy, for her amazing and sincere support in several ways but especially for her suggestions in the formulation of this thesis and for helping me get through the last days of this race. To Anna, for being so caring and for making me feel at home at the other side of the ocean. To Maitri, for her friendship and authenticity. To Fresia for the incredible conversations and complicity. To Antonia, Maryam, Dan, Thomas and Niall for the nice moments we have shared. i Abstract Over the past decade several scholars have pointed out the increasing influence of libertarian, social ecology and feminist ideas and practices over the new left-wing social movements of the 21st century (Grubacic & Graeber, 2004; Gordon, 2008; Souza, 2014; Böhm et al., 2010). Some of these ideas and practices are: direct democracy, anti-authoritarianism, decentralization, critical praxis, commoning, good living, and prefiguration - the latter of which is understood as an ethics of practice and a strategy that seeks radical change through the construction of new worlds ‘within the shell of the old’ rather than by the seizure of the State. When focusing on urban contexts, most of the literature regarding prefiguration emphasizes the way social movements organize their protests (i.e. in an assembly, horizontal and decentralized way, etc.) and oversee the construction of long-term alternatives. However, most of the initiatives that focus on long-term alternatives seem to be studied in non-urban contexts. In this regard, the city of Madrid is a relevant urban context to analyze prefigurative initiatives. After the 15-M or Indignados Movement emerged in 2011, prefigurative initiatives have flourished over the city. With this thesis, my purpose is to analyze the role of Madrid’s urban setting and its different spatialities - place, territory, networks, scale and positionality - in the development of these initiatives. In order to do so, I will research and compare prefigurative initiatives: squatted social centers, social centers, community parks and urban gardens, in two districts with two contrasting socio-spatial characteristics: Puente de Vallecas and Centro. Key words: prefigurative initiatives, space, social movements geography, Madrid ii Table of Contents Acknowledgments ..................................................................................................................... i Abstract .................................................................................................................................... ii I. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1 1. Problem Statement ........................................................................................................... 1 2. Research Question ........................................................................................................... 1 3. Hypothesis ......................................................................................................................... 1 4. Methodology ..................................................................................................................... 2 II. Theoretical Framework ...................................................................................................... 3 1. Context .............................................................................................................................. 3 2. Characterization of social initiatives .............................................................................. 4 2.1 Questioning systems of oppression .............................................................................. 4 2.2 Prefigurative ................................................................................................................. 5 2.3 Direct or radical democracy ......................................................................................... 6 2.4 Not dogmatic but committed to diversity .................................................................... 6 2.5 Open-ended: Utopia as a process, not a fixed ideal ..................................................... 6 2.6 “Good Living” and degrowth ....................................................................................... 6 2.7 Commoning ................................................................................................................. 7 2.8 Collectives and not the State as the main instance for change .................................... 8 3. The term ‘Prefigurative Politics’ .................................................................................... 8 3.1 First use of the term “prefiguration” ............................................................................ 8 3.2 Subsequent uses of the term “prefiguration” ............................................................... 9 3.2.1 Breines .................................................................................................................. 9 3.2.2 Epstein ................................................................................................................... 9 3.3 Current discussion about “prefiguration” .................................................................. 10 4. Role of socio-spatial dimensions in prefigurative initiatives ...................................... 11 4.1 Territory and territorialization ................................................................................... 11 4.2 Place ........................................................................................................................... 12 4.3 Spatial networks ......................................................................................................... 13 4.4 Scale ........................................................................................................................... 13 4.5 Positionality ............................................................................................................... 14 III. Empirical study: Prefigurative initiatives in Madrid .................................................. 15 1. Introduction .................................................................................................................... 15 2. Methodology ................................................................................................................... 17 3. Case study 1: Initiatives in the Centro District ........................................................... 20 3.1. Initiatives ................................................................................................................... 20 3.1.1 La Ingobernable (“The Ungovernable”) ............................................................. 21 3.1.2 La Tabacalera (“The Tobacco Company”) ......................................................... 25 3.1.3 ¡Ésta es una plaza! (“It’s A Plaza!”) ................................................................... 30 3.1.4 El Huerto de La Cornisa (“Urban Garden ‘The Cornice’”) ................................ 33 iii 4. Case Study 2: Initiatives in Puente de Vallecas District ............................................. 36 4.1 Initiatives ...................................................................................................................