Professional Documents
Culture Documents
http://citiesmcr.wordpress.com/2011/03/18/every-revolution-has-its-square
Tiananmen square, Place de la Bastille, Red Square, Alexanderplatz, Tahrir square, Assaha-
al-Khadra, Syntagma Square, Green Square, Wenceslas square: these are just a few of the
public spaces that have become engrained in our symbolic universe as emblematic sites of
revolutionary geographies. Their names stand as points de capiton that quilt a chain of
solidarity, emancipation. The emergence of political space, these examples suggest, unfolds
through a political act that stages collectively the presumption of equality and affirms the
ability of ‘the people’ to self-manage and organize its affairs. It is an active process of
intervention through which (public) space is reconfigured and through which – if successful –
a new socio-spatial order is inaugurated. The taking of urban public spaces has indeed always
been, from the Athenian ochlos demanding to be part of the polis to the heroic struggle of the
There is an uncanny choreographic affinity between recent urban revolts in the Middle
East and eruptions of discontent and urban protest in Athens, Madrid, Lyon, Lisbon, Rome,
London, Berlin, or Paris, among many other cities. However, although the Middle Eastern
uprisings are celebrated by Western media pundits and politicians, their European
counterparts are often disavowed as illegitimate outbursts of irrational anger and anarchic
violence. Consider, for example, how a few hundred thousand people acting in common on
Tahrir square are staged as the stand-in for The People, for the totality of 81.3 million
Egyptians, while the participants in urban insurgencies in the global North are customarily
labeled as protesters, rebels, anarchists and, occasionally, as ‘scum’. Particularly when things
turn nasty, every effort is made to assure that the ‘rioters’ are not identified with The People.
Despite their highly variegated political-economic and socio-cultural embedding, the events
in Europe and the Middle East share that they are considered illegitimate, often repressed,
and invariably disavowed by the ‘local’ elites. Their participants are not considered to be
proper political interlocutors. Sarkozy called the 2005 rioters ‘racaille’,Gaddafi repeated
something similar six years later in his repudiation of rebelling Libyans. Yet, these events
managing the spatial distribution and circulation of things and people within a consensually
agreed neo-liberal arrangement. Rancière associates this condition with the notion of ‘The
distributing, and allocating people, things, and functions to designated places. These
managerial practices and procedures colonize and evacuate the proper spaces of the political;
the Police are about hierarchy, ordering, and distribution. Spatialized policies (planning,
architecture, urban policies, etc...) are one of the core dispositifs of the Police.
Politics inaugurate the re-partitioning of the Police logic, the re-ordering of what is
visible and audible, registering as voice what was only registered as noise, and re-framing
what is regarded as political. It occurs in places not allocated to the exercise of power or the
common at a distance from the State. Whereas any logic of the Police is a logic of hierarchy,
that urban insurrections can be framed. While much of the State’s attempts to re-order the
urban doom (exclusion, danger, crisis, fear). Attempts to produce ‘cohesive’ cities revolve
around choreographing distribution and circulation of activities, things and people such that
the police order remains intact. While the state’s statements frame particular trajectories of
‘inclusion’, they shy away from acknowledging division, polemic, dissensus and, above all,
from endorsing the assumption of equality on which the democratic political rests. Justice,
equality and communality are censored from the script of urban policy prescriptions.
It is precisely this suturing process that suspends political litigation, voicing or staging
dissent or asserting polemical equality. These cut through the police order and tentatively
open up the spaces of the political again. The urban insurgents have no demands; they do not
expect anything from the Police. They have no program, no pronunciations; neither leader
nor party. Perhaps they are part of something that is called into being through resonance, viral
infection and affiliation, not through hierarchy and structure. They do not demand equality,
they stage it and, in doing so, produce, pace Balibar, equa-libertarian spaces. This staging of
equality and freedom, the interruption of the normalized geographical order of the sensible,
exposes the aristocratic configuration and in-egalitarian ‘wrongs’ of the given, and invariably
encounters the Police’s wrath. Such exposition of equa-liberty cannot remain unnoticed: it
either succeeds or meets with violence, the terror of the State that – in its violent acting –
precisely affirms that some people are not part of The People, that the police order is indeed
in-egalitarian.
This constitutive gap between Police and Politics needs to be affirmed. Politics cannot
management. The political – as the staging of equality in the face of a wrong – is nothing else
anarchic interruption that affirms the foundation of the democratic invention, i.e. the equality
of each and every one qua speaking beings – a condition that is predicated upon affirming
This notion of politics centers on division, conflict, and polemic. Politics appears as a
practice of re-organizing space under the aegis of equality; it emerges where it is not
supposed to be, in public space. Such political events are interventions that transgress the
symbolic order and mark a shift to a new situation that can no longer be thought of in terms
of the old symbolic framings. Proper politics is thus about enunciating demands that lie
beyond the symbolic order of the Police; demands that cannot be symbolized within its frame
of reference and, therefore, would necessitate a transformation in and of the Police to permit
symbolization to occur. Therefore, the political act is, as Žižek argues, “not simply something
that works well within the framework of existing relations, but something that changes the
very framework that determines how things work …. it changes the very parameters of what
sequence; one that can be thought and practiced irrespective of any substantive social
theorization. It is the political in itself at work. Such new symbolizations are where a possible
re-politicization of public civic space resides. These symbolizations should start from the
oligarchic police order. It emerges where those who are un-counted and unnamed, whose
fantasies are only registered as noise, produce their metaphorical and material space. Such
claim to the Polis is what links the urban protests in the Middle East and the Global North. It