Thursday31 July 2014

Where are the left’s urban visionaries?

  • Email
  • Comments (7)
  • Save

Urban farming and pop-up hipster urbanism alone do not bode well for a serious progressive architectural vision

Wouter Vanstiphout

Wouter Vanstiphout

If we accept that urban projects are the most visceral expression of public policy and political positions, then it is a tragedy that we find it impossible to imagine what a truly progressive, collective urban agenda would look like.

This points to a disturbing emptiness at the heart of left-wing politics. But it also leaves us without any alternative to how we have been doing things for the past 30 years.

Yet, elections all over Europe — from France to local council elections in England — are causing left-wing pundits to hail a new dawn.

Finally, it’s claimed, there will be an end to austerity and to neo-liberal politics. Finally justice, equality and progressive politics will come back. Despite Europe’s economic implosion, there’s a suppressed euphoria: if things have become so bad, surely they can now only get better.

Let’s just assume that they will. That there will be a new left consensus that will lay the groundwork for a Europe of proudly progressive and collective nations. Let’s just disregard the left’s deep rifts, and imagine that the various factions will get together and actually reform our cities and countries with the same élan and certitude as did their forefathers in the late forties and fifties when the welfare states in western Europe were constructed. But what would the left actually do? And how would it be different from what we are getting right now?

The problem with left-wing politics is that over the last 30 years they have been reduced to a reactive, derivative position of softening the blows or spreading the damage a little bit differently. If we look at how left and right distinguish themselves on an urban or architectural level, we see only small, gradual differences, often merely rhetorical.

Left-wing mayors and ministers have probably been even more active than right-wing ones in promoting a happy capitalist paradigm of trickle-down urbanism and architecture, throwing themselves behind the Olympics and massive regeneration projects that swiftly degenerate into gentrification and public private partnerships.

‘We find it impossible to imagine a truly progressive urban agenda’

Yet, whatever we might think of London’s Canary Wharf or any of its descendants in dozens of European waterfront and gentrification projects, as a heady mixture of post-sixties non-plan models, postmodern neoclassicism and hardcore Milton Friedmanesque ideology, it really did offer another model. It really did destroy the past and bully itself into the future.

And what can the current left come up with that is truly “different”? Urban farming, do-it-yourself architecture, pop-up urbanism — slight, temporary, hipster incidents for a tiny elite. That is not enough; worse still, it does not bode well for the seriousness or the inner coherence of a progressive agenda for our cities that this is all there is.

There might be some hope for the left-wing renaissance if architecture could come up with something just as ideologically rigorous, just as aesthetically specific, just as reckless as the neo-liberal planning of the early eighties, but then completely different.


Readers' comments (7)

  • Where are BD’s columnist visionaries?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Where are the left’s urban visionaries?

    There's one right here, but as you ought to know, and with apologies to Gil Scott-Heron, the Revolution will not be published in BD, will not be adjudicated by CABE, will never pass across the table of a Design Review Panel, and will not get you any CPD points.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Gramsci

    The problem with leftwing politics over the last 30 years is that it has concentrated on Identity Politics not what counts, economics.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The problem with left-wing politics, and the entire world, is neoliberal economics. It's nothing but a scam and the (moderate) left was hoodwinked by it. If they wanted to do capitalism they should have stuck with Keynesian economics.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • the world is much more complex and interwoven. so the discussion suffers in undercomplexity by still discussing the problems in a left-right or capitalist-anticapitalist order.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • What the Left doesn't really need is people who are not on the Left upbraiding the Left for doing what they think the Left should be doing. What an absurd article. It's the equivalent of someone like myself scolding the Pope for being a Catholic. He's not going to care.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Oops - upbraiding the Left for NOT doing what they think the Left should be doing.

    When are we going to get an "amend" option here?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

sign in register
  • Email
  • Comments (7)
  • Save
Sign in

Email Newsletters

Sign out to login as another user

I'm searching for in
Desktop Site | Mobile Site