Abstract
Since the beginning of the 2000s, a number of international protest demonstrations, such as alter-globalisation movements, have emerged in reaction to neoliberal restructuring and the accompanying gradual erosion of citizens’ rights. These movements contesting the impact of global neoliberalisation began over time to focus on cities and to scrutinize current urban governance, increasing precarization, and socio-spatial segregation. During the European Social Forum that took place in Istanbul in 2010, a handful of panels on the theme of the right to the city brought together activists and residents from different neighbourhoods that were either destroyed or under the threat of destruction, to discuss the possibility of creating a common urban movement. Two visits were also organised for international participants to the Tozkoparan and Sariyer neighbourhoods, both destined to be urban transformation areas, threatening the inhabitants with expulsion and resettlement in degraded conditions.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
These panels were organised by different neighbourhood associations like Sulukule Platformu, Tozkoparan, IMECE (Movement of Urbanisation for People), Bir Umut (One Hope), No Vox France, and Reclaiming Space Germany.
- 2.
In Istanbul, several projects, such as Galataport (the creation of a centre of entertainment on the historic Galata bridge), the transformation of the old Haydarpasa railway station into a residence and shopping mall, investments in the Olympic Games, the Beyoglu-Tarlabasi urban transformation project evicting the poor population from the district, the construction of a Formula One race track, the construction of a third Bosphorus bridge, and a third airport, destroying the city’s northern forests, are only some examples of this neoliberal urbanism for which the profit value of the urban space and city branding are major elements in city-making.
- 3.
Previously a non-profit public institution for social housing, TOKI today has permission to undertake ‘for-profit’ housing projects on state land, either through its subsidiary firms or through public–private partnerships, and to raise funds for the construction of public housing. With new laws, the institution is endowed with monopolistic competencies. It possesses all public lands and can distribute them at will to private construction firms.
- 4.
Originally a technical term, gecekondu is slang for a specific form of self-service urbanization that occurred during Turkey’s industrialisation and the associated rural migration that took place between 1945 and 1985. Gece means ‘the night’ and kondu ‘landed’; hence gecekondu translates as ‘landed at night’. The term has evolved to encompass a variety of informal settlements and building types, and its usage denotes bottom-up, spontaneous action, which was especially prevalent during the first wave of mass migration.
- 5.
A group composed of lawyers, academics, artists, and journalists who participated in the Gezi Park protest constructed a website including different interactive maps showing the organic relationship between the AKP government and these private constructors, counting all public projects and to whom they were attributed. See website “Networks of dispossession”: http://mulksuzlestirme.org/
- 6.
This information is taken from the report prepared by the Defense of Northern Forests of Istanbul, a civil platform created to oppose the third airport construction. Report (in Turkish) available at: http://www.kuzeyormanlari.org/2014/03/21/kuzey-ormanlari-savunmasi-3-havalimani-raporu-nereden-baksan-katliam-yagma-saibe-guncellendi-3-2-2014/, consulted on 17/11/2014.
- 7.
Erdogan Bayraktar in 2007 to the Urban Regeneration and Real Estate Investment Conference, organised by the Urban Land Institute. See Zaman newspaper, 13 November 2007; Sabah Newspaper, 13 November 2007.
- 8.
This manifesto is available in English on their website: http://istanbulurbanmovements.wordpress.com/
- 9.
This Facebook page has more than 4100 followers. It also has two blogs, one in Turkish (mutlukent.wordpress.com), and another in English (reclaimistanbul.com).
- 10.
For a detailed analysis of this neighbourhood resistance, see Lelandais (2014).
- 11.
The mayor of Istanbul presented the project as ‘the most social urban project of the world’ in that it aimed ‘to improve the living conditions of Romanis’ (Mustafa Demir, Mayor of Fatih district, Zaman, 17 November 2006) by proposing new housing possibilities in the district. In reality, the project approved heavy loans for inhabitants who were financially precarious. The planned houses did not correspond to the lifestyle of the Romani, who prefer to live in community and to pass their everyday life in the streets of their neighbourhood.
- 12.
This platform consisted of associations, academics, and independent individuals working for the preservation of the district and rehabilitation on-site, without residents having to leave the neighbourhood. The Chamber of Architects and Engineers and researchers at Mimar Sinan University were most active in the platform. It was an open space where everybody could join in flexible forms of activism. For more information, see the platform website. http://sulukulegunlugu.blogspot.fr/
- 13.
This platform has a website to diffuse information. Even though several neighbourhood campaigns continue, the website is not regularly updated. URL: https://istanbulurbanmovements.wordpress.com/
- 14.
An excerpt from the song ‘Tencere-Tava Havasi’ (‘Sound of Pots and Pans’) written by Kardeş Türküler during the Gezi Park protests. The song is on YouTube: https://youtu.be/o-kbuS-anD4
- 15.
For example, the struggle against the construction of a third airport in Istanbul brings together urban activists concerned by the destruction of the city’s northern forests, which provide Istanbul with clean air. and rural inhabitants losing their villages and farms. See: http://www.kuzeyormanlari.org/category/english/
References
Adanali, Y. (2011). De-spatialized Space as Neoliberal Utopia: Gentrified İstiklal Street and Commercialized Urban Space. RedThread [electronic journal], issue3, www.red-thread.org/en/issue-detail.asp?sy=9
Adanalı, Y., Korkmaz, T., & Yücesoy, E. Ü. (2009). Living in voluntary and involuntary exclusion. Istanbul: Refuge-Diwan. Retrieved from http://reclaimistanbul.com/2011/04/04/istanbul-living-in-exclusion/
Akça, I., Bekmen, A., & Özden, B. A. (2014). Turkey reframed. Constituting neoliberal hegemony. London: Pluto Press.
Balaban, U. (2010). The Enclosure of Urban Space and Consolidation of the Capitalist Land Regime in Turkish Cities. Urban Studies, 48(10), 2162–2179.
Bekmen, A. (2014). State and capital in Turkey during the neoliberal era. In I. Akça, A. Bekmen, & B. A. Özden (Eds.), Turkey reframed. Constituting neoliberal hegemony. London: Pluto Press.
Brawley, L. (2009). The practice of spatial justice in crisis. Spatial Justice, 1(1), Electronic Journal, February 12, 2012.
Çavuşoğlu E., Strutz J. (2014). “We’ll Come and Demolish Your House!”: The Role of Spatial (Re-)Production in the Neoliberal Hegemonic Politics of Turkey, in Akça I., Bekmen A., Özden B.A. (ed), Turkey Reframed. Constituting Neoliberal Hegemony, London, Pluto.
Dikeç, M. (2013, June). Fraudulent democracy and urban stasis in Turkey. Society and Space-Environment and Planning D. Retrieved June 30, 2013, from http://societyandspace.com/2013/06/14/commentary-by-mustafa-dikec-fraudulent-democracy-and-urban-stasis-in-turkey/#comments
Dinçer, I. (2011). The impact of neoliberal policies on historic urban space: Areas of urban renewal in Istanbul. International Planning Studies, 16(1), 43–60.
Dryzek, J. (1996). Democracy in capitalist times. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Enlil, Z. M. (2011). The neoliberal agenda and the changing urban form of Istanbul. International Planning Studies, 16(1), 5–25.
Ergin, N. B. (2014). The right to the city: Right(s) to “possible-impossible” versus a mere slogan in practice. In G. Lelandais (Ed.), Understanding the city, Henri Lefebvre and urban studies (pp. 37–67). Newcastle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Erkip, F. (2003). The shopping mall as an emergent public space in Turkey. Environment and Planning A, 35(6), 1073–1093.
Fawaz, M. (2009). Neoliberal urbanity and the right to the city: A view from Beirut’s periphery. Development and Change, 40(5), 827–852.
Florida, R. (2002). The rise of the creative class: And how it’s transforming work, leisure, community and everyday life. New York: Perseus Book Group.
Gürek, H. (2008). AKP’nin Müteahhitleri [Constructors of the AKP]. Istanbul: Güncel.
Haenni, P. (2005). L’islam de marché: L’autre révolution conservatrice. Paris: Seuil.
Hall, T., & Hubbard, P. (1998). The entrepreneurial city. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons.
Harvey, D. (1989). From managerialism to entrepreneurialism: The transformation in urban governance in late capitalism. Geografiska Annaler B, 71(1), 3–17.
Harvey, D. (2012). Rebel cities. From the right to the city to urban revolution. London: Verso.
İçduygu, A. & Keyman F. (ed.). (2005). Citizenship in a Global World: European Questions and Turkish Experiences, London: Routledge.
İMECE (Urbanism Movement for People). (2014, September). The urban roots of Gezi, Istanbul. Passarelle, 10, 78–83.
Keyder, Ç. (2005). Transformation in urban structure and the environment in Istanbul. In F. Adaman & M. Arsel (Eds.), Environmentalism in Turkey, between democracy and development? London: Ashgate.
Kirişçi, K. (2000), Dissaggregating Turkish Citizenship and Immigration Practices. Middle Eastern Studies 36(3), 1–22.
Küçükçekmece Belediyesi. (2007). Ayazma-Tepeüstü Kentsel Dönüşüm Projesi; Yaşama Yeni Bir Pencereden Bakın [Ayazma-Tepeüstü urban transformation project: Watch the life from a new window]. Istanbul: Küçükçekmece Belediyesi.
Künkel, J., and Mayer, M. (eds). (2012). Neoliberal Urbanism and its Contestations. Crossing Theoretical Boundaries. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Kuymulu, M. B. (2013a). Reclaiming the right to the city: Reflections on the urban uprisings in Turkey. City, 17(3), 274–278.
Kuymulu, M. B. (2013b). The vortex of rights: ‘Right to the City’ at a crossroads. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37(3), 923–940.
Kuyucu, T., & Ünsal, Ö. (2010). ‘Urban Transformation’ as state-led property transfer: An analysis of two cases of urban renewal in Istanbul. Urban Studies, 47(7), 1479–1499.
Lefebvre, H. (1974). Production of space. Paris: Anthropos.
Lefebvre, H. (1996). Writing on cities (Trans. and Intro.: E. Kofman & E. Lebas). Oxford: Blackwell.
Leitner, H. (1990). Cities in pursuit of economic growth: The local state as entrepreneur. Political Geography Quarterly, 9, 146–170.
Lelandais, G. (2013). Citizenship, minorities and the struggle for a right to the city in Istanbul. Citizenship Studies, 17(6-7), 817–836.
Lelandais, G. (2014). Right to the city as an urban Utopia? Practices of everyday resistance in a Romani neighbourhood in Istanbul. In G. Lelandais (Ed.), Understanding the city. Henri Lefebvre and urban studies (pp. 69–90). New Castle-upon-Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing.
Lovering, J., & Türkmen, H. (2011). Bulldozer neo-liberalism in Istanbul: The state-led construction of property markets, and the displacement of the urban poor. International Planning Studies, 16, 73–96.
Marcuse, P. (2011). The purpose of the occupation movement and the danger of fetishizing space. Retrieved November 15, from http://pmarcuse.wordpress.com/
Mayer, M. (2000). Urban social movements in an era of globalisation. In P. Hamel, H.-L. Thaler, & M. Mayer (Eds.), Urban movements in a globalising world. London: Routledge.
Miller, B., & Nicholls, W. (2013). Social movements in urban society: The city as a space of politicization. Urban Geography, 34(4), 452–473.
Pickvance, C. (2003). From urban social movements to urban movements: A review and introduction to a symposium on urban movements. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27(1), 102–109.
Purcell, M. (2008). Recapturing democracy. Neoliberalization and the struggle for alternative urban futures. New York: Routledge.
Rutland, T. (2013). Activists in the making: Urban movements, political processes and the creation of political subjects. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37(3), 989–1011.
Swyngedouw E., Moulaert F., Rodriguez A. (2002). Neoliberal Urbanization in Europe: Large-Scale Urban Development Projects and the New Urban Policy. Antipode, 34.3, 542–577.
Touraine, A. (1978). La Voix et le regard. Paris: Seuil.
Tugal, C. Z. (2009). Passive revolution: Absorbing the Islamic challenge to capitalism. Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press.
Yalçıntan, M., & Çavuşoğlu, E. (2013). Professionals and local activists facing the neo-liberal transformation of the cities (conference paper). In International conference on Engagements and Tensions Towards Urban Renewal, School of Architecture, Paris, January 26.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Copyright information
© 2016 The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s)
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Lelandais, G.E. (2016). Gezi Protests and Beyond: Urban Resistance Under Neoliberal Urbanism in Turkey. In: Mayer, M., Thörn, C., Thörn, H. (eds) Urban Uprisings. Palgrave Studies in European Political Sociology. Palgrave Macmillan, London. https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-50509-5_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1057/978-1-137-50509-5_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Palgrave Macmillan, London
Print ISBN: 978-1-137-50492-0
Online ISBN: 978-1-137-50509-5
eBook Packages: Social SciencesSocial Sciences (R0)