We breathe under the same sky to survive on the same planet that we call home. Some would say we share the same space. Mind you, the same, but not equal space. Society, since its inception, has shown heterogeneity, reflecting parallel realities. In one world, the road is lined, with huge buildings made of glass, while in the other, there is barely a roof. This symbolises scarcity in resources, and where there is scarcity, there is politics. Earlier, society saw shortages in bread, but today there is a shortage of space. But the rationale for the shortfall remains the same. While those sitting at the top not only digest their share of resources but also snatch from the poor, vulnerable, who are left, with nothing in return. It is in this context the politics of space will be discussed.
For examining, the politics of space, it is imperative to understand the categories of space. It can be divided into the rural, the urban and the global. The relationship between all these categories is historical. Thus, the factors that led to this categorisation is the advent of industrialization and technology. Stratification perpetually plagued society. What industrialization did was to engrave the division of society into urban and rural in our minds. And the politics began. Thus, one can conclude that space is not just physical but is also mental. It is not precisely concrete, but also abstract. The physical space manifests politics through mental space.
Capitalism is the catalyst that has vacated room for the politicisation of space as it is only then the class struggle became apparent. Ever wondered why the poor resign to the miserable fate and make peace with living in jhuggi-jhopri? It is because the state charters their life. Urbanism is part of the ideology the state propagates where the poor are promised a beautiful life which is nothing but a beautiful lie. The state is actively involved in bringing infrastructural developments at the cost of the poor, the environment. For instance, the poor often are displaced, without rehabilitation for the construction of dams. Even though the space for infrastructural developments might be available, the poor will continue to be deprived of space to breathe. No matter how much space there is, there will always be a shortage of space for the state. This shows how in every infrastructural development and distribution of space, states assume robust urban bias.
The urban bias is a reflection of who has power over the resources, that is, space. Castles and huge buildings not only speak at great length, about the strength and power who built them but also against whom they were built. Thus, the town is very much a planned development, not a natural development where the benefit will percolate to those at the lowest level. One can say, Politics is power. Power is politics.
Like every other thing, space is a social construct. Space is allocated through class, and social planning creates class structure. Best exemplified in the way, there is abundant space for the rich while the poorest sections clamp in little or no space. Thus, when we talk about the shortage of space, it does not connote less space but the abundance of space. The rhetoric applies to the rich, not the poor. This arrangement is not just confined to the cities because the class struggle is deep-rooted in the entire society, not only in some fragments. Even in the rural areas, the politics of space manifests because even there, we have a class, often determined by caste which holds power over the malnourished section. The quality of the building is a subjective idea. In a metropolitan city, it resembles great aesthetics, while in rural areas, the substance of aesthetics is changed. Nevertheless, they are symbols of power and domination.
Space is political because it is the locus of struggle. Everybody wants space. Some for expansion while others for survival. Some to exercise their right, other to fulfil their duty. Whatever be the reason, historicism is ever relevant. Buildings do not engage in politics. Thus, it is the social actor who politicise space. What we see is the commingling of idealism and materialism. Hence one can say we view space in three ways: perceived, conceived and lived.
What we see is the physical manifestation. What we think and what determines our position in society is a mental construction. The way we resign to our position is the social implication. It is through the allocation of space that we understand our stand in society. Space dictates our demands, thoughts, choice, way of life and of the world. The demand a poor makes from the politician differs from those made by an industrialist. A poor person by their standing in the society is a victim of unjust distribution of resources and space. It leads to different lived experiences and creates stratification in the form of the rich-poor divide. In their demands from the politician, a distinction between ‘want’ and ‘need’ is significant to be understood. A poor person needs necessities while an industrialist wants luxurious benefits, which is assured to them. Thus, there is crony capitalism that pervades our society, which exists because there is politics- the politics of space.
The politics of space has varied nuances, depending on the metrics that we choose to examine. If we talk from the perspective of class, politics is shaped through capitalism, whereas talk from the perspective of gender, politics is shaped through a private-public dichotomy. Whatever be the metrics, the politics of space is a story of power and domination of one group against the exclusion and subordination of the other group. It is a story of struggle. Wherever there is injustice, there will be resistance and where there is resistance, there will be the state. Where there is the state, there is politics.
Disclaimer: All views expressed in this article are of the author and do not, in any way, reflect the opinions of the members associated with this organisation. They are not intended to malign any group, organisation, company or religion.
Content writer Aastha tiwari is a girl who is stating at the clouds from the window sill listening to Surjan Stevens while contemplating the metaphorical undertones coloring the cloud. Role: Content Writer.Educational Qualification: Second year Political science major.Ultimate Goal: UPSC.Biggest achievement: Being featured as the writer of the month for Feminism In India.
I don’t even know how I stopped up here, however I
thought this submit was once great. I do not recognise who you might be however definitely you
are going to a well-known blogger if you happen to are not already.
Cheers!