Advertisement

The Squatting Movement(s) in Paris: Internal Divides and Conditions for Survival

  • Thomas Aguilera
Chapter
Part of the The Contemporary City book series (TCONTCI)

Abstract

The history of squatting in Paris is animated by a conflict between the autonomous and the institutionalised wings of the squatting movement, mainly between artists, autonomous and housing activists. This conflict opposes diverse groups of squatters who get unequal resources, who differ on their practical and intellectual conception of squatting, on their internal organisation, on their goals, and their attitudes towards public authorities. This chapter shows how the internal divides of the squatting movement in Paris have fluctuated through different cycles of mobilisation. Aguilera supplements this analysis with a specific focus on the uses of the squatted spaces and the relationships between squatters and authorities.

References

  1. Aguilera, T. (2012). Gouverner les illégalismes. Les politiques urbaines face aux squats à Paris. Gouvernement et action publique, 3(3), 101–124.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Aguilera, T. (2014a). Innover par les instruments ? Le cas du gouvernement des squats à Paris. In C. Halpern, P. Lascoumes, & P. Le Galès (Eds.), L’instrumentation de l’action publique (pp. 417–443). Paris: Presses de Sciences Po.Google Scholar
  3. Aguilera, T. (2014b). L’(in)action publique face aux squats discrets à Paris et à Madrid. Déni d’agenda et autonomisation de la sécurisation: comment la méconnaissance du territoire bloque les politiques publiques. Métropoles, 14.Google Scholar
  4. Aguilera, T. (2014c). The French housing movement: Squatting as mode of action among other tools. In C. Cattaneo & M. Martinez (Eds.), The squatters’ movement in Europe. Commons and autonomy as alternatives to capitalism (pp. 159–160). London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
  5. Aguilera, T. (2017). Gouverner les illégalismes urbains. Les politiques publiques face aux squats et aux bidonvilles dans les régions de Paris et de Madrid. Paris: Dalloz.Google Scholar
  6. Aguilera, T. (2013). Configurations of squats in Paris and the Île-de-France region: Diversity of goals and resources. In SQEK (Ed.), Squatting in Europe: Radical spaces, urban struggles (pp. 209–230). Wivenhoe/New York/Port Watson: Minor Composition, Autonomedia.Google Scholar
  7. Alternative Chart Intersquat. (2003).Google Scholar
  8. AORIF. (2006). Les squats dans le patrimoine des bailleurs sociaux d’Ile-de-France. Dossier ressources n°1, mars 2006.Google Scholar
  9. Bonelli, L. (2008). Les caractéristiques de l’antiterrorisme français. In D. Bigo, L. Bonelli, & T. Deltombes (Eds.), Au nom du 11 septembre, les démocraties à l’épreuves de l’antiterrorisme (pp. 168–187). Paris: La Découverte.Google Scholar
  10. Bouillon, F. (2002). A quoi servent les squats? Compétences des acteurs et ressources des lieux. Revue Française des Affaires Sociales, 2(2), 45–63.Google Scholar
  11. Bouillon, F. (2009). Les mondes du squat. Anthropologie d’un habitat précaire. Paris: Presses Universitaires Françaises.Google Scholar
  12. Castells, M. (1972). Luttes de classe et contradictions urbaines. Paris: Éditions Maspero.Google Scholar
  13. Castells, M. (1983). The city and the grassroots. A cross-cultural theory of urban social movements. Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
  14. Cherki, E. (1973). Le mouvement d’occupation de maisons vides en France. Espaces et Sociétés, 9, 69–91.Google Scholar
  15. Coing, H. (1966). Rénovation urbaine et changement social. Paris: Les Éditions ouvrières.Google Scholar
  16. Colin, B. (2005). Les squatts parisiens depuis l’Après-Deuxième Guerre mondiale jusqu’en 1995. Master’s dissertation, Paris: Université Paris 7.Google Scholar
  17. Della Porta, D. (1995). Social movements, political violence and the state. A comparative analysis of Italy and Germany. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dominguez, M., Martínez, M., & Lorenzi, E. (2010). Okupaciones en movimiento. Derivas, estrategias y practicas. Madrid: Tierradenadie.Google Scholar
  19. Feldman, J. (2015). Vive la Miroiterie: A Preemptive Elegy. In A. Moore & A. Smart (Eds.), Making room. Cultural production in occupied spaces (pp. 240–251). Barcelona: Other Forms, the Journal of Aesthetic Protests.Google Scholar
  20. Fillieule, O. (2009). De l’objet de la définition à la définition de l’objet. De quoi traite finalement la sociologie des mouvements sociaux ? Politique et sociétés, 28(1), 15–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Flesher Fominaya, C. (2007). Autonomous movements and the institutional left: Two approaches in tension in Madrid’s anti-globalization network. South European Society and Politics, 12(3), 335–358.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gamson, W. A. (1975). The strategy of social protest. Homewood Illinois: Dorsey Press.Google Scholar
  23. Genty, T. (1999). Art et subversion, deux pôles antagonistes ? De l’impossibilité de la subversion dans l’art au dépassement de l’art par une praxis de la subversion quotidienne. Master’s dissertataion. Retreived from http://infokiosques.net/IMG/pdf/Art_et_Subversion-cahier.pdf
  24. Holm, A., & Kuhn, A. (2011). Squatting and urban renewal: The interaction of squatter movements and strategies of urban restructuring in berlin. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 35(3), 644–658.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Inyzant, H. (1981). Le mouvement Castor en France. Les coopératives d’autoconstruction entre 1950 et 1960, PhD dissertation, Paris: Université Paris 10.Google Scholar
  26. Katsiaficas, G. (1997). European autonomous social movement and the decolonization of everyday life. Atlantic Highlands: Humanities Press International.Google Scholar
  27. Kingdon, J. (1984). Agendas, alternatives and public policies. Boston: Little Brown.Google Scholar
  28. Kriesi, H. (2007). Protest in time and space; the evolution of waves of contention. In D. Snow, A. Sarah, A. Soule, & H. Kriesi (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to social movements (pp. 19–46). Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.Google Scholar
  29. Mackay, G. (1998). DIY culture, party and protest in nineties Britain. London: Verso.Google Scholar
  30. Martínez, M. (2002). Okupaciones de viviendas y de centros sociales. Autogestion, contracultura y conflictos urbanos. Barcelona: Virus.Google Scholar
  31. Martínez, M. (2014). How do squatters deal with the state? Legalization and anomalous institutionalization in Madrid. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 38(2), 646–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mcadam, D. (1995). Initiator and spin-off movements: Diffusion processes in protest cycles. In Traugott (Ed.), Repertoires and cycles of collective action (pp. 217–239). Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Moore, A. (2015). Occupation culture. Art + squatting in the city from below. Wivenhoe/New York/Port Watson: Minor Composition.Google Scholar
  34. Mudu, P. (2013). Resisting and challenging neoliberalism. In SQEK (Ed.), Squatting in Europe: Radical spaces, urban struggles (pp. 61–88). Wivenhoe/New York/Port Watson: Minor Composition, Autonomedia.Google Scholar
  35. Mudu, P., & Chattopadyhay, S. (Eds.). (2017). Migration, squatting and radical autonomy. Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  36. Owens, L. (2009). Cracking under pressure. Narrating the decline of the Amsterdam squatters’ movement. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Péchu, C. (2006). Entre résistance et contestation. La genèse du squat comme mode d’action. Travaux de science politique de l’Université de Lausanne, 24, 3–51.Google Scholar
  38. Péchu, C. (2010). Les squats. Paris: Presses de Sciences Po.Google Scholar
  39. Piven, F. F., & Cloward, R. (1979). Poor people’s movements: Why they succeed, how they fail. New York: Vintage Books.Google Scholar
  40. Prieur, V. (2015). Revendications des squats d’artistes et institutions. Marg, 21, 74–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Pruijt, H. (2003). Is the institutionalization of urban movements inevitable? A comparison of the opportunities for sustained squatting in New York City and Amsterdam. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 27(1), 133–157.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pruijt, H. (2013). The logic of urban squatting: The logic of urban squatting in Europe. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 37(1), 19–45.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Pruijt, H., & Roggeband, C. (2014). Autonomous and/or institutionalized social movements? Conceptual clarification and illustrative cases. International Journal of Comparative Sociology, 55(2), 144–165.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Quercy, P. (2002). Les squats dans la Région Ile-de-France. Situation et propositions, Rapport au Ministère de l’Equipement, des Transports et du Logement, Paris.Google Scholar
  45. Simmel, G. (1964). Conflict and the web of group affiliation. New York/London: The Free Press.Google Scholar
  46. SQEK (Eds.). (2013). Squatting in Europe: Radical spaces, urban struggles. Wivenhoe/New York/Port Watson: Minor Composition, Autonomedia.Google Scholar
  47. SQEK. (2014). The squatters’ movement in Europe. Commons and autonomy as alternatives to capitalism. London: Pluto Press/Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  48. Staggenborg, S. (1989). Stability and innovation in the Women’s movement: A comparison of two movement organizations. Social Problems, 36(1), 75–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Tarrow, S. (1995). Cycles of collective action: Between moments of madness and the repertoire of contention. In Traugott (Ed.), Repertoires and cycles of collective action (pp. 89–116). Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  50. Tilly, C. (1999). From interactions to outcomes in social movements. In M. Giugni, D. McAdam, & C. Tilly (Eds.), How social movements matter (pp. 253–270). Minneapolis/London: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  51. Uitermark, J. (2004). The co-optation of squatters in Amsterdam and the emergence of a movement meritocracy: A critical reply to Pruijt. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 28(3), 687–698.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Weill, P.-E. (2017). Sans toit ni loi? Genèse et conditions de mise en oeuvre du Droit au logement opposable. Rennes: Presses Universitaires de Rennes.Google Scholar
  53. Whittier, N. (2007). The consequences of social movements for each other. In D. A. Snow, S. A. Soule, & H. Kriesi (Eds.), The Blackwell companion to social movements (pp. 531–552). Malden: Wiley-Blackwell.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Aguilera
    • 1
  1. 1.Sciences Po Rennes-ArènesRennesFrance

Personalised recommendations