Operation:City 2008 is a series of events that summarizes joint activities of Zagreb’s independent cultural scene in fields of cultural production, urban development, spatial policy, cultural policy and citizen participation. Read more...
Conference “The Neoliberal Frontline: Urban Struggles in Post-Socialist Societies” took place December 4-7, 2008 in Zagreb within a large space reclamation event Operation:City 2008. A host of urban scholars, architects, urbanists and activists from across the Balkans and from around the world discussed issues of neoliberalism, urban development, ideology and governance.
The publications are now online - a larger ‘Survival Manual for Neoliberal Reality’ in Croatian, accompanying the framing Operation:City 2008 event and including the translations of some of the seminal works in urban theory, documentation of artistic interventions in public space and a case study of historic development of Zagreb’s urban planning carried out within the Operation:City 2008. For all non-Croatian speaking folks there’s the conference publication in English with written contributions by conference participants. Here you’ll find texts by Neil Smith, Boris Buden, Jason Hackworth, Stefan Nowotny, Keller Easterling, and many many other participants.
OPERACIJA:GRAD - Priručnik za život u neoliberalnoj stvarnosti, pdf (in Croatian only)
The Neoliberal Frontline - conference publication, pdf (in English only)
VedranMimica in his presentation stressed out that there is a need for new architectural knowledge as the way architecture is thought is slow.
People Berlage Institute learns from in relation to this questions of space urbanity and neo-liberalism.
Rem Koolhaas, who was one of the first to speak about impact on China urbanism and territory of Chinese ‘liberalisation’ marked by 1978 motto of Deng Hsiao Ping “to get rich is glorious”
What is happening today is that multinational corporation and governments are more involved into shaping of the city and development than urban thinkers and academia
SaskiaSassen, asks in 2001 question of politics and practices: if city space is indeed partly constituted by the fragments located on global circuits
is it possible in juxtaposition of urban fragments and global circuits, can alternatives spaces/zones, counter spaces emerge and exist. and can they be spaces for alternative projects
The same term zone, Keller Easterling is using for completely different purpose just couple of years later in a lecture given on BerlageInsitute talking about Dubai and idea of the corporate city.
“Corporate city as a form of urbanism that behaves as a currency. Zone is the place of corporate city, it makes it’s own rules, typical has no taxes, labour restriction - space of environmental, labour abuse. Zone - as major urban paradigm was created on total (urban) deregulation. Dubai is growing by the zone, every zone is called the city, as the mean of signaling the kind of enthusiasm for entering global market. Dubai is good in preserving the secret…”
The overlook of development of Yugoslavia between ww2 and dissolution of Yugoslavia to show the difference of Yugoslavia from other Eastern European countries, followed by the overview of projects dealing with territory of Yugoslavia (eg. “Ljubljana Light Capital of Europe”)
VedranMimica asked Miran Gajšek another panelist how was he looking at the investigations of Berlage and how they are developing city of Ljubljana at the moment.
Miran Gajšek
Split intervention in 3 parts
1. Neo-liberalism was not only the policy, but it was a politics and reality from 1990ties. For eg. the ministry of planning didn’t exist after 1992, since politicians and some architects thought that in market economy there is no (space) for planning.
2. At the beginning the development of Slovenia as an independent states was focus on developing transport infrastructure, focusing on historical importance of transport routes. So on state level the only focus was on transportation. The city and state has to plan, because if they don’t plan, the one with money will plan. You have to prepare a plan even for those who doesn’t want it. And plan has to be made for every citizen and for all the territory.
Intention of the city and investor was to have the comprehensive study that was ordered from Berlage.
After crisis in 1920ties the state intervention became much more important, in USA planing authority for the banks was established after crisis. If we look at this experience, the planning authorities will be established in Europe and rest of world after this crisis, because governments would like to control the money invested.
Developers are sharks and it’s not easy to work with them. You need politicians to talk with them. And new “new deal” and developments will have to solve also social problems (eg. european corridor between budapest - osjek - sarajevo - ploče development of this
VedranMimica: Why there are so much transitional conformism and deficit in Zagreb?
SašaPoljanec-Borić
We have here retarded form of capitalism, not neo-liberalism. it comes in the specific urban form that is rent seeking and not profit seeking, and its not producing enough of positive externalises. We have a growth and not development. This is abusive form of capitalism because it promotes inequality even more than liberal capitalism does.
Why I personal reacted on this to deal with intellectual denial, because I care for younger generations that are confronting the problem of liberty at the moment.
Opposition to leftist denial is very red - pronounced by Pravona grad, and green - pron
These people has to produce the new social contract, but i don’t see where that leads because there is a lack of intellectual left that is involved in this process.
Where will the new domain come from?
It will come from the cultural and intellectual sector as a bottom up action. This very event is the one proof of this belief.
Due to a delay, the keynote of Keller Easterling will be held tomorrow (saturday 6 december) at 11 am. Tonight at 8 pm the keynote of Ines Weizman will be held.
Jason Hackworth, Zagreb, Community Center Mosor, December 5
Some reflections on the challenging the “most successful ideology in world history”
I will start by challenging the statement that neoliberalism is dead. Regardless of what happened in last few months, neoliberalism has a machine that is unparalleled (imf, wto,.. all of them are still here). Architectural machinery is still here that needs to be contested.
After crisis in 1998, despite the fact that crisis was caused by neoliberalism, neoliberalism came out of it even stronger, this historical precedent shows that it is dangerous to think that what happen in last few months will be enough for it to be exposed and to disappear.
The question is why is so difficult to contest when it seems so unpopular?
Despite it successes in ground, it is not inevitable and natural, it is a class project and it can be challenged, and I will present 3 strategies for contesting neoliberalism especially by and within the academia.
The progressive scholars have scripted convincing narrative to explain where the neoliberalism comes from (Regan, Thatcher, IMF, WTO), but I would like to suggest that political success didn’t come from the neoliberalism alone, but it came from the ability to morph and reflect other political movements - eg. how it morphed into social demarcates political parties.
I would like to suggest 3 strategies for contesting neoliberalism by scholars
1.Decoupling Neoliberalism
If Neoliberalism was put on ballot it would rarely get voted, but it is always coupled with various movements, it is important that it becomes decoupled from social movements it is paired with and gets popularity from, eg. coupling with evangelical community, that actually has nothing to do with, but architecture of these groups has been mobilised/used to promote neoliberism and give spiritual credibility to the neoliberalism. This is the part of research I do “The case of EvengelicalNeoliberalism” focusing on, dominionis, christian libertarianism - society should aim to the maximal liberalism but within biblical frame, socialism and all forms of collectivism are not only wrong from the economical perspective, but also they are anti biblical which gives neoliberalism its ‘biblical’ credibility, prosperity theology - god wants you to be prosperous, and give your wealth to the church to start it. Each of these support neoliberalism on the ground and present it rooted in the faith, thus natural.
I would argue that job of activism is more then just pointing this odd couplings that happened, to challenge the sources of legitimacy neoliberalism gets, but to break out these ties because only when its decoupled, it can be contested and critiqued in its own right.
2.Destabilizing Neoliberalizm
Challenging the micro-assumptions upon which the meta-theory is built.
Neoliberalism is presented as matter of necessity, as M.Tatcher put it “it has no alternative” and left is successfully presented as shy and slow to address the needs of people. Right wing neoliberal scholars have used government failures to justify market solutions on the premise that governments are incapable, unfortunately, scholars of left have no contested this notion still. Some of the strategies in enhancing the idea of government failure are done through international organizations, for eg. through Habitat for Humanity which was presented as a ’solution’ to the government failure, it is presented as replacement for the government, although most of those working for the Habitat don’t want it to become that. It was not framed in newspapers only as an alternative of ‘failed’ government, but also as the victim of government decisions.
These assumptions are not challenged enough by other scholars, neoliberalism cannot be challenged without more fierce challenging from academia of this micro-assumtions and not only the meta theory that gives the general framework of the neliberalism
3.Denaturalizingneoliberalism
Challenging ‘logical’ or ‘natural’ manifestations
Neoliberal institutions have power over governments through eg.lowering credit rating of the country if government is not behaving ‘likely’ (eg. building a lot of affordable housing, or infrastructure)
What is the role of bond rating agencies in shaping what neoliberalism is and how this can be contested?
- little known about these organizaiton until recent turmoil.
- overall localisation of revenue responsibility
- rise of institutional funds
- disintermediation
There is no change, despite what happened in last few months, because of the nature of those buying bonds and buying out cities’ debts. These are not individuals anymore, but different of institutions, that are regulated by international organizations. Impact of the decision made by the bonding agencies has became the most important. This is all happening at the time and in the context called disintermediation - the removal of local banks as intermediary between local market and international institutions. Thus, remaining investors are independent more and more relying on the Rating agencies which don’t distinguish for eg.between corporations and cities, and strain capacities of cities to make decisions that will be seen as unpopular by the rating agencies.
The of institutions lurking from shadow really became more powerful, but they were not challenged by critics of neoliberalism. Beside usual suspects of Neoliberalism (Regan, Thatcher, IMF…) the dirty work of Neoliberalism is done by this bonding agencies and other companies that came out of the shadow only in light of recent crisis.
The first step can be contesting denaturalisation of the work, because it is controversial and political, the features wiped out by neoliberalism and bringing this back is crucial.
I would like to finish with the question David Harvey asked in 1990ties
Are we all neolioberals now?
Fighting the ‘wolrd’s most successful ideology’
Harvey evoked this question to suggest that political assumptions changed so much. Although I feel that Harvey is right, it is hard to pass by nihilism of this question and idea.
Neil Smith, The Neoliberal Frontline, Dec. 4, Zagreb, Community Center Mosor
I will start from the end of the lecture - the question it poses is: could we think the end of the capitalism? And, indeed, Smith argues that we not only should think about it, but that we have to think it through in all the urgency of the present moment.
The present state of the urban landscape, in these times of emerging economic and social crises, is rapidly changing as the progression of disembodiment of the city building is taking place. The window of opportunity for the “right of the city” movement is there.
The lecture has been structured in 5 points around 5 arguments
1. Definition of Neoliberalism as conservative movement. In the case of USA the liberalism than emigrated to the left taking the place of Social Democrats. This is the only instant where liberalism is considered as the movement of the left.
2. The end of neoliberalism. Smith argues that the neoliberlism passed its peak.
There were 4 reasons for its fall and its present moribund or zombified state.
a) Asian economic crises in 80′ - and its splitting beyond the Asian borders
b) antiglobalisation movement in 90′ exposing lies of neoliberlism in its costly attacks on IMF, World Bank, G8.
c) Iraq war - exposing the incompetence of the American ruling class.
d) the economic crises - In this section explaining the zombified state of the present neoliberlism Smith paraphrases Habermas saying: “neoliberlism is dead but its dominant”…
3. The segment of the lecture addressing the present economic crises explained the present movements and events especially in the USA, and its global impact.
4. In the problematic of the Cities Smith has quoted the Henry Lefebvre’s insight: “urbanism takes control of industrialism as a means of capital distribution”.
Today this statement became clearer with crises that it centered on city building and impoverishment of cityscape. There are two possible responses to this current situation:
a) reform - social, investment in infrastructure and housing - a case of new, new deal. That is put under the question because there would be the emerging fiscal crises, and possibilities of bankrupt state and cities in the USA.
b) repression - neoliberal state has a possibility of repression. The architecture of repression and apparatus is already there.
5. Right to the city. Today “the right to the city alliance is formed in USA and all over the world”, from the flux of 1968 when Henri Lefebvre created the concept. There is seminar on CUNY on right to the city.
How could today’s theory and academia work though the disenchantment - where even freethinking Marxist thinkers cannot think the world beyond the capitalism?
With over ten days of artistic interventions, publicdiscussions, a workshop and an exhibition opening, we’re just a day away from the official kick-off of the conference “The Neoliberal Frontline: Urban Struggles in Post-Socialist Societies”. The line-up is now online and reveals an exciting roster of urban scholars, architects and planners, and activists.
Make sure to return to these pages or our feeds over the next couple of days as we’ll be live blogging, posting podcasts and videos of talks and panels including Neil Smith, Jason Hackworth, Boris Buden, Edi Rama, Keller Easterling, Brian Holmes… to name just a few.
To share you a whiff of fresh printhouse smell that filled the conference venue today as the conference publications came from print and to give you the foretaste of the following days, we have uploaded the conference newsletter, where you can find original contributions by a number of conference participants.
On Saturday, November 22nd, the third Operation:City gets underway. Unlike previous iterations (Operation:City in the former Badel factory in 2005 and Operation:City – in the former Jedinstvo factory in 2007), where cultural programmes have provided an occasion to reclaim and transform abandoned industrial sites into public spaces, the Operation:City 2008 will bring together activists, artists, experts, scholars and general public over issues of spatial and social development of Zagreb and of neoliberal cities in general.
Whom the city belongs to? ||| Privatizing the public? For whose benefit? ||| Who is exhausting the city?
We invite you to join us in search for answers to those questions. Operation:City brings a variety of events providing occasions to learn, discuss and participate.
If in Zagreb over the next three weeks, you’ll come across interventions in the public space by Sanja Iveković, Silvio Vujičić, Slaven Tolj, Dalibor Martinis, Igor Grubić, Siniša Labrović, Marko Pašalić, Mladen Stilinović, Nemanja Cvijanović, Škart, Lina Rica, Kristina Leko and the first Zagreb Complaints Choir. If you encounter them on the streets, join in!
Find out more about the past and the present of urban planning in Zagreb and reconsider what quality urban planning should be by visiting the exhibition “How the City Builds the City“, which will be on display December 2 – 7 in the Social Center “Kino Mosor”.
In twenty days, the third Operation:City, a joint programme of Zagreb’s independent cultural organizations will begin. Preparations for Operation:City 2008 are in full swing, and soon the entire programme will be available on this site. For now, we invite you to take a look at the preliminary programme of the international conference “Neoliberal Frontline”.
Presented and moderated by 
