Politics Year: 2 Student name: Danai Makoni
Course: Politics 2 Student number: g11m4632
Lecturer: R. Pithouse Course: The Right To The City
Plagiarism declaration: I have consulted the department policy on plagiarism and attach a signed plagiarism form. This work is my own.

Question 1: Critically evaluate David Harvey’s suggestion that we should adopt the right to the city as both a working slogan and political idea.
The essay seeks to establish and explain David Harvey’s concept of using the right to the city as a working slogan and political idea. Harvey is known for (2008; 23) introducing the concept of the right to the city as a working slogan (Harvey, 2008:23). Harvey explains how social inequality and discontent can be dealt with by the adoption of the right to city as a working slogan and political idea. The author states that the “one step towards unifying these struggles is to adopt the right to the city as both working slogan and political idea (Harvey, 2008:23)”.The following discussion seeks to expand on this hypothesis and critically evaluate the above mentioned theory. When evaluating the above discussed claims one must examine the two respective sides. One must firstly examine why it is tangible, practical and beneficial to the status quo of the international system to use the right to city as a working slogan and political idea. The second stage of the essay will address why the idea of turning the right to the city into a working slogan and political idea is criticised and seen as flawed. In conclusion the essay seeks to offer alternatives to the current issues.

Harvey’s (2008:23) main argument explains how the right to the city has been taken out of the hands of the people and has now become one of the most ignored rights in contemporary civil society. The author issues a call to democratize the power allocation which will in turn allow the disenfranchised to shape their urban experience (Harvey, 2008:23). Harvey explains that the right to city is simply not having a say in what the city is to become but as the city moulds the people the right to the city is the ability to choose what the people become (2008:23). The capitalist system plays a fundamental role in the understanding of Harvey’s work. The system itself as Harvey explains has led to rapid mobilization in a bid to expand capitalist markets to allow for continued surplus increases.
It is clear from the above-mentioned discussion that Harvey’s (2008:5) main argument of the right to city centres on the fact that the neo liberal system has created a massive move towards urbanization both in the historic times and in the contemporary world. Harvey shows how Capitalism plays a significant role in the move towards eliminating the rural areas and the slums as a means to modernize the world (Harvey, 2008:25). One then realises if the capitalist system plays such a fundamental role in a system which creates an atmosphere of inequality and mass social stratification then there must be an introduction of a new system or adjustments to the current system to allow a more fluid flow of resources within the society.
The idea Harvey (2008:33) introduces states that there is discontent in the world due to the urbanization and privatization of land in many parts of the world. Urbanization is a worldwide phenomenon that is making the rich richer and the poor even more disadvantaged (Harvey, 2008:33). Therefore as a result of the discontent that has arisen not only from being displaced but also from the poor facing the brunt of the economic crisis whilst the wealthy carry on unaffected has created a revolutionary atmosphere in many parts of the world. Harvey (2008:33) calls for there to somehow be a unified revolt and a spreading of discontent internationally now that urbanization has become global. The concept of introducing the right to the city as working slogan and political idea therefore aims to create as stated by Zibechi (2010:171) a political earthquake where there is global awakening and the people come to the realisation there is a need for a social movement to advocate for adjustments. Harvey (2008:32) says a unified struggle will allow a shift in policy makers. New policy will create a new group of who controls the spread of urbanization and how surplus will be used in the future in a way that will not disadvantage the majority (Harvey, 2008:32). The democratization of that right to the city as a political ideal is crucial as it will allow for the all people to have a say in how urbanization and how surplus investment is carried out(Harvey, 2008:32).
The use of the right to the city as a working slogan creates awareness within the people to the effect that urbanization has had on the lower classes and how little it has negatively affected the wealthy (Harvey, 2008:35). This part of Harvey’s ideas is also supported by Marxist theorists who would state that a social movement will be resultant of the loss of false consciousness as the people become aware and begin to call into question “the subject/object relationship (Zibechi,2010:171)”.The ideals behind the working slogan will allow for a unified revolt which is necessary if the dispossessed are to gain their rights back (Harvey, 2008:35).
Another valid point raised by Harvey (2008:37) is one that explains how power and wealth are succinctly linked and therefore result in those who have wealth having power to influence the government in ways that will benefit them financially. The use of the right to the city as a political idea will lay equal ground for the people, wealth will no longer be a means to infringe on the rights of others, but policy will ensure that the needs of all are examined (Harvey, 2008:37). Harvey (2008:38) also explains how neo liberal policies will have to take a back seat; neo liberalism creates a stratified class system in respect to the right to the city. Harvey advocates for all people to be able to have a say in how they want their city as with any right this should be inherent (Harvey, 2008:40). The neo liberal capitalist system does not allow for this though, capitalism means surplus is invested into urbanization which will boost consumerism (Harvey, 2008:40). This process spreads the risk around and when there is a global crisis as there is now the poor fact hardest of it all. Harvey’s (2008:37) ideas attempt to cater for this shortfall by using the right to the city as political and working slogan the capitalist policies will have to find new arenas to direct surplus that does not put the risk on people who had no control in the investments in the first place.
Harvey places very many valid ideas within his text but many can argue his ideas are flawed. The main issues with attempting to democratize the right to the city and use it as a working slogan and political ideal is that it faces a lot of strong opposition from not only governments but the elite within society(Harvey, 2008:17). Governments such as the Chinese are not going to simply sit back and watch as their masses attempt to mobilize in an international revolution. There will be a violent backlash that could lead to further oppression of the poor (Harvey, 2008:15). It is also difficult to argue with the functioning of the capitalist system as there is no other functional system therefore without a clear alternative they will always be a stratified class system and that will result in some parts of the population always being abused (Harvey, 2008:16).
Another key flaw would be timing it will be very complicated to find several countries or people in the same country that are at the point of revolt simultaneously. Critics of Harvey argue that the concepts behind creating a political system that is based on the right to city would require a complete overhaul of the city as we know it and demand the creation of new city economically, politically and socially. Harvey is quoted as a romantic whose motion is not pragmatic and intangible. Critics have also stated that the problem with Harvey’s ideas is that urbanization is moving at such a fast rate it cannot begin to cater for everyone’s needs. Harvey’s idea is that the right to the city as both a working slogan and political idea would ensure that everyone could decide and play a role in how they want their city as mentioned is flawed as Countries like Dubai pose a threat to his hypothesis. As stated by Katodrytis (2005:4) “Dubai is a prototype of the new post-global city, which creates appetites rather than solves problems.” The urge to urbanize has moved from that of the purely industrialisation and urbanization based on trying to evoke a more functional state.” Dubai may be considered the emerging prototype for the 21st century,” this form of urbanization becomes excessive rather than necessary even purely for the sustenance of capitalism Dubai has urbanized to excess (Davis, 2006:57). Dubai can be said to have created a city where the spatial and economic organisation is exclusively for the wealthiest people of the world (Davis, 2006:57).
David Harvey’s (2008:35) suggestion that we should adopt the right to the city as both a working slogan and political idea may be flawed in some cases but is still a valid argument. Harvey (2008:35) raises many valid points that could if put in effect cater to change of the status quo of the world and allow for equal development, urbanization and surplus reinvestment that is positive for all and not simply just for the elite. The right to the city as both a working slogan and political idea would ensure that everyone could decide and play a role in how they want their city which in the democratic world we live in should be a basic right as valid as ones human rights(Harvey, 2008:32). What many critics of Harvey overlook is that his ideas are valid in the fact that that once the right to the city is taken up as a working slogan there would not be a need to overhaul society completely but the changes would come as side effects form the change in the political and economic sphere(Harvey, 2008:27). It is clear that once there is less economic inequality the standards of living of the working class would automatically begin to rise and the political discontent decrease as everyone benefitted from the urbanization(Harvey, 2008:33)This is a valid point as one examines the change within contemporary Brazil which is no long the most economically and social stratified country in the world. It is therefore clear that measures can and should be taken to eradicate inequalities and this can and has been done within a functional capitalists system. There is a need for this kind of change in the political system when one examines the case study of Dubai that was mentioned earlier. Dubai has an expendable workforce which is easily deportable it is likened to the use of old indentured labour (Davis,2008:19). The fact that these workers rely on Dubai as home and a working environment means that they will work for very low wages and not contest this as they can not afford to strike and risk being deported (Davis,2008:19). This raises a crucial example where if the right to the city was ensured for all and was an inherent right these workers would more empowered and would not be victims of a capitalist system. The inclusion of the right to the city as a political idea would mean that not only does government policy shift but it would also mean an inclusion of the people within the policy making and enable them to collectively contribute to the creation of policies that represent them.

South Africa is also a valid case study as it is one of the many countries whose societies are riddled with inequalities and poor social conditions. South Africa has one of the highest rates of inequality within Africa. The examination of contemporary South Africa illustrates how the process of urbanization during colonial times has resulted in slums and shacks. Housing has now become a major issue as many of the South Africans today cannot afford the price of housing and are limited to building shacks as a form of accommodation ( Stadler,1979:95). Davis (2004:9) illustrates how urbanization has been the cause of the slum epidemic worldwide. Many governments refuse to deal with the issues resulting from urbanization like the slums and rather choose to destroy the slums and evacuate the people (Davis,2004:9). This is not a long term solution as the people simply move to another area as they have to find somewhere to live. Governments therefore need to stop dealing with the symptoms and side effects of capitalist urbanization but rather address the cause of the problem and create a tangible solution. A long term solution within the system will lessen the reoccurrence of incidents like the Marikana miners massacre which stemmed from miners protesting their poor working conditions and low wages .
Harvey’s suggestion that we should adopt the right to the city as both a working slogan and political idea offers solutions to the abovementioned issues. Harvey presents an option that allows for beneficial change that would allow for societies to lessen inequality and increase standards of living for many. Though Harvey advocates for an anti-capitalist method as presented earlier by critics. It is clear that what he fundamentally advocates for is a system that uphold the rights of all. There has to be a shift in global political policy with globalization playing such a major role in world politics today. The system needs allow for the protection of the people who fuel this capitalist economy. It is not of course practical for people to assume that there can complete equality within a country but it is less inequality that is sought and not complete equality. The capitalist system works hand in hand with so many social ills that need to be addressed as they are felt mostly by the workforce. There is a need to put the capitalist mode of production in a humane frame until a new and better system is developed. There needs to be policy that advocates for education for all, sanitary accommodation, healthcare systems that benefit all of society, accessible transport and reasonable wages. There has not been a proposal for everyone to be able to stay in the $5000 per night hotels in Dubai but there is definitely an appeal for the people within these hotels to remember the people behind the hotel, those people who built the city. When one examines the above issues one therefore agrees with Harvey’s suggestion that we should adopt the right to the city as both a working slogan and political idea

Word Count 2580

Bibliography
Chatterjee, P. 2004. 'Populations & Political Society'. The Politics of the Governed (Delhi: Permanent Black)
Davis, M. 2004. ‘Planet of Slums’, New Left Review, No. 26
Davis, M. 2006. ‘Fear and Money in Dubai’, New Left Review, No. 41
Harvey, D. 2008. ‘The Right to the City’, New Left Review, No. 53.
Katodrytis, G.2005.‘Metropolitan Dubai and the Rise of Architectural Fantasy’
Bidoun, no. 4.
Stadler,A. 1979. ‘Birds in the Cornfield: Squatter Movements in Johannesburg’. Journal of Southern African Studies. Vol. 6, No. 1
Zibechi, R. 2010 'State Powers & Non-State Powers', Dispersing Power (Oakland: AK Press)