For our graduation studio “We the people – Democracy, Architecture and the City”, we organized a series of workshops and lectures from professionals in the field. For the first session we invited Josse de Voogd – an independent researcher on electoral geography – who gave us a fresh, new perspective on the relation between voting behavior and the built environment:
The electoral map of the Netherlands shows a multi-colored mosaic of different regions and neighbourhoods with their specific voting behaviour. Although the Netherlands is an egalitarian country, there is a remarkable segregation when it comes to voting behaviour and to issues like lifestyle and education. The planned nature of Dutch urbanism leads to clearly recognizable areas that attract specific people. For example, almost every city has a nineteenth-century ring around the old core and almost everywhere these gentrified quarters, with their façade plants, hip cafés and carrier bikes, are the strongholds of the green and social liberal parties. Simultaneously, shrinking regions in the periphery of the country and declining earlier postwar neighbourhoods are the breeding grounds for right- and leftwing populism.
The pattern is not static, people move to places they can afford, and above all, to places they like. Living in the central city is getting more popular for some, while others prefer to live in villages or on the countryside. This development means that the intermediate suburbs, built on large scale between 1950 and 1990, with few services and a weak identity, are losing popularity. They suffer from social decline and are changing their voting preference. It are primarily the affluent ‘blue’ (liberal right) voters that move to newer areas, while the social degradation of neighbourhoods leads to more populist votes. Urban planning can influence all these patterns and developments. Making neighbourhoods more attractive and creating a more diverse housing stock can keep the social-climbers within the area.
Josse de Voogd(1983) works as an independent researcher on electoral geography. See his articles (in Dutch) on ‘Geografie magazine’ and ‘Sociale vraagstukken’ and his book ‘Bakfietsen en rolluiken’ .
There seems to be only one cause behind all forms of social misery: bigness. At least, that’s what the Austrian philosopher –and convinced anarchist- Leopold Kohr (1909-1994) believed after witnessing the Spanish Civil war and fleeing Austria after the Nazi takeover in 1938.
In his book ‘The breakdown of Nations’ (1957), he argued that geographical size not only influences how countries see themselves, but more important: how they interact. As Kohr saw it, the problem with Europe’s geopolitical situation was the fact that its states were not equal in size, allowing the ‘big ones’ to dominate the rest, ‘the dose makes the poison’. The wrong mix of sizes could be disastrous for the international equilibrium and the main question for society was therefore “not to grow, but to stop growing. The answer: not union but division.
To achieve his utopia, Kohr supported the independence movements of Puerto Rico, Wales and Anguilla, and opposed grand unification projects like the European Union. He appealed for the breakup of Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia, long before they happened. And he published his ideas about how such small states should be formed and governed. He even devised a concrete upper limit for “smallness”: “The absolute maximum to which a society can expand without having its basic functions degrade, is about 12 to 15 million people.”
To illustrate the unequal balances of Europe, he projected a Europe-like division on the USA to see how different American history would be if the union had looked like this:
His conclusion: Wars would be as frequent as in Europe. So what if Europe could have been sliced up -like America- into rectangular chunks of territory, disregarding most existing cultural, religious, linguistic and natural boundaries.
Kohr’s studies on Europe and North America were unique at the time and influenced other great minds to develop similar theories. One of them: Eurotopia by Freddy Heineken – Yes, the Dutch beer brewer- but that story is for another time.
The Harriman Institute in New York was recently exhibiting the exhibition: ZATO – Secret Soviet Cities during the Cold War on the dynamics between politics, urbanism, and cartographic manipulation. Unfortunately we couldn’t go there, but secret cities based on the communist ideology of ‘the Party’, for sure drew our attention.
These closed cities or so called ZATO sites (Closed Administrative-Territorial Formation / Zakrytoe administrativno-territorial’noe obrazovanie) were areas for secret military or scientific research and production in the Soviet Empire. Weapons were produced there and medical experiments took place on nearly 250,000 animals to understand how radiation damages tissues and causes diseases.
Built in the remote areas of the Soviet Empire, they followed a unique architectural program – inspired by ideal cities, based on perfect geometric plans, articulated by progressive modernist architectural language, reflecting the ideology of the Party. However, these “realized utopias” were camouflaged and blurred into the environment. The cities were not to be found on official maps and those who worked there had special passes to live and leave, and were themselves hidden from public view. Most of the scientists and engineers who worked in the ZATOs were not allowed to reveal their place or purpose of employment.
Today there are still 43 ZATO on the territory of the Russian Federation. Their future is uncertain: some may survive; others may disappear as urban formations within the context of Russian suburbs.
And now for something completely different: Urbicide. Violence not only against city dwellers, but against urbanity itself. Read this: an article on US army activity in Sadr City, a district of Baghdad masterplanned by Greek visionary urbanist Constantinos Doxiadis. Obviously, destroying urban tissue and erecting huge concrete barriers have become important military tools since the cityscape has become the ultimate battlefield in the 21st century.
Please note, by the way, how the Wikipedia-article also lists New Orleans (next to Sarajevo and Zimbabwe) as a victim of urbicide: in this case the violence against urbanity has been fabricated “not by military action but by policy and ideology,” according to Andrew Herscher. The passive-aggressive approach, or something like that.
Little design, lots of politics: Samoan Prime Minister Tuilaepa Lupesoliai Sailele Malielegaoi has recently declared his state is going to boldly go where no one has gone before: into the future. All 180,000 Samoans will, very soon, be skipping an entire day, effectively traveling through time. Probably, there will be no December 31st 2011 in Samoa. Ever. Twenty-four hours. Gone.
Strangely disappointing though, the underlying reasons are quite mundane (synchronizing with Australia and New Zealand will improve trade) and, admittedly, Samoa did celebrate the 4th of July twice a few decades ago so the country does have a day to spare anyway. Back to the future it is, indeed.
This, by the way, is not the first time the PM-with-the-unpronounceable-name (who also is Samoa’s second-best archer) has proposed bold moves to improve Samoa’s trade position: in 2009, he moved traffic from the right side of the road to the left, a decision which spawned a new political party against the change, and the countries’ largest public protests ever. A brave move, indeed – one no country had made for the past 40 years.
More radical geography: nuclear testing obsessed Richard L. Miller this time. Pretty self-explanatory, the above map is called “areas crossed by two or more radioactive clouds during the era of nuclear testing in the American Southwest, 1951-62.” Found here. Want to know more? Read this. Or this. Or contact Richard himself to order any of his books: his e-mail address (and a short bibliography) can be found here.
Whoa. Everything you always wanted to know about the Israel-Palestine situation but were afraid to ask: the Atlas of the Conflict. Co-written by Malkit Shoshan (PhD student of the chair of Design as Poltics), Willem Velthoven (of Mediamatic) and Nat Muller, the book painstakingly maps what seems to be the conflict of conflicts - it is being represented in over 500 drawings. Mediamatic throws a launchparty december 21st in Amsterdam – speeches by some cool people are included.
Click here (PDF!) for a 15 page sample of the atlas.
Very rarely does a career in geography gets your name on official US government blacklists, but when you’re called William Bunge things like that just happen. Bunge, who also got himself fired from at least two American universities, did ask for it though: besides being a communist he also tried to fight racial inequality in North-American inner cities by using geographical means – lethal in the wrong hands as these tools are. Setting up the Detroit Geographical Expedition and Institute, he started mapping such things as occurrences of rats biting babies and accidents involving black kids being hit by cars driven by white commuters (‘if you can predict an event, why call it an accident?’). Since his work painfully exposes racial and political problems rather left untouched by some, he managed to become a persona non grata in certain circles swiftly.
Apart from a biography which can be found on the very cool website IndieMaps.com (and from which all the information in this post has been blatantly, ehm, borrowed) very little can be found about the cartographer-cum-revolutionary online – and the few books he managed to get published so far are rare and expensive. If anybody knows where to find more on Bunge’s work, please let us know!