Squatters

[propertyistheft]

Squatters, are they helping or hindering the revolution. Squatting is a complete rejection of the capitalist system, and can be considered a revolutionary way of life. But squatters also depend completely on others, for the building of the apartments they squat in, for the food they steal, and for the rides they take, by train or car. So do you consider them a hindrance to society or a revolutionary way of life. Also if a socialistic society is to come into place, how do you take these squatters and make them a part of this society.

[Enragé]

for the building of the apartments they squat in

so do virtually all other people
and they usually actually make the place look a shitload better
and if they wouldnt have been in it, nobody would have, its not like they're kicking people out of their homes, they're squatting buildings which remain vacant for speculation while in most big cities there exists a shortage.


and for the rides they take, by train or car

how so?


for the food they steal

this is a generalisation, not all squatters steal

and whats wrong with stealing from multinational companies
its they who steal from US, its just that under the law it isnt called "stealing"



squatters, if they use the buildings they squat for useful things, like organising political events, if they actively support the revolution, if they dont go all like "everyone but us are just conformist bastards, fuck 'em", then yes they're very useful

In a socialist system there would be no speculation, no houses/buildings vacant, there would be no homeless, no ridiculous prizes for a living space
so in a socialist system, why squat?

[u.u]

I think that they don't harm or help. They just add to the climate.

[propertyistheft]

Sorry I wasnt clear in what I am saying, I am not anti-squatter whatsoever. I think it is great that they live in abandoned apartments and make use of everything that otherwise would be ignored. I think that they have all the right in the world to do what they do. Im just wondering how this will play out in a anarchist or socialist state. And if they would become productive members of society. I am all for stealing from corporations. And I myself am friends with many squatters. Im just saying that they do not produce any goods or services, and in a socialist society how would they be accomodated. If what you are saying is that in a socialiist society there would be no need for squatting, then that answers my question. Also with getting around, I meant that they depend on aquantinces to drive them around, and hopping trains (once again I'm not against this). Im simply saying that they are not self sufficient.

[Enragé]

i think there are enough squatters who do actually have jobs, and if they dont, they still do stuff, like organising gigs, and/or political meetings, and/or protesting, and/or fixing the squat

[propertyistheft]

good point, I think that my view is a little biased because the squatters I know are a little.... I dont know how to say, lazy and the only thing they seem to drive towards is getting drunk. They used to have revolutionary ideals but they has been washed away by drink and drugs.

[violencia.Proletariat]

Squatters, are they helping or hindering the revolution.

We aren't in a revolution.


Squatting is a complete rejection of the capitalist system, and can be considered a revolutionary way of life.

Squatting is not a rejection of captialism. Back in the 19th century squatting was a way of making land your property. There's nothing anti capitalist about that. It can be an anticapitalist action but it isn't always.

As for being a "revolutionary way of life", there is no such thing. A revolution is a change in the relationship to the means of production. Squatting does not do this.

Don't think I'm against squatting however. It's just not a solution for anything. The solution is to take the means of production and distribute housing appropriately. Squatting is something we can do in the mean time.


So do you consider them a hindrance to society or a revolutionary way of life.

I consider lifestyle anarchists squatters a joke. They aren't a hinderance or revolutionary, they're irrelevant to the political situation.


Also if a socialistic society is to come into place, how do you take these squatters and make them a part of this society.

Real squatters (the people who squat out of necessity) would have no reason to deny housing once it is provided for them.

[Enragé]

violencia, besides just needing it for a living space, it can also be great for political meetings, places where you can eat a decent meal for 1 euro, and simply not having to pay the ridiculous prizes in some big cities.

[propertyistheft]

we aren't in a revolution? Maybe not a fully developed one, but I think the very existence of this website shows that we are in one. Revolution does not just pertain to violence and class warfare.

[Enragé]

good point, I think that my view is a little biased because the squatters I know are a little.... I dont know how to say, lazy and the only thing they seem to drive towards is getting drunk. They used to have revolutionary ideals but they has been washed away by drink and drugs.

yea, it all depends on why you squat, and what you do in addition to simply squatting a house.

Large parts of the dutch squatters were extremely radical throughout the 70's and 80's (their highpoint, as an example; a riot/demonstration organised mainly from the squatters scene was extremely close to actually storming and preventing the coronation of (now) Queen Beatrix, the disturbances were so great, that all throughout the day riot police were being forced back, entire battles ensuing, and on the live transmission of the coronation you could hear the sirenes, the riots)
and continue to be so now.

Also, in co-ordination with neigbourhood organisations they managed in nijmegen it was i think, to beat back riot police, the military (including tanks) when they moved in because squatters and sympathisers in the neighbourhood were preventing it from getting torn down to build some shitty thing.

so it really depends on what sort of a squatter you are
if you're just in it for the booze, the drugs, and not having to do anything
well then you're just a bourgeois little shit going through "a phase".

[violencia.Proletariat]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19, 2006 08:05 pm
violencia, besides just needing it for a living space, it can also be great for political meetings, places where you can eat a decent meal for 1 euro, and simply not having to pay the ridiculous prizes in some big cities.
Yes, I forgot to mention that. But I can't say how succesful squatted community centers really turn out to be.

[Enragé]

Originally posted by violencia.Proletariat+November 20, 2006 12:12 am--> (violencia.Proletariat @ November 20, 2006 12:12 am)
[email protected] 19, 2006 08:05 pm
violencia, besides just needing it for a living space, it can also be great for political meetings, places where you can eat a decent meal for 1 euro, and simply not having to pay the ridiculous prizes in some big cities.
Yes, I forgot to mention that. But I can't say how succesful squatted community centers really turn out to be. [/b]
well, as shown in the previous post, they proved to be a basis, or more accurately put the infranstructure, for an entire movement (which..admittedly failed, but not because they squatted)

[BreadBros]

Squatting is cool. During revolutionary times property is often appropriated by workers and the general populace for use, both personal and political. Squatting today is kind of like a low-intensity version of that. We're gonna need a shitload more squatted or taken-over buildings, factories, meeting spaces, living spaces, etc.

[Keyser]

Well maybe I can help some posters out here, as I am a squatter myself.

For me, squatting started out as a need, I did not have anywhere to go and needed a roof over my head. I have never vandalised the places I have lived in nor have I ever been anti social to the people in our local community.

Most squatters work. My squat (12 people) has 5 students, 1 umemployed and the remaining 6 work.

I am in Britain and squatting is sort of semi legal, due to many loopholes in the law.

Although, unless I really needed to rent if the law was changed to make squatting really hard or near impossible, I'd keep squatting even if I could easily afford to rent, as I just don't see any point in renting or buying places if you can squat. Homes, food and other essentials should be free and as council/social housing is in such decline, forget about the state putting a roof over your head, especially if your a single young male like myself.

But in and of itself, squatting is not a revolutionary act, hence I dispute lifestylists and 'post-leftists' on that one.

But sqautting does make you more self reliant, more willing to question authority and stand up to it, as you have to deal with the police, the legal establishment and local government and it is great fun, all on top of giving you a home when you cannot afford to buy one or rent one.

If you think you can squat, do it. ;)

[chimx]

it depends. are the squatters poor folk that can't afford a place and taking action into their own hands instead of relying on state/church funded shelters? or are these squatters of which you speak working folk who are just too into their subculture to buy an apartment?

[Ol' Dirty]

Squatting is very much revolutionary in sentiment. You pay no taxes, and you defy many property laws that people hold. Not exactly socialist revolutionary, but still revolutionary.

[propertyistheft]

Squatting is also useful in the space it provides for organizing.