The Elephant in the room.

A political affair

Urban politics, synonymous to national politics determines how resources are allocated in a city and by extension those whom are served. Government programs perform a crucial role in establishing the welfare of its people. In many countries, national governments make policies that directly affect local authorities who will then transmit and interpret these in relation to their respective neighbourhoods. As Urban designers, it is important to understand the power structures behind the decisions that shape the local spaces we design. According to Mumford (1938), a city is an agglomeration of opinions and ideas motivated by the social, cultural, and economic interests of people. In this light, we must therefore question the ideas and interests that motivate our proposals to ‘improve’ the Urban environment and consider the categories of people it will either benefit or disenfranchise.

Urban morphology and power

To understand the relationship between the built environment and power, we need look no further than the origins of fascism. At the time of Benito Mussolini, the dominant idea in Italy was the vigorous re-establishment of the old Roman empire: the eternal Rome. He demolished massive sections of Rome, including the Via dei Fori Imperiali to make way for grand boulevards. The fascist regime intended to use the boulevards as propaganda machines to highlight the pomp and power of its military. He employed Architects and Urban designers to undertake the construction of these spaces, including Giuseppe Terragni. In a similar vein but with a different motivation, Le Corbusier’s ‘Plan Voisin’ (although never achieved) proposed the demolition of certain areas of central Paris to make way for his Ville Contemporaine. On this account, we can see that major political and economic revolutions have significant impacts on Urban theory and practice.

What’s happening lately ?

Historically, we can study the patterns of change when looking back. However, in the present time, I see no meaningful change equivalent to the current political and global economic direction. A late modernism has for the last 30 years continued to dominate the urban realm. This is because the presiding idea of aggressive capitalism now reigns supreme. I believe that the idea within this system is the development of a ‘globalscape’ within a homogenous framework, meaning that all newly produced urban spaces will continue to feel and be experienced the same. This is neither a good nor terrible thing depending on whom you ask as our identities are becoming increasingly digitalised.