July
1995
Editorial:
Community Versus Property
By Martin Rowe
|
|
|
On Tuesday May 30, about 200 NYPD police officers, many
dressed in riot gear, carrying clubs and mace, watched by rooftop
sharp shooters and
circling helicopters — led by a 50,000 pound armored personnel
carrier — entered 13th Street between avenues A and B of
the Lower East Side of Manhattan. Their mission was to evict approximately
30 squatters from two buildings that had been occupied for more than
a decade.
This may seem an unusually large show of force simply to evict squatters.
But the latter sensed an imminent attack and had not only welded themselves
into their buildings and apartments, but had erected large barricades
of dumpsters, an overturned car, garbage, and broken furniture and bicycles.
Those who were there described a surreal scene straight out of an urban
war zone as the tank smashed through the barricades to give access to
the police. Subsequently, all thirty-one of the street supporters were
arrested for disorderly conduct and resisting arrest. Wielding battering-rams,
the police smashed their way into the buildings and apartments, and
cleared them of the people who lived there, often persuading them to
leave by resting machine-gun barrels against their temples.
Why was the perceived threat of the squatters such that a force not
seen on the streets since the riots following Martin Luther King’s
assassination was needed? Along with erecting barricades, the squatters
offered only non-violent resistance, linking arms and going limp when
physically removed by the police from the site. What crime had they
committed? Well, technically they were “illegally” occupying
buildings owned by the City.
Under the ownership of the City, however, not a dime of investment was
put into the buildings and they were allowed to crumble.
As far back as the late 1970s and throughout the 1980s, people had
been moving into these abandoned buildings and effectively rebuilding
them
through their own effort and finances. In some cases, this was an enormous
undertaking considering that frequently the City had done as much as
possible to prohibit homeless people and others from “illegally”
occupying the buildings. The City had removed stairways, radiators and
boilers, driven holes through roofs, and ripped out plumbing and electrical
wiring until only the shells of buildings remained. Over the years,
these urban homesteaders rebuilt the stairs, fixed the leaking roofs,
and replaced plumbing and wiring to create livable dwellings. Groups
of people often pooled their financial resources and skills to heat
the building. Many of the “illegally” occupied buildings
resembled communes, with people cooking for each other, taking care
of each other’s kids, and generally looking out for each other.
After restoration, these new buildings replaced crack houses and dens
of thieves and prostitution with viable communities, clearing up one
of the most notorious streets on the Lower East Side.
In an era when we are being told to contribute to country and community,
it would be hard to find people more committed to the idea of community
than the “illegal” residents of the Lower East Side.
Not only had they made many of the streets safer and eased the City’s
housing shortage by renovating residences at zero cost to the City,
but many were involved with community organizing, recycling efforts,
gardening, and a few even ran a community bikeshop. This involved repairing
old bicycles and reusing old bike parts, and teaching kids bicycle
mechanics
so that someday they may build their own. In the eight years that this
shop existed it provided close to a thousand bicycles to underprivileged
children who could not afford new ones. That bikeshop epitomized everything
that is good for the City, yet the City still wanted it eliminated.
Why? Why these squatters in this part of the City when there are hundreds
if not thousands of squatters throughout the Lower East Side, the Bronx,
and Brooklyn?
There are two reasons. The first, is the fact that real estate prices
are being pushed upwards as the East Village gentrifies. Those who
will
benefit from this gentrification — developers and construction
companies — all give substantial contributions to City Council
members and the Mayor. The second is that here were some of the most
radical political people in the City. A true experiment in alternative
living has taken shape in parts of the East Village. Squatters renovating
dilapidated structures, residents retaking abandoned lots and converting
them into public gardens and parks, a community bike shop, cultural
diversity—the kinds of things that communities in this country
have lacked since the erosion of inner cities and the rise of the suburbs
after World War II.
Perhaps it is all best left to the literature of the squatters themselves: “You say we don’t want to work, but ultimately we have to,
on restoring our buildings and at regular jobs. Who amongst you never
felt frustrated by your daily work which profits a few? We want to work
for something meaningful, for instance to keep housing affordable or
to build community centers, workshops and gardens. Haven’t you
ever dreamed about work like this?”
 |
|
|
 |
