WAYS OF ORGANISATION At the moment there are several thousands of squatters in Amsterdam; lowest estimate 3000, highest estimate 8000. A thousand of them are organised in an explicit way (we do not want to call the other squatters unorganised): - regular house-, street-, block- and neighbourhood-meetinqs - irregular meetinqs on town- and national level (especially during the campaiqn against the anti-squatting-law in 1976) - four advisory-groups, who have weakly consulting-hours for squatters and people who envisage to squat - a communal run coffeeshop and information-centre (now in existence for 5 years) named Roodmerk. An exhibition on the London Villa- Road squat was held here recently - a monthly extensiving bulletin "Kraakkrant"; discussions and opinions on squatting, news and accounts on squats and neighbourhood-actions; impression 800, it is diffused by about 10 people, who have in this way reqular contacts with squatters from different parts of town - many squatters are active in neighbourhood action-groups or even form the nucleus of such groups, it is within these groups that the collaboration of squatters and regular inhabitants finds its expression end of page 1. There exists a communal financial fund, the principal of it is that each squatter pays 10 guilders a week, of which $ is to be used for the buying of building materials and in some cases to pay for building services and ~4 to meet "action-costs" such as posters, leaflets, telephone (this information is mainly based on practise in the Nieuwmarkt neighbourhood). There is NO central cash, but each house, or in some cases a block of houses, keeps the money. If the money is not directly needed in that house it is used by other houses. For about two years decisions were made in general meetings ('74/'75) about the use of the money, but the last... years practise has become that people who need money pass other squatted houses and explain each time why they need money and it are the people of each individual house who decide, Several times a year a small group makes a financial account which is diffused. Participation varies and is very much dependent on the way initiatives for renovation or repair are supported. In any case this system is an economic expression of solidarity and many projects were only possible because of it. Over the last years several thousands of guilders have been available in this way. SQUATTING WHAT FOR ? In the big cities in the Netherlands everybody needs a rasidence-permit demandad by the national housinq-distribution- act of 1947. A law made just after the second world war to avoid self-action of the homeless, such as took place in England at that time. In Amsterdam almost a 100.000 people do not have such a permit (Amsterdam has about 800.000 inhabitants) and are what the authorities call "illegal". We call people squatters not when they are living somewhere illegal, but when they have occupied a home against the will of the owner and/or the city-authorities. Different kind of neighbourhoods have different forms of squatting. In qeneral we differentiate between the inner-city, the 19th. century surrounding neighbourhoods and the new suburbs. the inner-city In the inner-city there are many empty office-buildings, both former monumental houses along the canals and new 20th. century buildings. There are also houses which are empty because of demolition-plans for offices or traffic, or renovation into expensive appartments. A particular case are the houses, protected by the preservation-act (monuments) of which there are several thousands in the inner-city. Property in this part of the town is mainly private, with exception of those areas where the city-council has made plans for vast public-works (such as tha subway, the new town-hall and university-blocks) and expropriated areas, mainly in the former pre-war jewish ghetto, that are now owned by the municipality and let out or long lease to private firms. As elsewhere it is the dependency of the city-council on big business, that makes that many house in good shape in these areas are put on the demolition-list. The forms of squatting that arise from these characteristics are mainly: end of page 2. big buildings Big office- and/or industrial-buildings, which stay empty because the firms moved to new premises, in many cases out of the inner- city, or closed down. People have to act as a group to manage living in these buildings, not made up of seperate dwellings for seperate families. It is through many inter-personal conflicts that groups that are able to stay for a long time in such buildings, come to communal forms of living together. Groups are mostly not constituated on forehand, but came into existance because a big building is going to be occupied. The money that is needed to make these in many cases on first sight unattractive spaces livable, necissates the forming of communal funds for the expanses. In most cases money from other supporting squatting-groups, who have already livable spaces, is needed. High investments, especially in time spend to rebuild, put pressure on these squatters to attempt to legalize in one way or another their living-situation. Contradictions and tensions between over-active and apathetic, legalistic and militant squatters develop easily in those circumstances. The conflicts in big houses between "non cooperative" people and the others commonly need many sessions to find a solution. Sometimes even squatters from other houses assist as more "objective" advisors. There are also exanples of quite reactionary and repressive conduct of squatters in such cases. Much more has to be said about this subject, but that goes beyond the general-informatic aim of this text. expensive appartments Houses that are empty because the owner wants to make expensive appartments from it and threw the original inhabitants out. In many cases these houses are in bad state or deliberately demolished on the inside. Many squatters live here for a short while till they are forced to move to another place. There are examples of squatters who have themselve patched up such houses and stayed. Often force is combined with remaining "original" inhabitants who refused to go, although there are cases where the latter turned against the squatters not wanting to have anything to do witb communal actions. monuments House under the protection of the preservation-act are restored with the aid of heavy governmental subsidies, in many cases by foundations which are formally on a non-profit base, but in practice make profits as well, act almost exclusively in the interest of the future upper-class inhabitants of these monuments. Because of the soft soil in Amsterdam investments to restorate can be enormeous. In case the foundations on wooden poles have to be replaced by concrete poles (pushed underground in small fragmants; very few firms, (with a monopoly position, because of patents) do this expensive job. There have been several cases of such houses squatted and actions against both governmental and municipal authorities with demands that the houses would not exclusively be for upper-class inhabitants (the rents after restoration are in most cases three or four times as much as the current rentlevel). Efforts to get of the qround combined actions of threatened original end of page 3. inhabitants and squatters living in monuments in Amsterdam have failed till now, except for a short demonstrative occupation of the headquarters of one of the restoration-foundations in 1976. houses intended for demolition Houses that stay empty because of demolition-plans for offices, traffic, etc. In many cases it is because of previous actions with strong pressure upon the local authorities that proposed plans are not directly executed or delayed, so houses remain empty for a longer or shorter period, in most cases already demolished on the inside and boardad up or bricked up. Many squatters only occupy such houses with the intention to stay there temporarely. However, there are sevaral examples of squatters that tried to resist demolition, such as actions over the last 8 years in the Nieuwmarkt neighbourhood, and occupied farm-houses in the nearby village Diemen. Starting with the refusal of an existing plan often alternativa plans are developed by squatter-groups in many times in integratad actions with neighbourhood- and ecological action- groups. In some cases such plans are pushed into official discussion deliberately to gain time to organise resistance. Making alternative plans, however, can mean also that slight chances of existinq plans are accepted, that a small group of almost proffessional negotiators elects itself durinq the conflict without any link with the people involved at the beginning of it, that the emphasis in discussions is placed on the technical rather than on the social argument, that the hoax of "participation" is accepted. 19th. century neighbourhoods In the 19th. and beginning of the 20th. century neighbourhoods, built for quick profit just as nowadays (althouqh planners always say that what is built now is fundamental different from that epoch) many houses are in bad condition, in most cases just because no maintenance whatsoever has been done durinq the last decennia (insecurity of proprietors about the future of the neighbourhood). Also there are whole streets where the foundations of the houses (which stand on wooden poles) has rotten away, or is bad because of swindling at the time of building. Especially in the eastern parts of town whole neighbourhoods fall apart; notably houses built in the late twenties of this century as show-cases of social-democrat municipal policy (Indische en Afrikaanse buurt). The council authorities, notably the urban planning offices, have drawn up urban renewal plans for whole areas. Resistance over the years in these neiqhbourhoods have in many cases let to fundamental chances in these plans, such as renovation instead of demolition of houses. The demand for rehousing in the same neighbourhood after the completion of the new dwellings and the refusal to live amidst boarded up houses and ruins form one of the reasons for temporization of demolition and the occurence of squatting. Property is partly private and increasingly city-council. The existing housing-shortage in Amsterdam has led the city- council to legalize the temporary use of houses in these areas that need to be demolished, or renovated. By taking the initiative out of the hands of the squatters the city-council hopes to regain control and keep people more in dependancy of their burocratic constellation. end of page 4 (The Amsterdam Council Rehousing Department is over the years in constant crises, with an enormeous turn-over of directors and personal). The squatting in the 19th. century neighbourhoods with in many cases single dwellings amidst original inhabitants and the single dwelling-structure, built to separate the different family-households, has not given communal organisation forms as in the inner-city, although attempts are made. Only in one 19th. century neighbourhood (Staatsliedenbuurt) a kind of communal fund is tried out. suburbs It is only in the biggest suburb Bijlmermeer, spectacular urban plan of the beginning of the sixties, that a squatting movement has developed. The suburb linked to the town by several highways and the subway (metro), projects now under construction and met by fierce resistance in several naighbourhoods, is one of Europes clearast examples of the urban ideologists of the thirties (a.o. Le Corbusier) with its separation of functions (traffic, parks, parking, shopping and surviving). Envisaged to rehouse the former inhabitants of the inner-city and 19th. century neighbourhoods, it did not get that function because of the extremely high rents. Big flat biocks stayed empty for years and many individual expulsions because of rent- debts took place. Rent-debts have increased so much that the authorities refuse to give exact figures and in many cases do not expulse and prefer to "pay" rent through one of the many soeial-security regulations. Individual expulsions have the propagandistic function to put pressure upon the main part of inhabitants of this suburb to pay their rents in time. In 1968 there was a short demonstrative occupation by a political group (Socialistiese Jeugd = Socialist Youth) of a block of flats, expulsed by riot police the same day. A few years later (1974) it ware the immigrants of the South-American Dutch colony Suriname, that started to occupy the empty flats. Many of them were pushed first from the exploitad innerland to the only urban area Paramaribo. High unemployment (25%) and the almost complete lack of social security aid. The known formal change to an "independent state" of Suriname formed at the same time the main reason for the exodus of Surinam people to Holland. Whole families flew over (often the money for the fare was advanced by Dutch pension-holders in Amsterdam, who awaited the return of their money through extreme rents, payed by the social- security office of the Amsterdam-city), a lot of them almost directly from the inner-lands of Suriname. Most of them went to Amsterdam. The housing-problems that arose from this situation led to the massive squattinq in the Bijlmermeer flats (at one moment more than a 100 flats, almost 600 people). Social workers played a peculiar role in this conflict, they tried from the beginning to canalize the movement and avoid self-organisation. Most of these asocial workers were Surinam people themselves, who studied in Holland. Also a marxist- leninist surinam party (LOSON) was involved in the occupation movement, being interested more in their aims as political party "for the people" than acting with these people. end of page 5. several demonstrations were held with some support of neighbourhood- and squattergroups of the rest of the town and organisations for immigrant-workers. At that moment the authorities who first threatened to expel the squatters did not dare, because at the same time negociations about the forming of the "independant state" Suriname ware held and with almost a quarter of the whole population of that country being concentrated in Amsterdam, they could not risk troubles. As elsewhere authorities started to talk about dispersion of Surinam people, "to avoid the creation of racial tensity" as they put it. Except for a spontaneous demonstration by the Nieuwmarkt actiongroup in the suburb Bijlmarmeer (Nov. '74) and a more formal organized support-demonstration through a 19th. century neighbourhood where many surinam people live (Pijp) and the inner-city, this squatting-action remained isolated. A long pariod of negociations followed, in which each time a few families were legalized and a few "rehoused". The authorities slowly got so much influence, that they pursuaded the social workers to stop the increase of the squattings (of course "to avoid racism"). OTHER KINDS OF HOUSING STRUGGLES Apart from the above described neighbourhood characteristics, there are in Amsterdam characteristic groups of dwellers who engage in actions, either to defend or to gain their housing such as the many house-boat inhabitants in the canals in the inner-city and suburbs and groups like immigrant-workers (mainly maroccan, turkish and spanish) and gypsies. In some instances their struggle has combined or been support by squatting- and/or neighbourhood action-qroups. WHO ARE THE AMSTERDAM SQUATTERS ? Without wantinq to give any kind of sociological twaddle just a few facts to get an idea: - students who mainly coma outside of Amstardam and do not find a place or are sick of living in tha student- ghettos in high-risa flats in tha suburbs (they mostly see squatting as a temporary solution} - young people who want to live together and in many cases want to start a regular family situation (they squat and meanwhile try to get a house leqally by tha municipal distribution) - people with housing-problems because of a change in relationships (from broken up marriages to broken up communes) - young people who want to get away from livinq with their parents - people of middle high income groups who have just a too high income to get a house within the existing official distribution system. It is through squatting that very often changes in role, social status, relationships, occupation and study take place. From young workers getting in conflict with their boss because they do not come in time anymore to students in sociology who end up as carpenters in a kind of collective workshop. End of page 6. As to the role of women and men in the Amsterdam squatters- movement one can say that the regular pattern is reproduced (men acting in the foreground in meetings and as "representatives"). This text for axample was written by males. Almost no woman are taking part in the women's movements in Amsterdam. In regard to the economic dependency of women, though, one can see a change, most women that squatted have their own income. The patching up and rebuildinq of buildings and houses has led for both men and women to learning of many skills, but the work-division with its intellectual specialisation (in this case the housinq question) is almost not overcome. In some cases squatting has led to the forming of communal workshops (printinq, buildinq, foodshop and a bookshop-project and an elctro-tachnical shop in preparance. An investigation whether most squatters have parmanent or irregular jobs has not been made, we just do not know at the moment. A minority touches social security. There are quite a few squats that aedure for several years and people that live for many years in squats. At the moment one can almost speak about different generations of squatters in Amsterdam, with the inherent problems of authority, because of difference in experience. TO CONCLUDE...... The Amsterdam squatters movament has had and will have a strong influence on the adaptation of the existing order to changed social conditions. 0ne can see how closa in many cases the demands of the most advanced represantatives of modern capitalism and action- qroups are in countries like Holland and England. Sometimes the modern state and the squatters seem to have a common enemy in "private ownership of ground and houses" (a topic at the moment in dutch parliamantary politics, subject of divergencies between social-democrat- and christian parties), but the modern state only attacks private property to put in its place state property and the same question of power in another form will have to be attacked then (did you ever hear about squats in Moscow; there is quite definite information about that and what do we know about what is happening in China, certainly not what most political tourists and the chinese propaganda machine wants us to beliave). It was not our intention to write up anykind of victorious account of what is happening in Amsterdam; we know too well how solidarity and communal living can end up as narrow minded, shortsighted forminq of cliques; how the squatting movement in Amsterdam has given birth to an idealisation of what is called over here "de buurt" (the neighbourhood), an idealisation of communal living that never existed and at the best could come end of page 7. into existence in the future. One even can see the development of a kind of micro-nationalism. People only wanting to be engaged in "their own" neighbourhood, street, house, room,...... A lost of sight of the other social-questions, a lack of understanding of the necessity for the totality of our lives to be changed. Does this then mean that we are condemning this movement, in which we participated ourselves over the years? No, but we think that one should try at all movements to see and understand what is really happening and not to mystify ones own actions. It is therefore that we say that the importance of a movement is not judqed by the victory of a particular struggle, the winning of certain demands. To our opinion the importances of a movement lays in the possibilities it did develop for more parsonal independancy, for more communal affection and the breaking down of dependency on whatever authorities or authoritarian structures, whether it is the forced division of social roles, the trade union, political party or the revolutionary squatters union with its proposed ludicrous membership-cards, contribution to a central cash and other outlived organisational forms. Amsterdam 14 May 1977 text by three squatters (hk, 1dq, tvt) For more information, especially on the history of squatting- and neighbourhood-actions in Amsterdam read: "Today this house, tomorrow the city", text written in March '72 by two participants of the Nieuwmarkt actiongroup, published in collaboration with Islington Housinq Research Group London. Text now out of print, but photo-copies can be got at cost-price. Contacts: -koffiebar Roodmark, Bethanienstraat 20, Amsterdam, tel. 020 253150 -Kraakkrant (Squatters Paper) c/o Prins Hendrikkade 150 -Kraakwinkel (Squatters Shop) Van Hogendorpstraat 73/124 -Kafee "de vergulde koevoet." (Pub "the gilded crow-bar) Haarlemmerplein 17. A few words in dutch squatting circles: --------------------------------- buurt= neighbourhood kraken= to squat (literal: to crack) woninq= dwellinq gemeente= municipality (city-council) bewoner= inhabitant aktieqroep= action-qroup smeris= cop deurwaarder =bailiff breekijzer= crowbar woningzoekende= a typical dutch word with no English equivalent, meaning something like "someone, on search for a home" krot=hovel pandje=(little) premise bezetten=to occupy end of page 8. For those, interested in the organisation of the existing order in Amsterdam, just a few data: -- Municipal politics play an important role in dutch politics, especially politics of Amsterdam (the government resides in Den Haag) -- Since the twenties the social-democrats have been qovernmental in city-politics, mostly in coalition with liberals and christians (for a brief period after world war II the dutch communist party (CPN) was governmental as well, losing influence after 1948 and not coming back in coalition with the social-democrats until 1966). -- in 1966 the provo-movement took part in municipal elections and got one (changing) member in the city-council (this directly proved useless). In 1967 the provo-movement came to an end during a short uproar that was sparked off by a wild- cat strike of building laborers. Criticism on city-politics developed during the provo-movement (1965-1967) did find afterwards a more direct expression in the beginning of an orqanized squatters movement by some of the former provo's (1968). -- In 1970 new municipal elections inspired a variety of altarnative groups (artists, ecologists, students) to participate again in municipal elections with the Kabouter (dwarf) -movement. They got 5 members in the city-council. This Kabouter movement was both active in parliamentary politics and the at that moment developing neighbourhood action movement in Amstardam; the movement was not structured as a political party and many of its members refused such tactics and within a few years it went out of existance. -- The main ideologist of the kabouter movement however, could not stop his role on the parliamentarian stage and took part in 1974 for the then newly formed progressive christian party (PPR) in municipal elections. In that period under pressure of the social-democrat party (PvdA) a kind of popular front government was formed for Amsterdam, beinq a coalition with party communists, pacifistic socialists (PSP) and progressive christians (PPR). -- With the national government being in the last years coalitions of the middle and for the last four years a left/ christian coalition, the municipal political parties in power, in case of resistance of the amsterdam population always tries to blame ONLY the national government, so seeking to use the growing power of all kinds of action-qroups for their own political ends. This does not work out: one of the main tarqets of the actions of all kinds of independant groups in Amsterdam is the municipality, so the social-democrats, communist party or whataver party in offica. end of page 9. -- All the unions (there are now only two federations of unions that play a role: social-democrats and progressive catholic (FNV) and the much smaller christian union (CNV)) collaborate closely with the amsterdam city-authorities. Demanding for instance the building of new hiqhways, the underground and new far-distance suburbs, all of course in the interest of the working population' and especially the sacred cow "employment". - Most openly and expressively operating and acting against the amsterdam independent action-groups, is (by its nature) the communist party, who in some instances called the action-qroup members of the Nieuwmarkt neighbourhood "neo-fascists". - Compared with other cities in Holland influence of left qroups like trotskists, maoists or any kind of neo-stalinist or neo- leninist is weak. The existing political parties often try to get control within action-groups and in certain areas they succeeded, but in general there is a haalthy anti-party-politics attitude among people. -------------- end of the text