Gloria ALVES, Universidade de São Paulo -USP, Brazil
Until the 1990s (20th century) the peripheries were a possibility of life fulfillment for the low-income working class. These spaces were not in the order of priority for capitalism's reproduction, and were occupied by working-class housing.
If the peripheries were presented as a place of precariousness -throughout years of struggles of the residents; articulations between neighborhood associations, basic ecclesial communities and unions had several socio-spatial conquests -such as implementation of basic infrastructures (treated water, electricity, urban mobility, health and education facilities). That allowed the constitution of peripheral centralities,establishing part of what was necessary for daily life.
Since the process is contradictory, these achievements end up on one hand, increasing the prices of real estate and merchandise, making it often impossible for this low-income population to continue living; on the other hand, these spaces are inserted in the logic of capital reproduction and become characterized as conflict’s space.
But how is the population in the peripheries characterized? According to surveys, in some peripheral districts almost 60% of the population is black and poor. As a space of conflict the State, in partnership with the private sector -through the use of force; has sought to promote an ethnic and social hygienization. They want to free up spaces for the reproduction of capital through the reproduction of space, justifying actions of removal, evictions, imprisonment, and death, with a speech that promises the conversion of the space through consortiated urban operations and/or the creation of infrastructure for the society (subway, swimming pools, avenues).The processes of socio-spatial inequality are reinforced and, contradictorily, hidden by blaming this population. The struggle continues for the right to the city.
Mots clés : everyday life|production of space|struggle| resistance|centralities
A102816GA