Privatising East Germany: Re-unification and the Politics of Real Estate
Ben Gook (AU/DE)

Download PDF

‘In our time,’ Fredric Jameson wrote in a 2015 essay, ‘all politics is about real estate.’ Jameson’s clear-eyed conclusion makes immediate sense, read from within the embassy – a patch handed to the Australian state, then back to the GDR, then to the Federal Republic of Germany (via the Treuhand, as explained below), then to private owners, real estate developers and jobbing artists. Jameson goes on to list the varieties of this politics of real estate, which reaches ‘from the loftiest statecraft to the most petty manoeuvring around local advantage. Postmodern politics is essentially a matter of land grabs, on a local as well as global scale. Whether you think of … Palestine or of gentrification and zoning in American small towns, it is that peculiar and imaginary thing called private property in land … at stake.’ Within capitalism, he continues, ‘the land is not only an object of struggle between the classes, between rich and poor; it defines their very existence and the separation between them. Capitalism began with enclosure and with the occupation of the Aztec and Inca empires; and it is ending with foreclosure and dispossession, with homelessness on the individual as well as the collective level, and with the unemployment dictated by austerity and outsourcing, the abandonment of factories and rustbelts.’

1989 marked an inflection point in these long-running capitalist Landnahmen. The European socialist states’ collapse meant that imposing the ‘peculiar and imaginary thing called private property in land’ became a necessary step in the ‘transition’ to capitalist formations. Privatisation in Germany after 1989 focused on everything from warehouses to forests to hospitals to apartment buildings to railways – to former embassies. It entailed both privatising land and introducing market-type mechanisms into firms and the new markets. German re-unification intensified a western German drift towards neoliberalised political economy – understood as introducing market-based forms of economisation, calculation, measurement and extrinsic valuation to ever more domains, always in the name of injecting competition at every level of social life. Individuals should compete, businesses should compete, nations should compete: each against all as private units. As in other states of competitive ‘workfare,’ re-unified Germany’s social policy was subordinated to the needs of labour market flexibility and ‘international competition’. In other words, the idea was to apply business strategy to the state and to punitively discipline citizen-subjects. This strategy has taken various paths since 1989 – capped wages, reduced public spending for the unemployed and increasingly ‘flexible’ workplace arrangements. All subjects in the re-unified German labour market have been left to self-manage their employability, debts, the income drop and the wastelands of reduced services. Privatisation is indeed the watchword of this postsocialist era – a term we can generalise to think about social life, not merely the economy or property relations. We have come to associate privatisation in this broad sense with neoliberal capitalism since 1989: the slow, selective rot of publicity – public spaces, public investment, public education and so on.

There were two critical loci of neoliberalism’s appearance in German transition policies: first, the Treuhandanstalt, the ‘Trust Agency’ responsible for privatising socialised East German assets, and, second, widespread unemployment and underemployment after 1990. The Treuhand was the agency responsible for offloading the GDR’s common assets. For a period, the Treuhand was the world’s largest industrial enterprise: responsible for selling state-owned GDR firms covering four million employees, plus agricultural land, forests, Stasi properties, public housing and medical facilities. The Treuhand was accountable for around 1,700,000 Ha of land. In total, the Treuhand held roughly 12,000 enterprises: it fully privatised 7853, of which 1600 went to their former owners, 261 transferred to local councils, 2700 to former employees or managers; and 3713 were shut.

The Treuhand’s purpose morphed over the years. It was set up before re-unification, in March 1990, as a liberalising GDR government began to reorganise property rights, particularly in industry, finance and agriculture. Soon after the Wall fell, GDR economists, activists and politicians debated new economic approaches in a moribund economy. The late GDR state moved social property to a public trust overseen by this agency. They initially intended that the Treuhand would avoid functionaries selling or hoarding GDR assets for private gain in the post-Wall confusion – and this measure was particularly successful compared with other postsocialist nations. It was also meant to be more than that anti-corruption safeguarding device. Within the early Treuhand framework, various proposals were floated, including giving East German citizens an equal number of shares of this common property, as well as privatising some enterprises and transferring others to new state governments or foundations. Such proposals for ‘coupon privatisation’ were rejected by the last GDR socialist government, due to these approaches being unable to inject badly needed (foreign) capital into ailing state enterprises. Western bureaucrats took over the Treuhand after re-unification in October 1990, and its remit shifted: from a GDR trust to prevent the fire-sale of GDR assets to the federal agency of that fire-sale. By 1994, when the Treuhand was wound up, the enterprises’ new owners had made 2.5 million employees redundant. Public expenditure still accounted for 80% of the eastern economy in 1992–3 – a statistic suggesting political-ideological urgency prevailed over purely economic rationale in privatising so much of the former East. Benefits for unemployment, insurance and the labour market made up almost a fifth of eastern German income. From 1989 to 1993, privatisation saw a third of jobs gone. In manufacturing, this rose to three-quarters of all jobs shed. Open and hidden unemployment was around 30–35%, a statistic reminiscent of the Great Depression (or Greece circa 2013). The Treuhand, in other words, was the chief, albeit contentious, mechanism for shedding eastern labour.

Given the scale of job losses, privatisation across the former East produced opposition beyond the unions. The Treuhand chairman was assassinated in 1991. The assailant remains unknown, but many assume it to be an affiliate of the Red Army Faction or a former Stasi employee. These links may be apocryphal, but we can nevertheless read the assassination as a motivated response to some strong economic medicine in the former East. Workers there were subject to a labour market noticeably different from that of western Germany’s post-war, bargained corporatism: they were inducted into an economic experiment – neoliberalisation – that would soon make its way west. In recent years, the Arbeitsgruppe Alternative Wirtschaftspolitik, a group of heterodox German economists, declared the Treuhand to have accomplished ‘dispossession without compensation.’ It is still openly debated whether a new Mezzogiorno was created: some mainstream economists have recently proposed that western and eastern regions are so divergent, it may be erroneous to consider them a single German labour market.

The top-down, undemocratic process of privatisation introduced eastern Germans to the political economic rationality of (western) German capitalism. Germany’s recent approach to eurozone economics and EU governance has seen these strictures deployed further afield: namely, high unemployment as the ‘cost’ of economic discipline. From 2010, Germany and the ECB repeatedly demanded Greece and others privatise some of their land and government enterprises to repay public debt, despite the economic logic of such sales – ‘fiscal waterboarding’ in Varoufakis’ memorable phrase. In a particularly condescending episode, Josef Schlarmann, a senior CDU politician, and Frank Schaeffler, an FDP politician, suggested to the Bild newspaper that Greece should consider selling some of its islands, as well as the Acropolis and the Parthenon. The politics of real estate is nakedly expressed here, feeling no shame in anti-democratic outcomes that can even include hocking the symbols of democracy themselves.

~

East Germany’s postsocialist transition bore similarities to those in other postsocialist nations but was distinct given West Germany’s role. The conjuncture of global and domestic politics during the Cold War’s final days was also a factor. The GDR was the only postsocialist nation to ‘transition’ to an existing capitalist state within its borders: an entire population was ushered into West Germany’s institutionalised social order built up after 1945. Whereas other postsocialist countries made capitalism without capitalists, eastern Germany saw a flood of western German technocrats flowing into its institutions. Its novelty lies, then, in the Institutionentransfer – transferring the extant West German institutional make-up, its distinctive normative topography, to the former East.

None of this was inevitable in 1989. As with other nations at its eastern border, the path away from waning East German socialism was unclear, and the full stakes of transition continue to be overlooked. Re-unification has taken on the appearance of fate, rather than the political contest it was at the time. The standard tale of the re-unification of the two Germanys – celebrated each October and November – sets out that the ‘transition’ from divided Germany to re-unified Germany saw the East’s archaic economy and ideologically closed society yielding, with western ‘expertise,’ to efficient markets and democracy. The reality is more mixed than this tale suggests. Persistent low productivity, enduring unemployment and repeated crises in the eastern states, self-serving western involvement and, above all, ideological experiments with human consequences – these were hardly the demands of East Germany’s mass movements in 1989. These persisting conditions have been demonstrably disappointing for those who went onto the streets to demand change.

Germany’s current divisions run along several faultlines clustered around ‘real estate,’ including increasing income and asset inequality, as well as regional distinctions. The western German social (market) economy is, today, a self-satisfied political myth: measures of inequality suggest Germany is now among the most unequal in Europe. Germany’s ‘powerhouse’ status in the EU’s political economy masks its weakness. Even in western Germany, between 1993 and 2010, the labour market went from shrinking with increasing real wages to growing employment (particularly in part-time jobs) with falling real wages. In 2013, the Federal Institute for Employment Research recorded that 25% of German workers earned less than €9 per hour, a salary less than two-thirds of the national average. In this context, the geographical unevenness of economic change across the period since 1990 is striking. In 2015, according to studies from Der Paritätische Gesamtverband, poverty levels in the eastern states were all above the national average of 15.7%. The handful of manufacturing complexes of western German or European firms in the East today (only 5% of the 700 biggest German companies are headquartered there) are run by western German managers with an ageing ex-GDR and job-agency EU workforce. The same is true of staffing in eastern universities, which are now stacked with western-trained professors, with clear consequences on the range of acceptable approaches. Social displacement has been a considerable burden for eastern Germans – entailing dislocation from work, social bonds and homes.

By late 1993, just 29% of those employed in November 1989 were still with the same company – a shock for eastern communities in which workplaces, via socialist work brigades and so on, had been a significant site of sociability and leisure. Displacement was particularly acute for women: within four years of re-unification, women’s unemployment was double men’s. This shift in workplaces had other consequences. One-time eastern Gastarbeiter, typically drawn from other socialist states (e.g., Cuba, Vietnam, Angola), faced deportation, changed residence and working status shortly after re-unification. Xenophobia was unleashed at work and on streets within a rapidly changing social landscape and a threatening scramble for work. By its internal logics, then, the Treuhand was incredibly successful, with the GDR transforming from a state-owned to a predominately privately-owned economy in just a few years. However, considering social consequences and economic sustainability, it failed drastically – and its effects are arguably showing up politically today.

~

Following the Treuhand’s closure in 1994, unresolved assets were passed into the Bundesanstalt für vereinigungsbedingte Sonderaufgaben and administered from 2008 by, among other bodies, the Bundesanstalt für Immobilienaufgaben (BiMA / Institute for Federal Real Estate). This traces the shift from state-owned housing and industry to privatised real estate and the increasing role of housing as ‘bank’ for capital switching. The BiMA privatised the former Australian embassy in 2010.

The embassy’s surrounds in Pankow have been caught the politics of real estate – namely, the recent gentrification spiral. Waves of exiles have swept into Pankow’s villas and Altbaus from neighbouring areas such as Prenzlauer Berg, Wedding and Friedrichshain. A host of local activist groups have been fighting subsidised building modernisation programmes and rental increases, including the Pankow-based political party the Mieterpartei (Renter’s Party). The district’s shift towards Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) in recent elections constitutes a different response to this new phase in Pankow’s histories: it remains one of the most ethnically homogenous enclaves in the city, perhaps easily spooked into xenophobia amid an ‘influx’ of new social and economic forces. For decades Pankow housed many regime loyalists, who once voted for the nominally anti-capitalist Die Linke and subscribed to the GDR’s anti-imperialist agenda. Many of these voters, research has shown, have transferred to AfD’s bricolage of ‘good old days’ Heimat fantasia and anti-establishment bravado. The support for the AfD is subtended by some anti-capitalist resonances that the far-right party exploits in the former East. In just a few years, the AfD’s core programme has morphed from a nationalist response to the financial crisis and the EU, to an increasingly hateful politics after the asylum-seeker decisions of 2015. This shift at once dragged the AfD’s early adopters further right, while it sought new forms of electoral opportunity.

Pankow’s complexities suggest that, rather than a simple ‘xenophobic’ Ossi stereotype, peddled by western-oriented analysts, a full analysis needs to at least account for various dimensions. First, the way both post-war states in a divided Germany mobilised fantasies about Nazism being on the other side of the Wall. Second, the patchy distribution of re-unification’s dividends and long-standing eastern criticisms of the ostensible pairing of capitalism and democracy. Third, neoliberalism’s disenchantment of politics by economics, which seeks to displace all political questions by economic means, an anti-political measure that has redoubled eastern alienation from parliamentary capitalist democracy. This depoliticisation of the economy has also brought ‘cultural’ chauvinism (‘we don’t want their way of life here’) to the fore as the terrain of reactionary politics.

Further, the cultural politics of Germany remains divided. Easterners, who lack cultural power and are distant from its centres, are often marked as ‘provincials.’ The AfD’s apparently appealing route to gaining forms of national sovereignty – which they describe as lost to the EU and out-of-touch German elites – is a nativist fantasy of strong borders, ethnic fixity, direct democracy and economic restructuring. All this is a means of bringing true Germans back to the core of cultural and political power. A truly unified community, or so the story goes, cannot be gained until ‘the nation’ is free from Islamic and other influences. In the eastern regions, this is undoubtedly, in part, a displaced attempt to overcome a feeling of social and political impotence – and this includes wresting back control from property developers, speculators and the technocrats typically hailing from western Germany. The processes introduced by these outsiders, the story goes, always seem to favour ‘newcomers’ in whatever imagined form they take (so-called ‘economic migrants’, wine bars, Muslims, Americans, start-ups etc).

In this light, those among Pankow’s current and long-standing residents with sympathies for the AfD appear to be disaffected from re-unified Germany and Berlin capitalism’s embrace of real estate speculation, privatisation, choked infrastructure investment, labour market ‘liberalisation’ – in short, the unevenness of Germany and Berlin’s modest but real economic windfall since re-unification. Within the politics of real estate, it’s also worth remembering that the years since 1989 saw a thoroughgoing financialisation of the economy – a shift in regulatory regimes of the financial sector that saw much global money flush into German banks and assets. Germany may pride itself – and may be envied by outsiders – as being a nation of renters, rather than a nation of home-owners; as thrifty savers rather than profligate loan-takers. But the politics of real estate has arrived here too in Berlin, as the spatial and property logics of capitalism demand it must: such is the conclusion of the privatisation programme begun in 1990.

At the time of writing, the embassy site until recently seemed damned to a future existence as luxury designer apartments – the apotheosis of contemporary urban real estate, the proliferating antechambers of ossified social relations and aesthetic good taste, the favoured parking spots for global capital. A heritage listing and the interest of the public hand may save it from this fate, delivering it instead to the least-worst outcome of a state-sanctioned cultural institution. But the outlook in Berlin remains, at best, uncertain and, at worst, bleak. Long-term, only an alternative political economic programme can shift it in another direction. Short-term, practices of subversion, occupation and obstinacy can continue to hold on to other potentials.


Ben Gook (AU/DE) is an Alexander von Humboldt Foundation Postdoctoral Fellow at Humboldt Universität, Berlin. He also holds an honorary position at the University of Melbourne, as a Fellow in the School of Social and Political Sciences. He received his PhD in Social Theory and Cultural Studies from the University of Melbourne in 2014. He researches contemporary politics, economy and culture, with a focus on social change after the Fall of the Berlin Wall. His first book is Divided Subjects, Invisible Borders: Re- unified Germany after 1989 (London: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015). He has also written on Australian culture, including “Australian Postcolonial Trauma and Silences in Samson and Delilah,” (Scars and Wounds: Trauma on Film in National and International Contexts, 2017) and “…With Ears for Landscape: Australian Soundscapes,” Crossings (2006). His essay “Lest we Forget; Let us Forget” (2013) responded to Nothing to See Here by Amy Spiers and Catherine Ryan at Sydney’s Underbelly Arts Festival.

Frederic Jameson, ‘The Aesthetics of Singularity,’ New Left Review, no. 92 (2015): 130.
This definition of neoliberalism draws on William Davies, The Limits of Neoliberalism: Authority, Sovereignty and the Logic of Competition (London: Sage, 2014). I have written about this at more length and with full references elsewhere: Ben Gook, ‘Backdating German Neoliberalism: Ordoliberalism, the German Model and Economic Experiments in Eastern Germany after 1989,’ Journal of Sociology 54, no. 1 (2018).
Arbeitsgruppe Alternative Wirtschaftspolitik, Deutsche Zweiheit—Oder: Wie viel Unterschied verträgt die Einheit? Bilanz der Vereinigungspolitik (St Katharinen: PapyRossa, 2010).
www.bild.de/politik/wirtschaft/griechenland-krise/regierung-athen-sparen-verkauft-inseln-pleite-akropolis-11692338.bild.html
Gil Eyal, Iván Szelényi, and Eleanor R. Townsley, Making Capitalism without Capitalists: Class Formation and Elite Struggles in Post-Communist Central Europe (London: Verso, 1998).
Gareth Dale, The East German Revolution of 1989 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2006); First the Transition, Then the Crash: Eastern Europe in the 2000s (London: Pluto Press, 2011).
Der Paritätische Gesamtverband, Menschenwürde ist Menschenrecht: Bericht Zum Armutsentwicklung in Deutschland 2017 (Berlin: Der Paritätische Gesamtverband, 2017).
Brigitte Young, Triumph of the Fatherland: German Unification and the Marginalization of Women (Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1999).
Jonathan Olsen, ‘The Left Party and the AfD: Populist Competitors in Eastern Germany,’ German Politics and Society 36, no. 1 (2018).
On disenchantment, see Davies. On German’s ongoing division, see Ben Gook, Divided Subjects, Invisible Borders: Re-Unified Germany after 1989 (London: Rowman & Littlefield International, 2015). On divided Germany’s reckoning with Nazism and the GDR’s founding fantasies, see Julia Hell, Post-Fascist Fantasies: Psychoanalysis, History, and the Literature of East Germany (Durham: Duke University Press, 1997).
Frederic Jameson, ‘The Aesthetics of Singularity,’ New Left Review, no. 92 (2015): 130.
Diese Definition von Neoliberalismus bezieht sich auf William Davies, The Limits of Neoliberalism: Authority, Sovereignty and the Logic of Competition (London: Sage, 2014). Siehe auch: Ben Gook, ‘Backdating German Neoliberalism: Ordoliberalism, the German Model and Economic Experiments in Eastern Germany after 1989,’ Journal of Sociology 54, no. 1 (2018).
‘Workfare’: Sozialhilfeleistungen werden nur im Austausch zu Arbeitsleistung gezahlt.
Arbeitsgruppe Alternative Wirtschaftspolitik, Deutsche Zweiheit—Oder: Wie viel Unterschied verträgt die Einheit? Bilanz der Vereinigungspolitik (St Katharinen: PapyRossa, 2010).
www.bild.de/politik/wirtschaft/griechenland-krise/regierung-athen-sparen-verkauft-inseln-pleite-akropolis-11692338.bild.html
Gil Eyal, Iván Szelényi, and Eleanor R. Townsley, Making Capitalism without Capitalists: Class Formation and Elite Struggles in Post-Communist Central Europe (London: Verso, 1998).
Gareth Dale, The East German Revolution of 1989 (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2006); First the Transition, Then the Crash: Eastern Europe in the 2000s (London: Pluto Press, 2011).
Der Paritätische Gesamtverband, Menschenwürde ist Menschenrecht: Bericht Zum Armutsentwicklung in Deutschland 2017 (Berlin: Der Paritätische Gesamtverband, 2017).
Brigitte Young, Triumph of the Fatherland: German Unification and the Marginalization of Women (Ann Arbor: The University of Michigan Press, 1999).
Jonathan Olsen, ‘The Left Party and the AfD: Populist Competitors in Eastern Germany,’ German Politics and Society 36, no. 1 (2018).
Über Politikverdrossenheit, siehe Davies. Über die weitere Teilung Deutschlands, siehe Ben Gook, Divided Subjects, Invisible Borders: Re-Unified Germany after 1989 (London: Rowman & Littlefield International, 2015). Über das geteilte Deutschland, Nazismus und die Gründungsfantasien der DDR, siehe Julia Hell, Post-Fascist Fantasies: Psychoanalysis, History, and the Literature of East Germany (Durham: Duke University Press, 1997).
Peter Monteath, ‘The German Democratic Republic and Australia’ in Debatte: Journal of Contemporary Central and Eastern Europe, 16, No. 2, (2008): 213-235, see also: Boris Schedvin, Emissaries of Trade: A history of the Australian trade commissioner service (Canberra: WHH Publishing, 2008), 279-280.
Paul Daley, “Revealed: how Australian spies filmed Indigenous activists during the cold war” in The Guardian, February 13, 2018: hier.
Peter Monteath & Valerie Munt, Red Professor: The Cold War Life of Fred Rose, (South Australia: Wakefield Press, 2015), 275
Andrew Wright Hurley, “No Fixed Address, but currently in East Berlin: The Australian bicentennial, Indigenous protest and the Festival of Political Song 1988” in Perfect Beat 15, Iss. 2 (2015): 129-148.
Tobias Krätzer, Botschaften und Konsulaten in Berlin: Eine stadtpolitische Analyse, (Berlin: Berlin Verlag, 1998), 132.
Peter Monteath, ‘The German Democratic Republic and Australia’ in Debatte: Journal of Contemporary Central and Eastern Europe, 16, No. 2, (2008): 213-235, siehe auch: Boris Schedvin, Emissaries of Trade: A history of the Australian trade commissioner service (Canberra: WHH Publishing, 2008), 279-280.
Paul Daley, “Revealed: how Australian spies filmed Indigenous activists during the cold war” in The Guardian, 13. Februar, 2018. Artikel online aufrufbar hier.
Peter Monteath & Valerie Munt, Red Professor: The Cold War Life of Fred Rose, (South Australia: Wakefield Press, 2015), 275
Andrew Wright Hurley, “No Fixed Address, but currently in East Berlin: The Australian bicentennial, Indigenous protest and the Festival of Political Song 1988” in Perfect Beat 15, Iss. 2 (2015): 129-148.
Tobias Krätzer, Botschaften und Konsulaten in Berlin: Eine stadtpolitische Analyse, (Berlin: Berlin Verlag, 1998), 132.
The Socialist Unity Party of Germany was the governing political party of the GDR (German Democratic Republic).
Led by architect Horst Bauer, who also designed Berlin’s iconic Café Moskau.
Tobias Doll, Elisabeth Eulitz, Karla Schäffner. Berlin-Pankow: Sozialistische Botschaftsbauten Städtebauliche Dokumentation – Freiraumplanung – Typenbauten. (Master paper, Heritage Studies, Technische Universität Berlin, 2012-13).
One key architect involved in the urban planning of Marzahn, Wolf-Rüdiger Eisentraut, was in 1996 to renovate the embassy itself when it was transformed, briefly, into a medical laboratory.
A 1970 Neues Deutschland article compared Australia to ‘neo-colonialist’ South Africa, citing its ambitions towards regional dominance, its racist ‘White Australia’ policy and ‘arch-reactionary’ denigration of Aboriginal people. See: Walter Kocher, “Der folgsame Vetter des Uncle Sam”, Neues Deutschland, 12.7.1970, 6.
The site was rented from the GDR by Australia, however operations were prematurely closed down in 1986. Held by the public hand for a time, the site subsequently hosted a kindergarten, the Deutsche Industrie- und Handelsbank AG, and the medical laboratory ‘bioscientia Institut für Laboruntersuchungen Ingelheim GmbH’, before being privatised by the BImA) (Institute for Federal Real Estate) to investor Lars Dittrich. At this point, it hosted the now-insolvent media start-up tape.tv, before being being resold to real estate developer Prexxot GmbH, who sublets it to the artist studio complex Atelierhaus Australische Botschaft Ost. Separate to the Ex-Embassy exhibition, at the time of writing, artists in the studio house are currently attempting to extract the building from the speculative real estate bubble, looking towards collective ownership formats.
Doreen Massey, For Space (London: SAGE Publications, 2005), 70-71.
Romaine Moreton, “Authentic Aborigine, White Phantasy” in Courting Blakness: Recalibrating Knowledge in the Sandstone University, Fiona Foley, Louise Martin-Chew & Fiona Jean Nicoll (eds) (St Lucia:University of Queensland Press, 2015), 174-183.
Die Sozialistische Einheitspartei Deutschlands war die regierende politische Partei der DDR (Deutsche Demokratische Republik).
Geleitet von dem Architekt Horst Bauer, der auch Berlins ikonisches Café Moskau entwarf.
Tobias Doll, Elisabeth Eulitz, Karla Schäffner. Berlin-Pankow: Sozialistische Botschaftsbauten Städtebauliche Dokumentation – Freiraumplanung – Typenbauten. (Masterarbeit im Masterstudium Denkmalpflege der Technischen Universität Berlin, 2012-13).
Wolf-Rüdiger Eisentraut, einer der leitenden Architekten, der z.B. in die Stadtplanung Marzahns involviert war, war 1996 mit der Renovierung der Botschaft beschäftigt, als diese kurzzeitig in ein medizinisches Labor umgestaltet wurde.
Ein Artikel der Zeitlung Neues Deutschland von 1970 vergleicht Australien mit dem ‘neo-kolonialistischen’ Südafrika und bezeichnet dabei Australiens Ambitionen in Bezug auf eine regionale Vorherrschaft als rassistische ‘White Australia’-Politik und rückschrittliche Denunzierung der indigenen Bevölkerung. See: Walter Kocher, “Der folgsame Vetter des Uncle Sam”, Neues Deutschland, 12.7.1970, 6.
Australien pachtete das Grundstück von der DDR, allerdings wurde der Betrieb frühzeitig in 1986 eingestellt. Für einige Zeit öffentlich betrieben, wurde das Gelände kurzeitig von einem Kindergarten genutzt, darauffolgend von der Deutschen Industrie- und Handelsbank und dem medizinischem Labor bioscientia Institut für Laboruntersuchungen Ingelheim GmbH, um anschließend durch die BImA (Bundesanstalt für Immobilienaufgaben) privatisiert zu werden. Der Komplex fiel an Investor Lars Dittrich und beherbergte das mittlerweile ins Insolvenz gegangene Media Start-Up tape.tv, wurde dann an die Bauträgerfirma Prexxot GmbH weiterverkauft und ist jetzt das Atelierhaus Australische Botschaft (Ost), eine Ateliergemeinschaft für Künstler, welche momentan den Versuch wagen, das Gebäude dem spekulativen Immobilienmarkt zu entziehen und sich mit Formaten des kollektiven Besitzes beschäftigen.
Doreen Massey, For Space (London: SAGE Publications, 2005), 70-71.
Romaine Moreton, “Authentic Aborigine, White Phantasy” in Courting Blakness: Recalibrating Knowledge in the Sandstone University, Fiona Foley, Louise Martin-Chew & Fiona Jean Nicoll (eds) (St Lucia:University of Queensland Press, 2015), 174-183.
Romaine Moreton, “Authentic Aborigine, White Phantasy” in Courting Blakness: Recalibrating Knowledge in the Sandstone University, Fiona Foley, Louise Martin-Chew & Fiona Jean Nicoll (eds) (St Lucia:University of Queensland Press, 2015), 174-183.
Morris Cohen and C.B. Macpherson, “Property and Sovereignty,” in Property: Mainstream and Critical Perspectives (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1978).
Kevin Gray, “Property in Thin Air,” in Cambridge Law Journal, 50 (1991), 252–307.
Kevin Gray, The Legal Order of the Queue, 2007.
James E. Penner, The Idea of Property in Law (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997); Cohen and C.B. Macpherson.
Nicholas Blomley, “Law, Property, and the Geography of Violence: The Frontier, the Survey and the Grid,” in Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 93 (2003), 121–141.
Cohen and C.B. Macpherson.
Cheryl Harris, “Whiteness as Property,” Harvard Law Review, 106 (8) (1993), 1721.
Aileen Moreton-Robinson, The White Possessive: Property, Power and Indigenous Sovereignty (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2015).
Cheryl Harris, “Whiteness as Property,” Harvard Law Review, 106 (8) (1993)
Davina Cooper, Governing Out of Order: Space, Law and the Politics of Belonging (London and New York: Rivers Oram Press, 1998).
Emily Grabham, “‘Flagging’ the Skin: Corporeal Nationalism and the Properties of Belonging,” in Body & Society, 15 (2009), 63–82.
Davina Cooper, Governing Out of Order: Space, Law and the Politics of Belonging (London and New York: Rivers Oram Press, 1998), 629.
Ibid, 636.
Aileen Moreton-Robinson, “Imagining the Good Indigenous Citizen,” in Cultural Studies Review, 15 (2), (2009), 61-80.
Here, there is a need to need to point towards — while refusing to appropriate — narratives of Aboriginal resistance to the settler state. A few key dates: In 1972, Aboriginal activists established the Aboriginal Tent Embassy on the lawns of Parliament House, the seat of government in Canberra, which carved out a physical, social and political space of belonging in the Australian capital until today, subverting the version of Australia that parliamentarians wish to portray to diplomatic visitors, and in constant struggle with the colonial state. In 1973 the White Australia policy, which had effectively barred non-European immigrants from moving to Australia, was disbanded with a series of legal amendments prohibiting racial discrimination from being formally included in immigration law. In 1976, following a ten-year strike by the Gurindji people, led by Vincent Lingiari, the Aboriginal Land Rights Act (Northern Territory) became the first ever Australian law to ‘grant’ land rights to Aboriginal people. The lie of terra nullius remained part of Australian common law until it was overturned in Mabo v The State of Queensland in 1992; a later Labor government reneged on the promise of federal land rights, creating a post-Mabo legislative framework for ‘native title,’ as a weaker and more limited set of rights. See Andrew Schaap, Gary Foley and Edwina Howell, The Aboriginal Tent Embassy: Sovereignty, Black Power, Land Rights and the State (Routledge 2013).
Doreen Massey, “Power-geometry and a Progressive Sense of Place,” in Tim Putnam, Lisa Tickner, Jon Bird Barry Curtis (Eds.), Mapping the Futures: Local Cultures, Global Change (London: Routledge, 1993).
Sarah Keenan, Subversive Property: Law and the Production of Spaces of Belonging (London: Routledge, 2015).
Glen Coulthard, Red Skin White Masks: Rejecting the Colonial Politics of Recognition (Minneapolis: University of Minessota Press, 2014).
Ibid
Matthis Berndt, Britta Grell, Andreas Holm et al, The Berlin Reader, (Berlin: transcript, 2013), 14-15.
Dallas Rogers, The geopolitics of real estate: reconfiguring property, capital and rights (London: Rowman and Littlefield, 2016).
Sabrina Apicella et al, “In the eye of the storm. Urban Transformations in Berlin: Realities of Crisis and Perspectives for Social Struggles”, in Teaching the Crisis (Group research project, Summer school program, 2013). See also http://teachingthecrisis.net/in-the-eye-of-the-storm-urban-transformations-in-berlin-realities-of-crisis-and-perspectives-for-social-struggles/
Morris Cohen and C.B. Macpherson, “Property and Sovereignty,” in Property: Mainstream and Critical Perspectives (Toronto: University of Toronto Press, 1978).
Kevin Gray, “Property in Thin Air,” in Cambridge Law Journal, 50 (1991), 252–307.
Kevin Gray, The Legal Order of the Queue, 2007.
James E. Penner, The Idea of Property in Law (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1997); Cohen and C.B. Macpherson.
Nicholas Blomley, “Law, Property, and the Geography of Violence: The Frontier, the Survey and the Grid,” in Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 93 (2003), 121–141.
Cohen and C.B. Macpherson.
Cheryl Harris, “Whiteness as Property,” Harvard Law Review, 106 (8) (1993), 1721.
Aileen Moreton-Robinson, The White Possessive: Property, Power and Indigenous Sovereignty (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2015).
Cheryl Harris, “Whiteness as Property,” Harvard Law Review, 106 (8Davina Cooper argumentiert, dass Eigentum entweder als Besitz oder als Mitgliedschaft funktionieren kann, da beide in ihrem Kern auf Zugehörigkeit basieren. Zugehörigkeit kann Besitz von Eigentum, Angehörigkeit zu einer Gemeinschaft, Verbindung zu einem Ort und/oder eine Handlungsweise oder eine Identität beschreiben, die zu einem “passt” oder bei der man sich „zu Hause“ fühlt. Davina Cooper, Governing Out of Order: Space, Law and the Politics of Belonging (London and New York: Rivers Oram Press, 1998).
Emily Grabham, “‘Flagging’ the Skin: Corporeal Nationalism and the Properties of Belonging,” in Body & Society, 15 (2009), 63–82.
Davina Cooper, Governing Out of Order: Space, Law and the Politics of Belonging (London and New York: Rivers Oram Press, 1998), 629.
Ibid, 636.
Aileen Moreton-Robinson, “Imagining the Good Indigenous Citizen,” in Cultural Studies Review, 15 (2), (2009), 61-80.
Hier ist es notwendig auf Erzählungen – ohne sich diese anzueignen – über den Widerstand der Aborigines gegen den Siedlerstaat hinzuweisen. Ein paar wichtige Daten: Im Jahr 1972 gründeten Aborigine-Aktivist*innen die Aboriginal Tent Embassy (Zelt-Botschaft) auf dem Rasen des Parliament House, dem Regierungssitz in Canberra, die bis heute einen physischen, sozialen und politischen Raum der Zugehörigkeit in der australischen Hauptstadt im ständigen Kampf mit dem Kolonialstaat geschaffen hat, um die Version Australiens, die die Parlamentarier den diplomatischen Besuchern zeigen wollen, zu untergraben. Im Jahr 1973 wurde die “White Australia Policy”, die nicht-europäische Einwanderer effektiv daran gehindert hatte nach Australien zu ziehen, mit einer Reihe von Gesetzesänderungen aufgelöst, die die formelle Einbeziehung von Rassendiskriminierung in das Einwanderungsgesetz verbieten. Nach einem zehnjährigen Streik der Gurindji unter der Führung von Vincent Lingiari, wurde 1976 der Aboriginal Land Rights Act (Northern Territory) das erste australische Gesetz, das den Aborigines Landrechte “gewährte”. Die Lüge von terra nullius blieb Teil des australischen Gewohnheitsrecht bis sie 1992 in Mabo v The State of Queensland aufgehoben wurde; eine spätere Labor-Regierung brach das Versprechen der Bundeslandrechte und schuf einen post-Mabo-Rechtsrahmen für den „Native Title“ (eine Rechtsauslegung, die anerkennt, dass Aborigines in manchen Fällen ein legales Anrecht an kolonialisiertem Land haben) als eine schwächere und beschränktere Reihe von Rechten. Siehe Andrew Schaap, Gary Foley and Edwina Howell, The Aboriginal Tent Embassy: Sovereignty, Black Power, Land Rights and the State (Routledge 2013).
Doreen Massey, “Power-geometry and a Progressive Sense of Place,” in Tim Putnam, Lisa Tickner, Jon Bird Barry Curtis (Eds.), Mapping the Futures: Local Cultures, Global Change (London: Routledge, 1993).
Sarah Keenan, Subversive Property: Law and the Production of Spaces of Belonging (London: Routledge, 2015).
Glen Coulthard, Red Skin White Masks: Rejecting the Colonial Politics of Recognition (Minneapolis: University of Minessota Press, 2014).
Ibid
Matthis Berndt, Britta Grell, Andreas Holm et al, The Berlin Reader, (Berlin: transcript, 2013), 14-15.
Dallas Rogers, The geopolitics of real estate: reconfiguring property, capital and rights (London: Rowman and Littlefield, 2016).
Sabrina Apicella et al, “In the eye of the storm. Urban Transformations in Berlin: Realities of Crisis and Perspectives for Social Struggles”, in Teaching the Crisis (Group research project, Summer school program, 2013). See also http://teachingthecrisis.net/in-the-eye-of-the-storm-urban-transformations-in-berlin-realities-of-crisis-and-perspectives-for-social-struggles/
Der Begriff ‘Mob’ bezeichnet eine Gruppe von Menschen. Im Gegensatz zu der allgemeinen Verwendung im Englischen hat ‘Mob’ für die Aborigines keinen abwertenden Unterton, sondern bezeichnet eine Gruppe starker Zusammengehörigkeit: “Mein Mob, meine Leute, meine erweiterte Familie”. Mob wird auch oft benutzt, um eine Sprachgruppe zu bezeichnen. Quelle: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Australisches_Aboriginal-Englisch, https://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/language/aboriginal-words-in-australian-english
‘Country’, im Englisch der Aborigines Bezeichnung für das Land einer Person, Meer, Himmel, Flüsse, Orte, Jahreszeiten, Pflanzen und Tiere; Ort des Erbes, der Zugehörigkeit und der Spiritualität. Siehe auch: https://australianmuseum.net.au/glossary-indigenous-australia-terms.)
Aborigines bezeichnen traditionellerweise ihre Stammesältesten als ‘Tanten’ (Aunty) oder ‘Onkel’ (Uncle). Siehe auch: http://www.indigenousteaching.com/glossary-terms
Informing this framing is Denise Ferreira da Silva, “The Global Matrix and the Predicament of ‘Postmodernisms’: An Introduction to the Critique of Kulturkampf,” Seton Hall Law Review, 35, Iss. 4 (2006): 1281-1298.
For the story of nuclearity in Africa see Gabrielle Hecht, Being Nuclear: Africans and the Global Uranium Trade (Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2012).
See Adam Broinowski, ‘Nuclear Power and Oil Capital in the Long Twentieth Century’, in Materialism and the Critique of Energy, eds. Brent Ryan Bellamy and Jeff Diamanti (Chicago: MCM Publishing, 2018), 197-242.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Australian_constitutional_crisis#Alleged_CIA_involvement
Ibid.
Elizabeth A. Povinelli, The Cunning of Recognition: Indigenous Alterities and the Making of Australian Multiculturalism (Durham, N.C.: Duke: University Press, 2002).
The Ex-Embassy exhibition is using here the GDR’s territorial description of the land mass of Australia.
See Michael Pusey, Economic Rationalism in Canberra: A Nation Building State Changes Its Mind (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991).
John Maynard notes Tom Lacey, Fred Maynard, Sid Ridgeway among Aboriginal men who evidently mixed with the CPA. See his text “‘In the interests of our people’: the influence of Garveyism on the rise of Australian Aboriginal political activism,” Aboriginal History, Vol. 29 (2005), 1-22.
Ibid.
Ibid.
See Gary Foley, ‘Black Power in Redfern 1968-72’, 2001 http://www.kooriweb.org/foley/essays/essay_1.html
Gary Foley, Andrew Schaap, Edwina Howell, The Aboriginal Tent Embassy: Sovereignty, Black Power, Land Rights and the State (New York: Routledge, 2016).
Ibid.
Generally, the trades and labour councils, waterfront and mining workers unions.
On current analytics of differences see Iyko Day, “Being or Nothingness: Indigeneity, Antiblackness, and Settler Colonial Critique,” Critical Ethnic Studies, 1, Iss. 2, (2018), 102-122.
Of relevance here is the first ACP document laid out in 1931, the “Communist Party’s Fight for Aborigines: Draft Programme of Struggle Against Slavery,” which included a call for the abolition of all forms of ‘forced labour; equal wages; abolition of the Aboriginal Protection Boards . . . capitalism’s slave recruiting agencies and terror organisations; the release of Aboriginal prisoners; the institution of Aboriginal juries for cases involving Aboriginal people; the restoration of Central, Northern and N-W Australia to form independent Aboriginal republics; and the development of Aboriginal culture.’ As Boughton notes, the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation (ASIO) would later reproduce the entire policy in a secret 1962 briefing paper, “Communist Party of Australia Policy and Penetration in Australian Aboriginal Activities and Organisations,” which drew ‘particular attention to the demand which called for: The handing over to the aborigines of large tracts of watered and fertile country, with towns, seaports, railways, roads, etc., to become one or more independent aboriginal states or republics. The handing back to the aborigines of all Central, Northern and North West Australia to enable the aborigines to develop their native pursuits. These aboriginal republics to be independent of Australia or other foreign powers. To have the right to make treaties with foreign powers, including Australia, establish their own army, governments, industries, and in every way be independent of imperialism.’ ASIO also noted the important link, theoretically and practically, between the Comintern ‘line’ on the Aboriginal struggle and the anticolonial struggle in New Guinea. In Bob Boughton, “The Communist Party of Australia’s Involvement in the Struggle for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples’ Rights, 1920-1970,” in Labour and Community: Historical Essays. R. Markey. (Wollongong: University of Wollongong Press, 2001) 263-294.
Bob Boughton, “The Communist Party of Australia’s Involvement in the Struggle for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples’ Rights, 1920-1970,” in Labour and Community: Historical Essays. R. Markey. (Wollongong: University of Wollongong Press, 2001) 263-294.
Ibid.
See Geoffrey Gray, A Cautious Silence: The Politics of Australian Anthropology (Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press, 2007).
Denise Ferreira da Silva, Towards a Global Idea of Race (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2007).
Elizabeth A. Povinelli, The Cunning of Recognition: Indigenous Alterities and the Making of Australian Multiculturalism (Durham, N.C.: Duke: University Press, 2002).
Irene Watson, Raw law (Abington: Routledge, 2015).
Robert Cover, “Nomos and Narrative,” Issues in Legal Scholarship, 6, Iss. 1 (Jan 2006).
Bronwyn Lay, Juris Materiarum: Empires of Earth, Soil and Dirt (New York: Atropos Press, 2016).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Australian_constitutional_crisis
See my collaborative take with Danny Butt on the colonial legacies of artistic autonomy in the neoliberal era of global art here: https://joaap.org/issue10/oriellybutt.htm
Denise Ferreira da Silva, “The Global Matrix and the Predicament of ‘Postmodernisms’: An Introduction to the Critique of Kulturkampf,” Seton Hall Law Review, 35, Iss. 4 (2006): 1281-1298.
Spivak marks universal socialism’s failures in its refusal to deal with requirements for training this aesthetic, inherently comparativist dimension of political imagination. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, An Aesthetic Education in the Era of Globalization. Cambridge (London: Harvard University Press. 2012).
Jelena Vesić, “The Annual Summit of Non-Aligned Art Historians,” in Extending the Dialogue: Essays by Igor Zabel Award Laureates, Grant Recipients, and Jury Members, 2008–2014, (Berlin: Archive Books; Vienna: ERSTE Foundation, 2016).
Ibid.
Bourriaud and Beltings’ very different propositions for (alter)modernity and non-hierarchical global art are addressed in Extending the Dialogue: Essays by Igor Zabel Award Laureates, Grant Recipients, and Jury Members, 2008–2014, (Berlin: Archive Books; Vienna: ERSTE Foundation, 2016).
Among the European philosophers, Michel Serres’ The Natural Contract, trans. Elizabeth MacArthur and William Paulson (Michigan: University of Michigan Press, (1989/1995), articulated the necessity of a wholesale ‘cast off’ of modernist relations of science and (im)material Western law to the non-human world.
Jelena Vesić, “The Annual Summit of Non-Aligned Art Historians,” in Extending the Dialogue: Essays by Igor Zabel Award Laureates, Grant Recipients, and Jury Members, 2008–2014, (Berlin: Archive Books; Vienna: ERSTE Foundation, 2016).
Denise Ferreira da Silva, “The Global Matrix and the Predicament of ‘Postmodernisms’: An Introduction to the Critique of Kulturkampf,” Seton Hall Law Review, 35, Iss. 4 (2006): 1281-1298.
Diese Rahmung ist geprägt von Denise Ferreira da Silva, “The Global Matrix and the Predicament of ‘Postmodernisms’: An Introduction to the Critique of Kulturkampf,” Seton Hall Law Review, 35, Iss. 4 (2006): 1281-1298.
Zur Geschichte der Nuklearkraft in Afrika siehe Gabrielle Hecht, Being Nuclear: Africans and the Global Uranium Trade (Massachusetts: MIT Press, 2012).
Siehe Adam Broinowski, ‘Nuclear Power and Oil Capital in the Long Twentieth Century’, in Materialism and the Critique of Energy, eds. Brent Ryan Bellamy and Jeff Diamanti (Chicago: MCM Publishing, 2018), 197-242.
Broinowski, ‘Nuclear Power and Oil Capital in the Long Twentieth Century’
Elizabeth A. Povinelli, The Cunning of Recognition: Indigenous Alterities and the Making of Australian Multiculturalism (Durham, N.C.: Duke: University Press, 2002).
Die Ausstellung Ex-Embassy benutzt hier die territoriale Beschreibung der Landmasse Australiens, so wie sie in der DDR verwendet wurde.
Siehe Michael Pusey, Economic Rationalism in Canberra: A Nation Building State Changes Its Mind (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991).
John Maynard zählt Tom Lacey, Fred Maynard und Sid Ridgeway als Aborigine Männer auf, die nachweislich mit der CPA verkehrten. Siehe sein Text “‘In the interests of our people’: the influence of Garveyism on the rise of Australian Aboriginal political activism,” Aboriginal History, Vol. 29 (2005), 1-22.
Ebd.
Ebd.
Siehe Gary Foley, ‘Black Power in Redfern 1968-72’, 2001: http://www.kooriweb.org/foley/essays/essay_1.html
Gary Foley, Andrew Schaap, Edwina Howell, The Aboriginal Tent Embassy: Sovereignty, Black Power, Land Rights and the State (New York: Routledge, 2016).
Ebd.
Im Allgemeinen die Handels- und Arbeiterverbände und die Hafen- und Bergbauarbeitergewerkschaften.
Zur aktuellen Analyse der Unterschiede siehe Iyko Day, “Being or Nothingness: Indigeneity, Antiblackness, and Settler Colonial Critique,” Critical Ethnic Studies, 1, Iss. 2, (2018), 102-122.
Von Bedeutung ist hier das erste AKP-Dokument aus dem Jahr 1931, der “Kampf der Kommunistischen Partei für die Aborigines: Entwurf eines Programms zum Kampf gegen die Sklaverei” [“Communist Party’s Fight for Aborigines: Draft Programme of Struggle Against Slavery”], das folgendes fordert: die Abschaffung aller Formen von “Zwangsarbeit, gleiche Löhne, die Abschaffung der ‘Aboriginal Protection Boards’ (Vorstände, siehe https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aboriginal_Protection_Board) – ‘kapitalistische Sklavenrekrutierungsagenturen und Terrororganisationen’ -, die Freilassung aller Aborigine-Häftlinge, die Einrichtung von Aborigine-Jurys für juristische Fälle, an denen Aborigines beteiligt sind, die Wiederherstellung und Bildung unabhängiger Aborigine-Republiken in Zentral-, Nord- und Nord-West-Australien, die die Entwicklung der Aborigine-Kultur” fördern. Wie Boughton feststellt, hat der Australische Sicherheitsdienst (ASIO) später die gesamte Politik in einem geheimen Briefing-Papier von 1962 wiedergeben: “Die Kommunistische Partei Australiens – Politik und Durchdringung von Aktivitäten und Organisationen der australischen Aborigines” [“Communist Party of Australia Policy and Penetration in Australian Aboriginal Activities and Organisations”], die “besondere Aufmerksamkeit auf folgende Forderung lenkt: Die Übergabe großer Teile des bewässerten und fruchtbaren Landes mit Städten, Seehäfen, Eisenbahnen, Straßen usw. an die Aborigines, um ein oder mehrere unabhängige Ureinwohnerstaaten oder -republiken zu bilden. Die Rückgabe ganz Zentral-, Nord- und Nordwestaustralien an die Aborigines, um den Aborigines die Möglichkeit zu geben, ihre einheimischen Interessen zu entwickeln. Diese Ureinwohnerrepubliken sollen unabhängig von Australien oder anderen ausländischen Mächten sein. Sie sollen das Recht haben, Verträge mit ausländischen Mächten, einschließlich Australien, zu schließen, ihre eigene Armee, Regierungen, Industrien zu gründen und in jeder Hinsicht unabhängig vom Imperialismus zu sein.” Die ASIO stellte auch die wichtige Verbindung zwischen der “Komintern-Linie‘ zum Aborigine-Kampf und dem antikolonialen Kampf in Neuguinea fest. — In Bob Boughton, “The Communist Party of Australia’s Involvement in the Struggle for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples’ Rights, 1920-1970,” in Labour and Community: Historical Essays. R. Markey. (Wollongong: University of Wollongong Press, 2001) 263-294.
Bob Boughton, “The Communist Party of Australia’s Involvement in the Struggle for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples’ Rights, 1920-1970,” in Labour and Community: Historical Essays. R. Markey. (Wollongong: University of Wollongong Press, 2001) 263-294.
Streitaktionen
Boughton, “The Communist Party of Australia’s Involvement in the Struggle for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples’ Rights, 1920-1970.”
Siehe Geoffrey Gray, A Cautious Silence: The Politics of Australian Anthropology (Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press, 2007).
Denise Ferreira da Silva, Towards a Global Idea of Race (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2007).
Elizabeth A. Povinelli, The Cunning of Recognition: Indigenous Alterities and the Making of Australian Multiculturalism (Durham, N.C.: Duke: University Press, 2002).
Irene Watson, Raw law (Abington: Routledge, 2015).
Robert Cover, “Nomos and Narrative,” Issues in Legal Scholarship, 6, Iss. 1 (Jan 2006).
Bronwyn Lay, Juris Materiarum: Empires of Earth, Soil and Dirt (New York: Atropos Press, 2016).
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1975_Australian_constitutional_crisis
Siehe meine Zusammenarbeit mit Danny Butt über die kolonialen Hinterlassenschaften der künstlerischen Autonomie in der neoliberalen Ära der globalen Kunst, hier: https://joaap.org/issue10/oriellybutt.htm
Denise Ferreira da Silva, “The Global Matrix and the Predicament of ‘Postmodernisms’: An Introduction to the Critique of Kulturkampf,” Seton Hall Law Review, 35, Iss. 4 (2006): 1281-1298.
Spivak markiert das Versagen des universellen Sozialismus in seiner Weigerung, sich mit den Anforderungen an die Ausbildung dieser ästhetischen, inhärent vergleichenden Dimension der politischen Imagination auseinanderzusetzen. Gayatri Chakravorty Spivak, An Aesthetic Education in the Era of Globalization. Cambridge (London: Harvard University Press. 2012).
Jelena Vesić, “The Annual Summit of Non-Aligned Art Historians,” in Extending the Dialogue: Essays by Igor Zabel Award Laureates, Grant Recipients, and Jury Members, 2008–2014, (Berlin: Archive Books; Vienna: ERSTE Foundation, 2016).
Ibid.
Bourriaud und Beltings’ sehr unterschiedliche Vorschläge für eine (andere) Moderne und nicht-hierarchische globale Kunst werden behandelt in Extending the Dialogue: Essays by Igor Zabel Award Laureates, Grant Recipients, and Jury Members, 2008–2014, (Berlin: Archive Books; Vienna: ERSTE Foundation, 2016).
Unter den europäischen Philosophen artikulierte Michel Serres’ The Natural Contract, trans. Elizabeth MacArthur and William Paulson (Michigan: University of Michigan Press, (1989), der erstmals 1989 veröffentlicht wurde, die Notwendigkeit einer umfassenden Ablehnung modernistischer Beziehungen zu den Wissenschaften und zum (im)materiellen westlichen Recht mit der nichtmenschlichen Welt.
Jelena Vesić, “The Annual Summit of Non-Aligned Art Historians,” in Extending the Dialogue: Essays by Igor Zabel Award Laureates, Grant Recipients, and Jury Members, 2008–2014, (Berlin: Archive Books; Vienna: ERSTE Foundation, 2016).
Denise Ferreira da Silva, “The Global Matrix and the Predicament of ‘Postmodernisms’: An Introduction to the Critique of Kulturkampf,” Seton Hall Law Review, 35, Iss. 4 (2006): 1281-1298.
Ebd.