Inside Gates versus Out of Gates

826 Words4 Pages
Inside Gates versus Out of Gates Turkey as an III World Society shows rapid urbanization process without industrialization which causes some problems in housing situation. In postwar period USA gave martial aid to Turkey, in order to provide to Europe agricultural needs, so there appears jobless villagers and sharecroppers because of changes in agricultural sector in terms of providing surplus by tractors namely by less human labor. So migration to big cities was emerged which is the reason for squatter settlements existence. On the other hand globalization plays a role in suburban development which is the upper-class people’s choice for leaving heterogeneous environment in city centers that causes to emerge new suburban homogeneous settlements as gated communities. Firstly, formation of squatter settlements implies ‘temporariness’ and the term ‘gecekondu’ refer building in one night. People build their gecekondus with having rising expectations for their future because they don’t have pessimistic feelings although they live in slums in the lack of even electricity. Gecekondu people are negatively labeled (stigmatized) as ‘peasants in the city’, uneducated, uncivilized, uncultured, backwards. They are also called as ‘varoº’, which is a sign of subordination and exclusion of these kinds of people. (Kiziltan, 2004) They survive in urban life by the help of democratic parties because they have high voting potential, which is populism as a political aspect, and also they provide cheap labor as their second survival factor in economic dimension. Gecekondu amnesty/pardoning become possible as gecekondu people play a role in production-having cheap labor potential and also in consumption by buying products which urban people use, in order to show that they can adapt to the urban life. According to Mass Society Theory, when individuals hardly connect to society they become members of social movements and mobilize against system. Besides this theory, second generation migrants are relatively deprived and fail to adapt in urban life so they display radical politic actions, try to challenge status quo, mobilize against advantaged groups. At the beginning squatters have only use value but after this value begin to turn into exchange value, so gecekondu people start to be stigmatized as ‘undeserved rich’, the villagers want to migrate to city to benefit from this exchanged value and other urban life’ social institutions(health services, education…etc) so there exits social mobility towards cities. Also, there is another factor which causes social mobility in squatters; squatters are heterogeneous environments which consist of people from different geographical background, so it is possible to expect high social mobility in these settlements.
Open Document