Interview: https://jungle.world/artikel/2021/06/die-situation-war-erdrueckend
Unfortunately, the length of the interview was quite limited, so some points that were important to us did not make it into the article. We try to give space to these thoughts at this point.
In addition, we want to emphasize that the lack of gendering is due to jungleworld’s guidelines and was not formulated by us this way.
Strategy & incompetence behind the eviction
In our opinion, there is a pattern to the gentrification of Rummelsburger Bucht. There is a systematic attempt to get rid of squatters while the district tries to avoid the associated damage to its image by concealing or sugar-coating its part in the measures. This could already be observed during the cold eviction of SabotGarden some time ago. At that time, the residents were harassed by security guards until they finally left on their own. There were spotlights shining on the tents 24/7, they were fenced in, security guards made entry checks, turned people away for no reason or patrolled the tents in the middle of the night. All commissioned by the district, as it turned out later.
Thus the catastrophic condition of the camp, which was emphasized by the responsible officials several times, was knowingly accepted for a long time. Former offers of help were gradually canceled on the grounds that the bay should not become too attractive for homeless people. We were told about removed sanitary facilities and withdrawn cold aid. They tried to make it more and more uncomfortable for the residents.
In addition, the eviction was carried out in a miserable manner. Even if one wanted to believe the good intentions of the district, this does not excuse the fact that the camp, in which a large number of people speak little or no German, was entered without translators. How were people supposed to react to your ‘great’ offer if they didn’t even know what you were up to besides kicking them out? Is it surprising that hardly anyone got on the buses in front of the door when it was not at all clear where they were going?
Strong response and participation
We were very pleased that many voices critically questioned the public statements about the eviction and met with a lot of response. Several hundred people throughout the day took the opportunity to express their solidarity with those affected in various ways, despite the icy weather. Moreover, the solidarity does not stop: on Wednesday, hundreds of people demonstrated with the affected people in front of the red city hall, and on Friday, the Berlin Homeless Assistance drives to the food distribution at the bay. Thanks to the organizers and the press representatives present, who continue to document and critically accompany the extent of this mess. Special thanks also to the courageous people who spontaneously occupied an excavator in order to prevent the destruction of the camp. If you are confronted with repression in connection with these actions, do not hesitate to contact us!
Accusations of instrumentalization
As already mentioned in the interview, we consider such accusations basically a deliberate shift of discourse in order to suppress criticism of the eviction. The aim is to claim that all demonstrators are not affected by the eviction. Former residents, who also have their say in the protests, are thus made invisible. It is obvious that especially groups that lived closely with the people from the camp or even lived there are speaking up. Representatives of trans*sexwork, the self-representation of homeless people, residents of the wagon collective Mollies, the DieselA and paramedics, who were active on the site, all criticize this eviction. In addition, the residents of the camp are denied to have a political standpoint on the gentrification of their city and to live it out in this way.
The district would probably be happy if people only talked about those affected, but not with them. It would be easier to wipe criticism off the table in that way. Probably for this reason the contact of journalists with the people who were in the airdome the day after the eviction was prevented. We are convinced that this will not work this time. This fact frightens those who are responsible, as we can see from their reaction. False statements are made, rowed back, the eviction denied and the responsibility sought in others. Because it is an election year.