Search

South Africa is undergoing a rapid decline in social and political cohesion at various scales. This paper explores Cape Town's experience of socio-territorial messages and identities deployed by the City administration and the leading party, the Democratic Alliance. I focus on relational constructions of the subjectivity of the 'ratepayer' and the deserving Capetownian as constructed in the City and the DA's discourse and policy measures in juxtaposition to 'street people' and other supposedly deviant urban subjects and how, as such, the wilful ignorance of the first remains both unchallenged and in service of an exclusionary and unjust spatial order. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper investigates the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic and related policy measures on livelihoods in urban South Africa. Using qualitative research methods, we analyse two rounds of semi-structured phone interviews, conducted between June and September 2020 in the township of Khayelitsha, Cape Town. We contextualise these by presenting a snapshot of the nationwide dynamics using quantitative panel data. Our findings describe how the shock of the COVID-19 pandemic has deepened the economic vulnerability which preceded the crisis. Survivalist livelihood strategies were undermined by the economic disruption to the informal sector, while the co-variate nature of the shock rendered social networks and informal insurance mechanisms ineffective, causing households to liquidate savings, default on insurance payments, and deepen their reliance on government grants. In addition, the impact of the pandemic on schooling may deepen existing inequalities and constrain future upward mobility. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While existing literature has amply demonstrated how states may "see" their populations, we know less about which residents are legible to the state as populations. Drawing on extended ethnographic fieldwork and interviews conducted between 2011 and 2019 in Cape Town, South Africa, this paper compares the fate of two large land occupations, one of which was evicted, one of which was not. In doing so, this paper demonstrates how rather than taking "populations" as a given, this status should be understood as an outcome. It suggests that participants in each respective occupation began with different views of the state. In other words, the way residents saw the state impacted each respective organizational outcome, which in turn affected how they were seen by the state. In one occupation, participants saw the state as a partner in obtaining housing, and so they organized themselves as atomized recipients. In the other, they viewed the state as an obstacle, and so they organized themselves collectively. Only in the latter case were residents viewed as a population; in the former, they were all evicted. Ultimately, this paper argues that, by bringing tools from political sociology to bear upon urban ethnography, we can gain insight into a process otherwise overlooked in the literature, allowing us to make sense of a question that is central to understanding urban politics in the global South: how do municipal governments decide which occupations to evict and which to tolerate? [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]