 Hello, everyone. Welcome to our second panel for today, entitled Decolonizing Planning, and the panel asked the following questions. What does it mean to decolonize planning, both normatively and in practice? How do we learn from theorize and practice, post-colonial, decolonial and abolitionist planning, while placing these movements in their proper and distinct historical and academic context? And given historical and ongoing realities of settleral colonialism, white supremacy, economic precarity, and neoliberal inequality, and war and occupation, what role can should planners play in engaging the field's histories, its dispossessed presence, and what futures could be imagined from these radical thought and practice traditions that could represent possibilities and potentials for the field to envision and inscribe socially just and contextually suited interventions. We have amazing four speakers today. I'm very excited. So I'm going to introduce the four speakers before they start sharing their work. So our first speaker is Professor Ananya Roy, who's professor of planning at the University of California, in Los Angeles, as well as the director of the Institute on Inequality and Democracy. Among her books are Citerecquium, Calcutta, Gender and the Politics of Poverty, Urban Informality, Transnational Perspectives from the Middle East, South Asia, and Latin America, Worlding Cities, Asian Experiments, and the Art of Being Global, and Territories of Poverty's Rethinking North and South, among many other influential publications. She's currently leading a National Science Foundation, a research network on housing justice in unequal cities that is building a shared terrain of scholarship across universities and movements to advance ideas, practices, programs and policies of housing justice in LA, as well as in other cities in the world. Her work is also concerned with combating racial banishment or the systematic removal of working class communities of color from urban cores to the far peripheries of metropolitan regions, as well as advancing scholarship on sanctuary cities, which seeks to expand practices of welcome and hospitality to account for long histories of settler colonialism imperialism and slavery. And Professor Roy, she was also my PhD advisor at UC Berkeley. Our second speaker is Professor Andrea Roberts, who's assistant professor of urban planning and an associate director of the Center for Housing and Urban Development at Texas A&M University. Her research identifies planning and historic preservation practices that sustain cultural resilience and quests for social justice within the African diaspora. Andrea Roberts work has been inspirational in the ways in which she brings more than a decade of experience in community and economic development to her scholarship, and in the ways in which she incorporate participation on multiplicity of voices in her public intellectual engagements. She's also the founder of the Texas Freedom Colonies Project, a research and social justice initiative documenting black place making history and grassroots preservation, engaging in ethnographic archival and action research using digital humanities platforms to make marginalized groups in danger voices visible and relevant to scholars. Our third speaker is Professor Orenia Ftahal, who's a professor of planning and geography at Bungurian University of the Najaf. He has worked on critical theories of space and power minorities and public policy, as well as the democratic society and land regimes. Among his books are ethnocracy, land and identity politics in Israel, Palestine and empty lands illegal geography of Bedouin rights in the Najaf. If the first work on the dark side of planning has been tri-transformational for my own thinking, as well as the thinking of many other, other studying planning in contested spaces. He's also an activist and has been member of several organizations served as a board member of Bitsalam, the Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the occupied territories, as well as co-founding a Israeli-Palestinian peace movement. He has also worked as a planner and advocate with the indigenous Bedouin populations in the Najaf. Last but not least, I welcome Professor Vanessa Watson, who's a professor of city planning in the School of Architecture Planning and Geometrics at the University of Cape Town. Her work seeks to settle the geopolitics of knowledge production and planning by providing alternative theoretical perspectives from the global south, placing power and conflict as inevitable and central to planning processes, and grounding planning ideas in an understanding of social diversity and difference. Her seminal paper on seeing from the south, refocusing urban planning on the global, global central urban issues has been foundational for all of us, who think about planning from the global south as well as the global north. She has played a key role in setting up the association of African planning schools, and that has been her concern with thinking about planning pedagogy on the African continent. Thank you all for a few. I'm so excited. Thank you very much for accepting for my invitation and we'll start with Professor Roy. Thank you so much, Hiba, for organizing this conference and for the invitation to be a part of it. It's a very special pleasure to be a part of this panel with Andrea, Oren and Vanessa. I'm going to share screen. This talk today is titled planning the post colony, or you can also read this as planning in the post colony. Now the title of this panel is decolonizing planning and I see that as a provocation, rather than as a possibility. I'll use the term decolonizing with great caution, because like so many other terms of critical thought, the term has come to be appropriated depoliticized and put into fast paced circulation. So what does it even mean in relation to planning. The endurance of colonial relationalities that seems to be all around us in the worlds of knowledge making and space space making that we call planning. And I want to be clear that when I talk about planning today in my talk, I am talking about the institutionality of planning. So there are of course many modes of planning, but I'm particularly interested in planning as an institution with uncanny proximity to state power. So what might decolonizing planning put forward for us as a provocation rather than as a possibility that I will talk about possibilities as well. The first in theory is a planning course that I teach each fall at UCLA, a core course for our incoming graduate students. I assigned to foundational essays on the decolonial imperative. These essays challenge my students and I think they present a challenge to us gathered here today in zoom world as well. This is Walter Minneolo's epistemic disobedience independent thought and decolonial freedom. The second is Eve Tuck and Kay Wayne Young's decolonization is not a metaphor. The epistemic privilege of which Minneolo writes the coloniality of knowledge continues in our academic formations. Despite fierce critique, the epistemological and methodological foundations of urban studies and planning remain committed to what George Lipsitz has called the white spatial imaginary. Some of us have now become what I called citationary alibis that not to purse colonial or feminist thought or to black geographies, also thinking from the south, while keeping intact structures of white theory. To talk at the Harvard GSD earlier this week, our presence in planning academia will not suffice to transform such structures. The making of black, brown and indigenous presence in the global university has taken place amidst what Grace Hong called regimes of racial management. So we diversify, but we do not decolonize. The decolonization is not a metaphor talking young remind us the decolonial desires can enact resettlement and reoccupation decolonization they insist must bring about the repatriation of indigenous land and life. Grace's very snarky tweet from the decolonial atlas reminds us far removed from such repatriation. Our institutions have taken to the comfort for example of land acknowledgments and other gestures of what Libby Porter and Janice Perry have described as recognition. But recognition like presence will not suffice, not to decolonize. And Grace Tuck and Yang remind us decolonization requires giving land back. How do we do so from within and against land grab universities and land grab professions. In my recent essay planning on stolen land, which is part of the planning theory and practice interface curated by Libby Porter and crystal legacy. I argue the planning is especially resistant to land back that while we dabble endlessly with land use regulation. We have the questions of land and property invoking technocratic practicality, what I call the tyranny of practicality to whitewash planning central role in state organized violence, including the theft of land, and thus negating the imperative for land reparations. In my essay, I suggest that we think about decolonizing planning, not as a possibility, but rather as a provocation. And for me the provocation requires thinking about the post colony, especially the United States of Empire as post colony. We have active repositioning of the cities of the North Atlantic in the global histories of slavery colonialism and imperialism. But by this I also mean attention to spatial formations that necessarily exceed the meanings that we have ascribed to the urban. The urban is the taken for granted modifier of planning. So to instead following Clyde Woods consider plantation logics and new plantation planning. I'm especially interested in how the post colony governs property, producing the categories of tenancy real estate rent and more that serve as the coordinates of liberalism and the coordinates of planning. So in a brilliant essay titled money mortgages and the conquest of America case who parked legal and critical race studies scholar shows her land became liquid in colonial America. And while English property law did not treat land as chattel settler colonists engaged in predatory lending practices to Native Americans created foreclosure as a brand new American commodity. And in the 1980s, it happened in the 1650s and 1660s. And by the 1670s colonial laws instituted foreclosure in America, enabling and legitimizing the widespread theft of land from indigenous people and turning land into real estate. And if we follow this genealogy of possession laid out by case who park, then we realize that so many of the towns of Massachusetts were grabbed and stolen by father William pinch on and son john pinch on to the use of foreclosure against indigenous people. So the real estate bear is property at stand. What then is decolonization. And is there a role for planning in it. Now, taking back the towns of New England, and this kind of decolonization of planning may very well be an impossibility that I'd like to think that it is, perhaps a possibility. In the background, instead, the possibilities that are opened up in the post colony, especially during the moment at hand, a moment that I see to be one of conjoined crisis and uprising. The process is that of the lived inequalities of racial capitalism, exposed and deepened by a global pandemic. And the uprising is as my comrade, Robin DG Kelly has put it, a rebellion against the death making apparatus of racial capitalism, of which police is an integral part. The possibilities at hand are not the decolonial freedom of which many yellow dreams, or the decolonization the tuck and Yang demand. The possibilities are perhaps more circumscribed, but worth considering. As I say in public books, I turn these possibilities, emergency urbanism, and I argue specifically the property has become the insurgent ground of emergency urbanism, a site of open rebellion against global racial capitalism, and its protocols of rent and debt. I borrowed the idea of insurgent ground from Saidea Hartman stunning book, wavered lives, beautiful experiments, which I think is one of the most important texts to understand the American city. Hartman foregrounds the insurgent ground of the lives of young black women who struggled to create autonomous and beautiful lives through open rebellion. What allows us to think about uprising as the long arc of rebellion, rather than a singular moment of crisis and protest. Along similar lines, Salwa Ismail's work has shown that behind the spectacular occupations of the Arab Spring was the prolonged emergency wrought by impoverished livelihoods precarious housing, intensifying policing. These oppressions took shape she shows in the informal neighborhoods of cities such as Cairo in the microprocesses of everyday life, creating oppositional subjectivities and infrastructures of protest. So if property has become the insurgent ground of emergency urbanism, then I would assert that for example here in Los Angeles, this is most visible in two spaces of struggle. The public stake in property, rent as theft, and I present these to you today, not as decolonial possibilities, but as postcolonial possibilities. So from moms for housing in Oakland to reclaiming our homes in Los Angeles, to the widespread call to common dear vacant hotels as housing insurgent housing movements are insisting on the public stake in property and flipping the script of eminent delay. But of course we must constantly keep in mind the militarized assault deployed by the state against such movement as we saw with moms for housing, as well as with reclaiming our homes. If eminent domain has been widely used as a tool of urban development benefiting the property classes, then what does it mean to use this master's tool for the purposes of housing justice. Hillside villas in allies China town is especially on my mind, because some of the long standing tenants there were displaced by eminent domain during the construction of the LA Convention Center, and are now fighting for the use of eminent domain for public acquisition of their building, whose affordable housing covenant has expired. And what is fascinating about the time of emergency, specifically a public health emergency is that the law mediates a different relationship between sovereignty and property. It is thus that legal reason has repeatedly asserted that during the pandemic, the mayor of Los Angeles has the police power to common dear private property, and thus you see many of us on Twitter saying sees the fucking hotels. And it is thus that the courts across the US have repeatedly in this last year rejected the opposition of landlord lobbies to eviction moratorium, ruling that such moratorium do not violate the takings clause of the fifth amendment, or create other irreparable economic harm to real estate interests. And so in this moment, just for this moment, it becomes possible to mobilize the police power of the state for the protection of human life, rather than the protection of property. The question of rent is especially interesting. The Janice Block Los Angeles is infamous eviction attorney argues that a moratorium on evictions constitutes legal theft from landlords. The Los Angeles tenants union response that rented self is theft. This is the capacious imagination of emergency urbanism, and it's critique of grantee capitalism. Indeed, as rental debt grows, so does the political demand for rent cancellation. This is Carol five co founder of moms for housing and newly elected Oakland City Council member reminding us of rental debt. And for those of you not in the US, the scope of the evictions to come in at this rental debt, debt is staggering. It's estimated that nearly 495,000 renter households in Los Angeles are at risk of eviction when the eviction courts reopened later this year. A few weeks ago policy link release new analysis showing that rental debt in California from the time of the pandemic is about $3.7 billion, and what a debt is it about a billion dollars. And it is to say this is debt born disproportionately by black brown and indigenous tenants. I read the demand for rent cancellation as rebellion against the terms on which property and tenancy were established through settler colonialism and slavery. Inspired by Denise Ferrero de Silva, I think about rental debt as unpayable debt, a debt that exceeds the legitimacy of both the law, i.e. contract and morality, i.e. obligation. What is at stake in such insurgency is an unraveling. I cannot yet call this decolonizing because it remains to be seen what happens to the colonial relationalities that undergird land property in rent. But I cannot say that this is a re inscription of the relationship between sovereignty and property between the state's police power and human life. The unraveling is also a remaking. The struggles are briefly outlined, it is a remaking of the very institution of property, and the enclosures of land and life through which property is accepted. It is a remaking of public goods, not in the mold of the new deal, but rather as what my friends and comrades at the Institute on inequality and democracy, Hannah appell calls reparative public goods. The planning as a discipline in profession as an institution has a role to play in what Nicholas Blomley would call the unsettling of property, and in the making of reparative public goods. I cannot know as yet if such a role is forthcoming for the plans that are being made for the public stake in property for rent cancellation for unpayable debt, come from insurgent movements, especially those that planning seems to ignore or disavow. Thank you with the question to pose to the institutionality of planning. A question that comes from Walter Minyolo. Why would you want to save capitalism and not save human beings. Thank you everyone. Thank you very much. Always inspirational. Next we'll have Dr Roberts, please the floors, the floor is yours. So good morning everyone from Brian Texas. I'll be speaking to you today about historic preservation and particularly black preservation practice as the tournament for those who are French and the tournament for the rest of us. And like Ananya, very hesitant to engage around decolonialism as a metaphor and instead of very preoccupied with decolonial acts and decolonial strategies as they occur and as they naturally emerge and that's what I'm going to speak to today, which is the context that resonated with me that was initially posed around the role planners should play in engaging the fields historical origins and identifying contextually suited interventions. And so my context or subfields or preservation and planning history, and I'll be speaking about issues situated in those subfields today. So, of course, as most people know I study historic African American settlements known as freedom colonies, which are emerged from clusters of landowners who attain property through adverse possession per purchase squatting. And while so called farmer relief in mass in the United States is imminent access to small landowner, small landowners, people live in homesteads, people who own less than 10 acres, people in cities are on the edges of cities and historic black settlements. And many that money and that assistance will not be available. And this is important because African Americans rule areas in rural areas are often land rich cash poor and consistently vulnerable to dispossession do the lack of access to things such as a state planning. For example, up to 75% of black land is held and testate. The benefits of preservation, land ownership and building integrity are required. And as a result, we find that only 3% of all national register listings actually represent black heritage 3%. So, freedom colonies, which I'll remind everyone or historic black settlements founded roughly between 1865 and 1930. Originally were founded in what we call bottom land or flood prone land because that was the land available to African Americans at the time near former plantations and many instances and what really is the distinction to understand even though they're called freedom, black settlements, towns, black settlements, black towns, and they were anchored by church schools and cemeteries is that they were founded out of intentionality and agency, and not necessarily just where people were pushed to or ordered to live. In that one time there were more than 557 of these places and I'll get to that number and the meaning of that number in a minute. I'm going to talk about a just or centered understanding of preservation in light of these facts and these people in these descendants situated in this way. Jodi Melamed aptly describes the organizing or agenda setting challenge racial capitalism I think presents to African Americans, and by extension practitioners committed to black centered planning and preservation of black places. He writes that quote the degree to which ideologies of individualism liberalism and democracy shaped by and shaping market economies and capitalist rationality from their mutual exception monopolize the terms of sociality, despite their increasing colonists, hollowness in the face of neoliberalism predation. So many long standing institutions are black relationality medium survive HBC us African American businesses social groups and are now at the precipice of mediating and influencing resource distribution and all black communities through the influx of federal dollars. However, to what degree are these institutions propagating the relationality that Melamed describes, and how should preservationist facilitate a new black group relationality beyond competition scarcity, and why to stimulus simulationist frames of black landedness and historic freedom colonies presented vehicle I think for understanding the tournament as a transformative frame for change in preservation. The tournament meaning diversion detour reroute and hijack or otherwise turning something aside from its normal course or purpose for example, formerly enslaved African Americans weren't included in the state's homestead acts. The Texas black codes block them from accessing public lands for post reconstruction African Americans, the unmediated access use and acquisition of the land in a context absent procedures and legal validation of the right to settle was indeed a hijack. How should this inform our current practices then considering historic preservationist troubled relationship with black places and heritage values. And this is a text heavy slide sort of summarize on one column you have with large Jane Smith critical heritage scholar calls authorized heritage or formal planning and heritage regular regulations in the United States. And on the other side you see descendants of historic black settlements and their frames for heritage values and planning practice and essentially authorized heritage is associated then with rarity scarcity architectural fetish. Architectural expertise, physical documentation official documentation of place and telling borders and designations laden with requirements that African American places cannot possibly adhere to creating a preservation apartheid and inhibiting access to the benefits, more than just the recognition or adoration but the access to funding to grants to certain protections and land use protections and designations, whereas African Americans associated with these historic settlements, find their documentation found in stories and memory and rituals in tendency in common, their decision making among griots and elders and can keepers and their preservation standards enveloped in belief and cultural practice and memory, and the cultural continuity and the sacred. And so, practitioners are in a position then to think about rerouting this languaging and this terminology in these frames for preservation. And the attention, or what I want to talk about is the platforms that we can use to translate freedom colony heritage and relationality in ways that complicate cultural resource management transportation planning in meaningful ways. And the attention behind this documenting and recognizing and preserving I talked about is to detect in is to detect situated decolonial acts are rerouting within preservation away from a lead is some scarcity and stratification. This relationality recognizes African Americans unique positionality. These are the indigenous movements to repatriate land descendants of freedom colonies live in between and intersect with land colonial coloniality and indigeneity, but are a distinct powerful concept, black counter public that I think can facilitate the rewolding in the work of ananya can facilitate a rewolding of black places and the construct of land and the construct of the historic. I want to share some examples of the tournament as it manifest among descendants, as well as ways in which I've witnessed it manifest I've documented it manifest in the way it's manifesting in my own work. And then I'm going to end with the answer to the so what question right what difference to the stories the maps of the dialogue make. I'm going to do with some examples of the ways I think our methods of successfully contested the tyranny of place definition and historical status that have led to the destruction of black places cemeteries and inclusion and planning processes. So I'll talk about a lot of this in the context of this region. Deep East Texas on the border of Louisiana these two areas of Jasper and Newton counties. And I'll speak first about a community associated called Dixie community in Jasper County, Texas, Jasper County with this notorious association with the dragging death of James bird. You can also see as a place with a large concentration of free black settlements. And so, I'm recounting a story that I first learned from a local settle, the Senate of a settlement nearby, who led me to the grave of Richard Dick seal, who is adjacent to that of his capture in the middle of an African American settlement settlement or cemetery. So for counting Dick's life. The individual begins with his being taken under the slave master's wing, then his founding Dixie Baptist church while still enslaved, and this story. And this, this site figure prominently in local history and are told with a bias toward the white seals family William seal the former White House historian describes Richard Uncle Dick seal as a trusted colleague of the master Joshua. He's the seal's version. We hear Joshua seal being permitted to receive tutoring, and his description of Dixie free status indicates a belief that his family's treatment of Richard seal is what made him free. William seal writes my great grandfather Joshua was a tough man, but he loved Uncle Dick like one of the family. So many freedom calling descendants, who you see here holding the this place matter sign, who've returned to this community of transformed the all black school in that community to a center for youth job enrichment and training and space for unions and parents and tie their community building philosophy and approach, not only to Richard seal, but also to Bobby seal another descendant known for his approaches to liberation and community building. And so they've deterred or hijacked the local history to sustain and cat catalyze a new relationality between land and space and historical significance. And more recently they provided food and water after winter storm Yuri to the entire region. Freedom colony founders, when they start these communities founded or entered a world in which the notion of their agency was absurd. So we're used to hearing about determinants being about situationalist and being absurd or even humorous, but I don't mean to to lighten the mood or to say this is about humor, or to say that that instead the idea of black colonization of space. They felt entitled to space was so ludicrous to whites that freedom calling locations remained invisible for some time and disappeared tours with descendants reveal landscape circulation patterns their ancestors devised to territorialize freedom. And it's unfreedom with a colonist confidence, while simultaneously engaged in defensive place making to reroute racial violence away from their communities. However, once ownership was registered at courthouses, extra legal legal and violent dispossession ensued, and their cultural landscapes were erased from the legal and the public and social record. Consequently, there are three challenges to finding documenting serving working with these communities issues of visibility the low population declining built environment access access to expertise and communities access to knowing what is accessible to them. And vulnerability and I mean that in the sense that there are valuable assets, valuable information that makes visible these places that is susceptible to loss due to legal precarity financial charity and the information being in the minds of elders who will soon leave us. And the reason for this demise what happened to freedom colonies. Much of this is due to institutional racism, building integrative demolition by neglect due to inability to access public funding to access not just public funding but banking redlining so we see this series of events of dispossession in several ways, which inhibit access to the benefits of historic preservation. And of course, these persistent challenges of land dispossession, municipal under bounding disasters and hazards preservation practice and policy with the land instability fundamentally inhibiting the access to these benefits to these planning processes. The Freedom Colleagues project started initially in 2014 is endeavored as an educational social justice initiative to support place preservation, not just the federation of particular buildings or structures, but place preservation of black settlement heritage, the preservation practice and their place making history, their planning history, we do that through connecting and collecting counter mapping and securing, and then co creating engage applied research in that process and as a consequence of that process. And what I want to share with you really quickly then are not just the way that we do the work writ large but our flagship project project the Texas Freedom Colleagues Atlas, which is the first statewide effort to integrate descendants into contemporary planning processes. By making previously unrecorded place knowledge available to practitioners involved in infrastructure environmental review of publicly funded projects in order to overcome the perception of placelessness. For those concerned about the vulnerability of making such information visible, consider that the invisibility did not save them. It simply added to the vulnerability and they're being excised from planning processes as growth growth expanded into the areas that were once remote. So the project doesn't merely aggregate public data but it fills absences. And as Rupika Rassam writes it intervenes in the public record by quote, fostering the production of the multiple epistemologies for digital knowledge production needed to ensure inclusion in the digital record and in the case of preservation the preservation record. So why an atlas to make the stories of origin and claim to place visible to geotag and spatialize it, increase visibility, increase agency and make visible historical significance and I just want to share really quickly the features. People can add to the map, they can search on the map, and they can look at the intersections of planning activity and risk with the settlements that were here to for not visible on the map, such as historic, such as Hurricane Harvey rather and text dot or transportation planning projects that are occurring presently here in the next five years. And most recently we've made it user friendly, meaning increase the availability of images, the availability of stories in more accessible ways. And most importantly, we've been able to learn from these stories, as I said fill the gaps in the record. The record meaning the names of places of people structures of leaders, and the experience of these places as black joy in not black precarity and black death. Another way in which the stories in our conception of these places are being rerouted. And finally, I want to speak to our nearest, our most recent efforts around relationality and that is to sustain relation relationality, or increase it or fostered a new way in a covert not dominated world we've introduced a talk show, so that we can help American settlement descendants connect, even in the face of the pandemic. We had an individual for example share about the pandemics impact on black funerals and mourning and grieving, and the access to capital needed to survive. And so I'd like to just conclude by saying that the tournament or rerouting emerges and descendants practices stories language, relationality and engagement, place making keeping a remembrance preservation foster, I think the potential for new relationality between governance and heritage and space and land that can encompass more than just retention wealth accumulation, but instead seek new communal black relationality. And we encounter challenges in the work as many devalued their memories, doubted the veracity of their stories and embrace black exceptional exceptionalism that overshadowed opportunities to collaborate or connect. And so engaged dialogue increased communication communication pathways for interruption, such as a more robust section 106 consultation process in public projects and unpacking of internalized racism must be faced to transform preservation and make planning history. Wow, thank you so much, Dr Roberts. This is. Thank you for all the work you do it's also fascinating inspiration. And next we have a professor after the floor is yours. Thanks very much very exciting to be here. It's a wonderful gathering and a wonderful opportunity to share our critical perspectives argue about them sharpen them and hopefully improve them. And I'll share my screen, and I begin again with the. Thank you for the organizers. Shukran joseph and Shalom from Israel Palestine, my talk actually does take seriously. The challenge that you presented us. Heba. And I'm looking at the planning and the new metropolis, whether we dare to decolonize. And of course I share with the previous speakers and also the wonderful first panel the incredible challenges and obstacles and the ideal of decolonize but nonetheless it's a it's an activism it's a frame of mind that I want to challenge. And I put a picture here of Dubai, one of the model cities of the 21st century, on which I will elaborate in a minute just in case people wonder. This is the bourgeois Arab, this is not the biggest towering in Dubai it's only the second biggest, and you'll see later on how we how we treat this case, this model case of Dubai. So I think encountering present colonialities is the contemporary challenge for planning. This is already answering one of the questions that you posed. And it goes in various forms of course it's a project for generations but nonetheless first of all it needs to be exposed articulated. And the common knowledge is that we are in the post colonial era. And let me try and unpack this kind of statement so I'll start with three paradigms, three paradigms of urban colonialities that will just act as a small windows to the to the issue. One is the Italian Estonia. The other one is bear shaver right here outside my window and in Dubai. And I want to first emphasize the perspective which is not from the Northwest. And so far we've heard a lot of scholars, but the focus was the United States fair enough. But let's try and learn from other regions, other logics. The perspective from there allows us to see other movements and powers. And the three trajectories are all in situations of urban colonialities but leading in different ways. And I think that's something that we can pinpoint our understanding how planning is involved in that. And so we call Tallinn, not a very well known cities in fact all the three cities that I chose and not sort of central cities they are not capitals, but still they are kind of models. So Tallinn was a static city in the 1990s in the post a Soviet colonial era when it sort of managed to get its independence Estonia. And it very much annihilated the existence of the Russian culture the Russian planning, all the Soviet legacy but nonetheless half the population of Tallinn city remained as Russian. They were denied citizenship they were colonized by the new Estonian state. In recent years through plans through other influences like human rights organization the European unions. The new plans for Tallinn are moving from ethnocratic to more inclusive, more equal, yet not totally decolonized because many of the Russian still don't have citizenship, but they are acquiring it, and they have urban citizenship. The city was sharply divided before you see on the left the typical Soviet housing and the new plan for master plan for Tallinn is very much focused on trying to integrate this kind of enclaves into a more unified or integrated society. This is the new plan. It has all the buzzwords of course it's a little bit of jargon sustainability quality inclusion multiculturalism, but on the ground what I find, and is that this slow progress in recent years towards decolonizing what was sharply colonial relations of two groups. Now we move to bear share our we see another trajectory which is a persistence of settler colonial immigrant city. And like mentioned before we actually sitting on tribal lands of Bedouin for centuries, maybe more than a millennium. And this is a typical kind of contrast between the indigenous informal great space criminalized town around Bolsheva and the city the more organized Jewish city that you can see at the background. And you can see here a manifestation unlike the talent plan total exclusion. You see the map on the right is a metropolitan plan for bear share but which was approved about six or seven years ago, which has a lot of agricultural reserves, the all the green areas land uses, and the Bedouin indigenous populations are supposed to urbanize into these towns on the left to see the actual, you know, mapping of the era photos of the area, and you see how many people, more than 100,000 people are what they call urbanized communities that in invisible. So this is an ongoing settler colonial relation urbanizing as it is around a metropolis, but nonetheless, a very different trajectory. And the sites on the ground is constant state violence unprecedented level of house demolition and in recent years this is the graph that is you know shooting through the ceiling. There's more than 2000 house demolitions every year in the last five or six years with the you know the rise of nationalist government in Israel. You see the stats here on the right, and you also see the comparison of what Jews in the region experience, which is about 10% the number of house demolition that is among the Bedouin Arabs. And so there is definitely an ongoing spatial colonialism, trying to force the indigenous Bedouin Arabs into towns, but it's it does connect to a greater picture, I said, and I was very glad that one of us was talking about the state as well because as an urbanist, sometimes we tend to forget that there is a power structure of the state. And this is a recent report that I was co author of. From the same image was already mentioned, and created a lot of echoes around the world was published in January, about the apartheid regime in general, which is an attempt to stabilize colonial relations to actually formalize them in terms of different populations to different population. This is what's happening now in Israel, Palestine, and the recent scandals of the vaccine apartheid that you know Israel is very fast to vaccinate its population, but not allowing or not providing the Palestinians under the control with with vaccinations just another month manifestation but our report is dealing more with immigration and land and with the management of violence. And these are three recent books and I that that I authored and it's not really in terms of trying to promote them, but in terms of the languages. And one is in English empty lands the other one, it's mother demise in Hebrew and he is in Arabic, and I want to sort of protect that one of the decolonizing practices is also writing in local languages, passing the knowledge to local languages, which in academia is is quite rare because English is the only language of of capitalism. Now we move to the third window, which is Dubai, and Dubai is, you know, a stark type of new urban colonialities colonial relation, which is not as the all colonial relation, a state or an empire, it's not really out expanding subjugating people colonizing them, grabbing the land, but in this current era, we see the dispossess the subaltern actually like magnets coming and subjugating themselves to the powers that be. But nonetheless the relations remain colonial relations. This is why I call it urban colonial coloniality and not urban colonialism because it's a different geographical settings in verse geographical but yet the relationship of separation, hierarchy, segregation, exploitation, and, most importantly, essentialization, you are marked as different, like in the colonial era but now in the city, and it's stark in the very shape and it's very stark in Dubai, against this glory of Dubai. You have this statue see that Dubai is the highest number of non citizens in the city. This was in 2016 but now it's actually almost 90% of the people are not even citizens like that famously said they don't have the right to ask for rights. And this is maybe a model for the future of urban coloniality. And this is I analyze the planning of Dubai of course a new friend of Israel now. There's different regions for different populations that outland plan the master plan for 2020. Actually, like in the South African. And to some extent like in the Israeli case actually allocates different areas to different populations, like national residential, temporary residential workers residential etc etc it's an apartheid city, which of course is very connected to the duality of relations. And then of course there is a dark side of it, as this article shows no rights to the worker and no right to family no right to land to housing that the workers in vast majority of the population there is disposable, displacable, evictable, and it's a height of exploitation and marginalization. So this is important. I'm knowing that I'm writing and running out of time but it's important to flag these three models also because Dubai is also a fantasy. And this is a recent Guardian article about Addis Ababa with a famous prime minister, you know, the Nobel Prize laureate, saying that now Dubai is our model in Addis Ababa in Ethiopia, and around the world or Singapore which is an example where many people have no rights in Singapore etc. So let's think about these three models, Tallinn in this sort of trying to decolonize the relation there, Bersheva is a status quo of colonial relation and Dubai is a new colonialities that you know is emerging around the world. How much more time do I have, Hiba? I'm almost done. I'm almost done. Okay, so what I want to emphasize is three or four more points. While you have the picture of Dubai, there is various possibilities to look at this and I want to emphasize the perspective of the global context. And I know Vanessa Watson will talk after me and elaborate on it, but I think there's a great range of scholars and perspectives that actually we can see better. Those kind of dynamics that exist from our regions, of course they apply to the rest of the world but it sharpens our ability to see and I draw a lot of attention to what we know in Walter Minoglo as we already said and another point that we have to emphasize through this gaze is that coloniality is not only north versus south, it's not only white versus the other colors. But it's also south versus south and east versus east. And so we have to look at it as the south colonizing the south in many ways that weren't really imagined before. And I always famously talk about the pathologies of new sovereignty. So I think in planning terms, we also have to go beyond, while of course maintaining the frameworks of European and white colonization, we have to go beyond that, and look at how planning is exercised on the ground. And I want to finish with decolonization, which is two more slides, Hiba. How we look at it, very briefly a vocabulary that a lot of people would know, you know, the voice to the people, it sounds banal but we have an extreme regime of silencing, including of course, people like me that, you know, people attempt to silence quite often. I am a privileged position, but the people that suffer from those demolition cetera, very, very much silence. Fair rise from the southeast we already talked about new vocabularies among great scholars many of them speak here today we have to adopt them. And I would say that transformative planning is activism, we have to get out of the comfort zone of writing papers and being the academia and actually go work with communities present them in committees in the courts in politics. And the colonial, the colonial planning is also beyond discourse. It's actually doing things. Education practices that I don't have to elaborate too much, but also the vision of equal metros and she we have to find a new normative flag, on which to reimagine the way that transformative power is now reconstructed in cities. Since my time is almost over. I want to connect to the idea that rage is impossible professional rage to salvage the transformative power of planning, which has transformative power, but it's been also abused. To finalize with this kind of idea that maybe decolonial planning is captured by the word dare, but I read there from right to left, which is, you know, just to go against the grain of power. So it's equalize. It's resist or refuse the power. Advocates alternatives and decolonize. And this is captured in this kind of picture of Dubai upside down. Maybe this is a vision for us as decolonizing plan is and thank you very much. Thank you so much and thank you for for always illuminating and bringing up new concepts to think with you. Next we have Professor Watson. The floor is yours. Thank you, and yeah, thanks again for the invitation and putting together this wonderful series of panels. Okay, I don't have slides, which is probably a good thing since my screen is looking very strange. So, I'm just going to talk. And I really want to make one single argument in what I'm going to say. I want to emphasize my belief in the importance of taking place and context into account. In relation to all planning concepts and practices. And in this case, the concepts of post colonial and decolonial planning. So I'm really welcome the way this session has been framed, which asks for future directions for socially just but also contextually situated intervention so so well done I think on an excellent framing of these panels. For some years, I have aligned myself with what has been called Southern or Southeast planning, the theoretical project, along with Aaron, and many others in the sessions sessions today. The position that emerged in response to. And as a critique of the historical tendencies to produce planning theories and practices based on undeclared assumptions about context about the nature of economy, society, culture, environment and cities. I assume these could be universalized to all parts of the world and many of you will be very familiar with this line of argument. But as a Southern or Southeast planning theorist. I guess I does have much in common with those strands of ideas termed decolonial post colonial neocolonial or settler colonial planning. Many parts of the global Southeast have histories and presence shaped in very different ways by colonization. There's a planning land use and settlement inherited and shaped through processes of colonization and we have heard much about that today. And yet I prefer to remain under the Southeast theorizing label, as I think it allows me to consider forces and factors, which include but which are also in addition to processes of colonization. I'm going to turn briefly to the South African case to make some points about this. I just want to note how important it is to me that concepts of decolonial post colonial and abolitionist planning have attracted this kind of interest in parts of the global north. It's inspired the conference today. The US particularly planning has a very long and conservative history with many of the usual knowledge gatekeepers resistant to the ideas of alternative ways of seeing and thinking about planning. The fertile ground is emerging now for growing interest and development in this area of planning theory, and there's great potential for southern collaborations. But having said that, I want to sound a note of caution. And it has to do with the acknowledgement of context and difference. I'm very wary of the tendency of good ideas to uncritically leap frog from their place of origin to very different places where they have different meanings and different implications. I suspect this is already happening in the decolonization debates. Recently, a colleague of mine from Ghana. Yes. And I use the story with his permission wrote to me to say that he felt the pressure to consider that his country had to be recolonized by important discourses on decolonialism before it could be decolonized all over again with new terminology and ideas from elsewhere. And this is very worrying place and context is key is important. So let me turn to the context of South Africa to make some points about this question of difference. As many of you will know, South Africa under the apartheid government has been held up as an extreme example of the most vicious and devastating laws and plans and racial segregation and racial repression in cities and the countryside. Minority white population 12% of the total maintained political and economic control. And 88% of the rest of the population black. And 90% of the land, which lay outside the bunterstand reserves. Planning, which was largely inherited from British colonial rule was a central tool in enforcing this apartheid cities and towns were deeply and spatially inscribed with race and class divisions. In 1994 27 years ago. Democracy was secured and former political power passed to the African National Congress. Liberation movement founded on the freedom charter, reflecting a commitment to equal rights for all. The 1996 constitution was recognized as one of the most progressive in the world. Dismantling spatial apartheid and moving to integrated equitable and sustainable post apartheid cities was an early goal. Cities and towns produced planning frameworks showing exactly this. The state appeared committed to it as was the planning profession. But 27 years on. Why has so little of this happened. Why do our cities not to look terribly different from what they did in 1994. The ANC still has power. The white population has shrunk to 8%. In part what this shows is the difficulty of reversing the impacts of colonization and apartheid in our field of planning and urban settlements. The materiality of cities means that history, any history is deeply inscribed and hard to change. In South Africa planning laws and approaches were a colonial inheritance. Those planning laws were not changed until 20 years after the end of apartheid. And then many of the earlier and inherited planning principles such as private ownership of property and land use zoning and so on are unchanged. There are a number of other factors. Beyond the lasting impacts of colonization and apartheid. These countries which have made it particularly hard to undo the inequalities and divides of South Africa cities. These take on very specific form in this country and even in each city. Making South Africa very different to other countries on the continent. And even in the global south and reinforcing my point that place and context are key. The impact of the sudden opening of 1994 of South Africa South Africa's economy to globalization. And the ongoing influence of an unconstrained private sector property market. Has meant the class and income divides have simply reinforced earlier racial divides. A growing black middle black middle and working class has meant that some formerly white suburbs have desegregated in some cities. But essentially, the class divides remain. Land restitution process was put in place after 1994. Allowing people to claim back their land. It has been glacially slow. Recently, expropriation without compensation has been allowed. We will see what that does. And in the meantime, the poorest of our urban populations also black. Have further concentrated on the edges of cities. In post apartheid state provided housing. This land is the cheapest. The lives of well located state owned empty land remain undeveloped in cities for the poor. This is a failure of post apartheid planning of post apartheid government and a failure of planning. So colonization and apartheid left the democratic government of South Africa with deeply divided and exclusionary cities. And by a similarly problematic planning system. But it is insufficient to suggest that decolonization of these forms and processes is all that is required in this context. Given government commitment post 1994 to just non racial and equal future for all free of the shackles of apartheid. Change must be possible. But in thinking about planning and the post colony of South Africa. I want to align myself with the position of Cameroonian philosopher Ashil and Bambi. Rather than the decoloniality arguments of the Latin American school and Walter Magnolo, which of course is entirely appropriate and that in that context. And of course, these are ideas, which are brilliant and inspirational. But they're different. And probably also different to the concerns of decolonial scholars in the United States, and perhaps as a subject for further discussion. We've known as decolonial decoloniality embraces indigenous modes of thinking. It makes those Western expressions of modernity imposed on much of the world through colonialism and empire. Hence, for him, decoloniality is not a successor to colonialism and coloniality. Rather, it offers an alternative, one that is rooted in indigenous thoughts and practice about nature, community and solidarity. Very differently. And Bambi questions our ability to cut free of modernity. In a far more dialectical relational and entangled picture of the relations between colonists and colonizer. He sees the future of Africa. And the world that Africa reveals and exemplifies as lying in a renewed effort to enact a more inclusive, sustainable and equitable vision of reason and humanity. Then was globally normalized in the past five centuries, accepting that the European imperial project has devalued and displaced other more emancipatory ways of thinking. Bambi explores a future that is grounded in the African experience of diaspora and mobility. It is these processes of mixture flow and interaction that help Africa define a path towards decolonization that does not rest heavily on the platform of indigeneity. These experiences he insists open the path to Afro-Politism, the politics that uses both the history and present of Africa to think about global emancipation. He argues that Africa is a continent rich in resources and epistemologies and new modes of political association. And that it's openness to the global circulation of ideas, people, cultures and goods. In this we can find an alternate modernity to the one we live in now. The politics of extremity, that colonial, the politics of extremity, that colonial projects and subjects find themselves in, he suggests, has created new sites for invention and imagination. Producing zones of hybridity in which the civilizing project of the colonial master inadvertently produces new spaces of dialogue and creativity. The emergence of a vast world of rich ideas, thought forms, linguistic styles and technologies of the self in Francophone Africa is for Mbembe, that's a paradoxical fruit of colonialism and the zones of hybridity it produced. So Mbembe speaks to the reality of Francophone Africa here, but there is a broad position that can be explored in relation to the post colonies such as South Africa. And I believe this concept of the Creole of the hybrid is important. It's about mix of the old and the new, of appropriation of what is valuable from the past and the present here. In planning here in the context of South Africa. What this thing requires is a deep understanding of context of how people are refashioning the city from the bottom up, how they survive in spite of and not as a result of planning and state services provision. There is an important role for the state, as was raised in the first panel, and in part to interact with the market like an idea. I identify the market, the property sector as a key obstacle to progress in in changing our cities. So to interact with the market in a much stronger way, but also to be persuaded to seek new and innovative approaches to infrastructure provision, sanitation, water, power, transport, creating circular urban metabolisms rather than linear ones. Integrating state provision with community forms of provision to create innovative hybrids. Of course, political commitment is key, as well as a radically revised planning law and questions of the commodification of land. I've done real store here to lay out any kind of new approach to planning in South Africa, or elsewhere. But the points I have been trying to make is that different starting points in post colonial or decolonial planning. And when considering the post colony can take one down very different routes to rethinking planning. And that both starting points and the roads followed are shaped by context. South Africa is very different from the rest of Africa and very different again from the US or Europe. And that is, with a quote from a recent paper on decolonizing African studies in the global north. Maybe author wrote an intellectually decolonized Africa can only be one in which the continent holds a central place, and which defines the questions to be asked. And to be sought in terms that are clearly rooted in Africa itself. Thank you. Thank you Vanessa for amazing for the food for thought and for the weaving together all the conversation we've been having. So we have a lot of questions coming up. And thank you for everyone of course again. So we have a lot of questions coming up from the audience. I'll try to go in order and maybe combine a couple of them. And we'll, we'll basically go mostly for the questions that are that address most all of you. So I will start with the first question that comes from Muhammad Ali Sharif that and combine it with a question that comes from Deepak. So the first one is the case for the hill stations of the case for the hill stations of Ooty and Darjeeling in India are perfect examples of land grab. The British established large states by clearing forest lands and denying the tribals the rights to forest and its resources. Over the years after independence, these T states now owned by corporate entities continue to engage in the production of tea for experts to the UK and other parts of the world, while the tribals remain dispossessed of their rights and their hereditary ways of life. These tribals are offered food rations and sometimes housing as social welfare schemes of government which smack for charity work. They help tribes secure back access to the forest and their lives and their dignity. So basically the follow up question how can plan planners and governments undo centuries of injustice. Relatedly, Deepak asked about he will extend an analysis to Puerto Rico a colony of the United States to decipher which kinds of insertion planning practices can help catalyze a transformative decolonizing agenda at a moment when design and designs have captured the emergency moment to advance a land grab and dispossession strategy. We have several inspiring examples but the issue of scale and asymmetrical power relations in an outright imperial domination relationship seem unsurmountable. Are the masters tools sufficient to bring his house down. Is it truly possible to plan a decolonial transformation from within this colonial context. So basically in a nutshell how can planners and governments undo centuries of injustice and can the master's tools. Are they sufficient to bring the house down. I'll get us started. These are huge questions I was just watching the expression on Andrea's face as the questions right. I think that the ways in which the questions are framed make a couple of points that I think we as panelists made that of course land grabs and these colonial relationalities are not a thing of the past. They are active and present. And this is why so many of us are drawn to the idea of the post colony, as Vanessa reminded us, rather than to that while decolonial freedom might be on the horizon. I think that these post colonial logics and these post colonial forms of rule are alive and well in reproducing and even making new colonial relationalities. So the examples of the plantations the tea plantations of India, and our Puerto Rico can be added on to the examples for example that are in gave us right as instantiations of these colonial relationalities. I think with the boat, I'm especially interested in sort of the legal apparatus. And that keeps in place. These forms of power. So it is not at all surprising, right that land acquisition laws, and the legal apparatus that enables extraction in India, especially the extraction of natural resources. Continue British systems of lawmaking and space making, right. So I'm also very interested then in those continuities and what it would mean to disrupt those continuities. I do think that, in fact, these, these remade renewed colonial relationalities require can only be undone through freedom struggles. I, you know, I think that Deepak in his question suggested that already that the master's tools will not suffice for that unraveling. But I think therefore that this moment of emergency that Deepak also reference is a complex one that at least in this hemisphere in the North American context. It is clear that emergency urbanism is a time of renewed crisis and land grabs, but it is also a time of uprising. I am very interested in that uprising though I as I noted at the end of my talk I think planning as an institutionalized form of knowledge making and space making likes to disavow in the North American context such uprising. We see it as completely outside of legitimate ways of knowledge making and space making. So I think I participate, I think in the, even the criminalization of such uprising. But I think that remaking that relationship between sovereignty and property which is at stake in both these questions can take can only take place not through the institutionality of things like planning, but through uprising. Hi. You know, I think, I think the South African example is an interesting one. It was really as as a result of struggle over over many decades that a democratic government came into power and established a land restitution process through which people could approach a court. And claim back their land. The restitution court was funded and allowed government to buy land to give back to people. It's an interesting example and we have to ask why, why has it, why is it not really worked, why has it been so slow. What we have to point to, again, and then is the commodification of land and the property market. It is simply not been possible for state to sufficiently fund the restitution process to to get land back to people quickly enough. So the institution is there. The intention is there. What is blocking it. It's it's back to it's back to property and it's back to commodification of land. But it's possible. And you want to go. You know, I just wanted to say really quickly that when I think about this in the American context and it's somewhat had to do with what Ananya was saying about criminalization, is that this is when I think about what works or what has potential is abolitionist planning that frame, because the criminalization piece. Not just the monetization of land is the monetization of people and bodies and abolitionist planning and planners have an opportunity and have looked at ways in which we can decriminalize we can shift large budgets away from policing. And while this is a different it's a somewhat different answer a different question when you're talking about what has the possibility, and what is born fruit especially in this context I think it's when that's when the shift to the abolitionist frame for planners become something tangible and viable. In terms of some kind of progress. That's all I want to say. I also think it's a you know it's a million dollar question. And, but I see planning, like most policy areas and endeavors of collective organization is the field of struggle. And it's a field of struggle we have particular negotiation struggles and demonstrations and what are the tools in our toolkit. The tools in our toolkit is a conceptualization is how we actually articulate the situation. Recently wrote an article about vertical versus horizontal terminology. What is the landscape of articulation. Now it's critical scholars and activists. I think we have to imbue the work of power into the terms. And I think the coloniality of planning actually does that it highlights the idea that colonial type relations, right, of expansion domination exploitation and essentialization, keeping you together and apart all the time, you're part of the same system, but you're lower in your status. I think this is this is one of the tools that we have is to articulate it. And then of course to struggle against it with our students with our communities with all kind of possibilities that exist. And let's not forget that colonialism is illegal. It's a crime, it's a crime against humanity if you talk about international law now we have to import that to the city. This is why I want to ask Vanessa for example I mean you talk about a liberal state. But I was talking about urban citizenship, urban citizenship translates nowadays in the 21st century sometimes more importantly than state citizenship. And inside cities in particular metro areas you can have colonial type relation what I said, it's not colonialism but coloniality of the power set that people keep millions of people in the Mitchell Plains without proper planning without proper facilities with the danger of being evicted. Right, so I wasn't quite sure why, you know, was the aversion of using this kind of terms were of course it's not alone. We're talking about a multitude of factors. But I think it is a good discourse to highlight the oppression that existed planning and to challenge the planners that on the face of it, of course all committed to equality, prosperity, equity. So this is our role I think to highlight it to expose it and to struggle against it. Thank you so much. I have another set of questions from a Janice Berry and a couple other that I think we can. Basically, it's, and I read the part from Janice Berry but also speaks to other to other questions. She's wondering if the panelists might reflect further on what decolonization demands of planning theory and what more work we need to do in terms of pulling out differences between settler colonialism new colonialism post colonialism. I don't know of what the terms Vanessa Watson used in her comments, and to think about context and so do we need to be careful about using the term decolonization to broadly and I think I think it's interesting because each one of you have a different stand about what, and I think it points to the fact that we don't have a one definition which is good of what decolonial mean and decolonizing mean and I think each one of you have a different stand about what decolonial mean and I think that speaks maybe these questions are speaking and asking you maybe to more expand on that the differences and maybe what we're looking for when we talk about that if we want to look for the colonial planning. And I think you know with with realism and with the south eastern perspective and I totally join Vanessa with with the idea that this is important this is of course the vast majority of the world. The West that produces most of the knowledge is maybe it's less than a fifth of the world let's remember where we are we are the majority right but from there also come different perspectives. There are some homologies if you like, one of them is the very idea that there is no horizon, there is no redemption. The life for generation is a struggle, just like in Lebanon. So, of course we hope for better but to decolonize is the process anymore and 11. You know there is the experience of generations is so much so that it's a very western or northern perspective you know that you can actually reach a solution that you actually can reach some kind of of an ideal of utopia. In the every day in the shades of gray of life I think decolonizing is a project. It's a project will never be complete because they will always be new colonizations. I had one slide that I didn't have time to show as usual I'll sneak it in the Q&A. It was about the digital world. The digital world now is colonizing us in various way and predicted previously incredibly powerful cooperation they can even silence the president of the United States right Twitter and Facebook. Now what does that do to the relation between the various groups in the city, you know, in terms of literacy technology surveillance data is the new. What I'm saying that not to glorify the digital world is that they were constantly been new frontiers. And as planners we really have to think about equality, radical equality, collective and individual equality is not always simple, which of course will include substitution and compensation for damage suffered but but also as a horizon, total equality is a constant project of decolonizing the relations. Anyone wants to add. I think I want to speak to the students out there as I answer this question, because I have interesting conversations with them about their careers, for example. So as we talk about what planners are capable of doing and how they're supposed to be thinking and acting in a decolonial way and what does it all mean. For a lot of them, they don't anticipate necessarily going into work in a system to necessarily go and work in a government. And I'm wondering how much we are preparing people, these young people who are going out into planning, ready to change the world who don't anticipate that that means I have to go and change an institution. I think that's part of the decolonizing. I know we're talking about systems one of the systems I'm talking about is planning education here is how well we're equipping people to go out with this thinking and build new apparatus, a new apparatus for planning in a decolonial way, new vehicles, even outside the nonprofit industrial complex like how are we doing that so that's just sort of coming to mind as we're talking about. What can you do if you are a planner and you work for the state, even though I know that's not always the assumption but that's pretty baked into what we're talking about here. And so, I would say that we have some serious things to consider and planning education. Around how much we're preparing people to, you know, pass the AICP and then go out there and have this career, and then how much we're also preparing them to tear things down. And some of us do that very well. Some of them are on this panel, in terms of preparing people to go out and build new things and do things in new ways. But I think that's a big part of our conversation here we have to attend to wherever we are. Yes, I'm sure Ananya and Vanessa and Aaron have a lot to say about planning education because they're all involved in different ways of activism at the intersection of education and practice. I mean, I think that's a really important conversation maybe we'll get to have a bit of it. I wanted to also address the question that Janice Barry posted in the Q&A. I mean, so I do think there's a conversation to be had around what do we mean by planning and what are the planning futures for which we are educating our students. And I will say that I am struck in the US context by the proximity that even our outside the system planners have or must have to stake power. So that is very striking to me, and even outside the nonprofit industrial complex, right. So I think that that piece of it, and here, paying attention to what Vanessa noted that these are very specific forms of deep difference right. So that is a conversation to be had. I like to teach the history of Anglo-American planning as one rooted in the settling and making a property, right, but also one that has always had an anarchist history. That is always in fact thought about property is theft. And that is perhaps a useful way in which to read something like even Ebenezer Howard's Garden Cities. But as I said, that's a whole that's a whole nother discussion, right about how do we tell a different history of planning. I worry, of course, about yawking the term decolonizing to the term planning and have already knows this. Not only because more broadly, particularly indigenous studies scholars have expressed great concern about the way in which the term decolonizing is now in circulation, especially in North America. This is in which that term runs the risk then of whitewashing quite violent ongoing relationships of land grab. So, one example of this is that our universities which are land grab universities and have have sort of streamlined such things as land acknowledgment special advisor to the chancellor on indigenous affairs, etc, etc. I'm not refusing to consider in any way land repatriation or reparations in fact the conversation around land reparations or repatriation seems impossible in established planning circles. Right. So when, when, you know, I think they've been similar conversations around abolitionist planning. In my mind is the very powerful critique of abolitionist planning penned by Duchenne dossier, who, you know, whose piece was titled there is no room for planners in the movement for abolition. I think the planning has been a secretary of colonial and capitalist extraction that suddenly can't claim to be abolitionist. I know that's not the kind of abolition planning that Andrea's talking about. And I think Duchenne made the argument about insurgent planners and their role. But I do think the planning, like any other form of institutionality likes to appropriate criticality and make it its own. And I think that's what I want to push against. So that we are to think about decolonizing planning it's not just about the decolonizing of knowledge it's not just about the use of a different language. It is about undoing the land property, colonization relationships that have made this settler slaveholder imperial democracy that is the US. If I might interject here with it with a question that has been on my mind it's not fully formulated but it's about the decoupling of property from from planning and the implication like first how can you decouple property from planning but the second is about I'm all for like, thinking our free thinking property but from from from this space where I'm talking to today from today but at the same time I'm wondering about all the Palestinians and the black families that Andrea was talking about that are actually they are very much wanting for the property to to really legitimate and to rethink about how they were dispossessed and to read to be to for equal distribution redistribution of wealth for reparation for etc. So how can you tell people, I mean that's why I think this is a great conversation because you cannot generalize because while here the capitalization the real estate the dispossession the land grab requires us to decouple the couple property from any kind of social justice initiative. I think in other places of the world like for example Palestinians living under the state of Israel would argue differently for property they still hold the keys wherever they all called the decades after they have left, or black families who have been gentrified or indigenous people who had been dispossessed. And so I wonder if you can just briefly talk to this question that I always when I talked to my students about like property is at the heart of our problems, but at the same time I think about all the other people who are holding the keys in yearning for that property that they will expel on under all sorts of colonial institutions. I'm so glad you brought that up here but because that's essentially, you know what I was wrestling or beginning to wrestle with within 15 minute period which is the question of property for African Americans, and how intertwined the idea of owning property is about owning oneself, because we were property. And it becomes a very different set of questions that again are reflected very well in the abolitionist conversation about owning oneself, and not being criminalized. But the decolonial question is very complicated and I guess what I'm looking for what I'm exploring in my talk is this new relationality with way. Reclaiming the aspects of relationality we have with land and self governance in a way that doesn't merely mimic the colonial. And how do you get at that and how do you do that is the work I'm engaged in very simply with a reclaiming not not a non critical reclaiming that the past was somehow perfect, but that there was some aspects of the relationship between individuals and land. During, let's say the reconstruction period that required a particular relationship with indigenous communities that often was intertwined that often was familial. Always, but in many instances. And so there has to be and I think there's great writers I'd be remiss if I didn't talk about TL King and other black geographers that are deeply engaged in black and indigenous land conversation. This is a huge conversation. But I think what it comes to planning our difficulty, and especially in historic preservation is we have these tropes and these attachments. So it's either, you know, are you interested in more money to support, or to make sure that black farmers have their do. And in that conversation, you know because of the relationship between African Americans and the USDA, for example, in that conversation, where do we talk about the colonization. They're not interested in talking to you. Now they're talking about justice. I think that that it's very, very important that we begin to have these grounded conversation as the redistribution redistribution of money and so called, you know, addressing poverty and all of that is going to be in our orbit very soon as 1.9 trillion gets out there. And if we are in this conversation we are now and not engaged with what that is about to do and where that money will go. Then this conversation might as well never have existed because it's going to change the dynamic between certain African American parts of the African American community, who will be able to attain that money and use it in certain ways, if we're not looking at this fundamental relationality internalization of some of those ideas about sovereignty and land that are colonial are complicit with the colonial right. Aaron you're muted. I can't agree more that there is a direct relation between sovereignty powers of pressure and colonization and property. And of course it's complex. I would first also say that the worry that an ananya expressed of course is a real worry. Every critique can be sanitized can be co-opted can be used by the you know it's our role to continue the real meaning of something and I remember I was a year in Africa last year and I remember that they kept talking about decolonizing geography, and it actually meant adding a couple of references to a reading list that someone from Africa and all this was, you know, perhaps good intention but to talk about decolonization is is about the concrete life the oppression, the segregation, the evictions, etc. So I think this is up to us to use it first of all, credibly colonization is not discrimination. And I think that staff has a very good discussion about oppression versus subordination or their various degree we have to talk about when it is when people actually are structurally institutionally and legally in a lower position in a lower status within the same kind of society and then they are colonized. And we have many other fields of discrimination of inequality of movement that that are important enough so I think I take this criticism very very well but again like Vanessa said when you move away from the liberal societies, it's much more concrete it's much more obvious. And, you know, with with with that, I also think about property in many other ways, luckily in the Middle East, we still have property system that are not profit oriented but sub divided private freeholds, and you can see the great advantage of them. I can even talk talk about my mom, who is 94 year old with ever never had property but she has had an undisputed security all her life, because she wasn't a collective community. So I think among the Bedouins to tribal kind of land holding is very very important, although the state is trying very hard to privatize it to dispossess and privatize at the same time. But I think we have to also imagine as part of decolonization or reimagining planning is to be integrated with reimagining the property system to give people security not profit. It's not a long discussion but all this is very very important for education, I think. I just wanted to add to that because I think this is such an important question and the points that Andrea and Orin have made speak to the fact that, as Nicholas Bomin would say there isn't a singular enactment of property, property is a set of material and discursive enactment possessive individualism is only one one enactment of property. So in the movements in LA whose work I foregrounded in the reclaiming movements in in sort of the rent, the talent union movements and the argument around rent is theft. What is very much at stake is a rethinking of those property relations that make up the US as a post colony. Right. And it's not just about the decommodification of land and housing, I think that's one piece of it, you know what a social rent in relation to the social wage. But this is about precisely as Andrea was saying what does it mean then to make an argument about place and belonging and memory that is not tied to possessive individualism. And I will say that I know Libby Porter is speaking later today, this is something that Libby Porter pointed out a while ago that some of these claims makings take place in the language, and in the framework of possessory of recognizability. And it is important for us to think about other forms of recognizability that are not about possessive individualism. Amazing conversation I like, I'm many people in the chat they can't have enough I can't have enough. So, unfortunately we don't have enough enough time to respond to all the questions we'll send them later in case you want to think read through them. I want to thank you all again for this amazing amazing conversation for the food for thought for like giving this for in a right energizing us again. And it's been a pleasure, and we continue we reconvene at two at 3pm EST time Eastern New York time basically with another panel panel three on rethinking planning from the margins with again another set of amazing scholars and others there is a caldera akira Rodriguez James Spencer Libby Porter and moderated by Dahlia Wendell from MIT. Thank you again so much thank you and I thank you Andrea thank you and thank you Vanessa, and hope next time we meet in person.