S7 #4 | The Sufi Guest House | Kerim Güç (Kerim Vakfı)

S7 #6 | Border Work | Tyson Yunkaporta

Show Notes * Magpie Migrations * Making ceremony among tourists * From sacred entities to souvenirs * Lawful voyaging: the three pillars of ancestral travel * Culture-bound syndrome / sorry rocks * Telling story / experiencing the more-than-human * Sex tourism: The twisted impulses of sexual energy * If you don’t move with the land, the land will move you * Men’s and women’s business * Falling in love with travel Get full access to Chris Christou at chrischristou.substack.com/subscribe [https://chrischristou.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_4]

S7 #5 | Coastal Colonialism in Jamaica | Dr. Devon Taylor (JaBBEM)

On this episode, my guest is Dr. Devon Taylor, the President of the Jamaica Beach Birthright Environmental Movement (JaBBEM), an advocacy group founded in 2022 that fights for equitable beach access and environmental justice in Jamaica. He is a Biomedical Research Scientist and environmental and social justice advocate who leads efforts to repeal the colonial-era Beach Control Act of 1956, which he describes as discriminatory and a barrier to public access. JABBEM uses legal tools, including the Prescription Act of 1882, to establish long-standing community rights to beaches and rivers. The group is currently involved in multiple court cases, including those concerning Bob Marley Beach, Little Dunn’s River, and Flanker/Providence Beach, to secure public access and prevent privatization by luxury resorts like Sandals. Dr. Taylor emphasizes that beach access is a fundamental human right and reparative justice issue, arguing that Jamaica’s beaches—national treasures—should be accessible to all Jamaicans, not just tourists. He calls for government action to replace outdated laws with modern legislation that ensures constitutional protection for public access and sustainable management of coastal resources. Show Notes * The violence and displacement from which JaBBEM emerged * The Beach Control Act of 1956 * Coastal colonialism / plantation tourism * Shoreline personhood and the birth of humanity * The medicinal space of the sea * Taking the fight to the courts in Jamaica * Pan-Caribbean solidarity and dilemmas * Critical mass: advice for guests/tourists Homework Jabbem - Website [https://www.jabbem.org/] - Instagram [https://www.instagram.com/jabbemjabbem/] - Facebook [https://www.facebook.com/jabbem.jabbem/] - YouTube [https://youtube.com/@jabbem?si=LmZhVbrYev-FY4zy] Stronger Caribbean Together [https://strongercaribbeantogether.org/] Transcript Chris: [00:00:00] Welcome Dr. Taylor, to the End of Tourism Podcast. Thank you for being willing to join me today. And I’m wondering to start, if you could share with our listeners where you’re sitting today and what the world looks like there for you where you are. Devon: Yeah. You know, funny enough, I’m sitting just outside of Washington, DC today. Chris: Oh. Devon: You know, I just got back from Jamaica. All right. And I’m just outside the capital of the “free world” today. Yeah, but Jamaica is home, so we just got back from some community service work, advocacy work. And I’m happy to engage the End of Tourism audience and share what the experience and the livity of the Jamaican people is like. Chris: Hmm. Thank you, Dr. Taylor. As far as I understand, you are the president of Jabbem, the Jamaica Beach Birthright [00:01:00] Environmental Movement, which was founded in 2022 as “a grassroots organization acutely aware of the adverse effects of misguided development and environmental injustices to beaches, beach property, and sensitive terrestrial ecosystems” And so I’d like to ask you, Devin, a bit about your story, about how and why Jabbem was created, if I can. Devon: Yeah. So my story is the story of my community - my community of Steer Town, a coastal community that I grew up in, but that’s also the story of the descendants of enslaved Africans, really, and a former slave plantation known as Jamaica, right? There’s a history that is rooted in displacement, disposition, and disempowerment of a people, you know. [00:02:00] So, Jabbem is a response to continued injustice, injustice not only to black bodies, you know what I mean? And the indigenous ones, the Tainos who were there first, right? But also the desecration of land, right? Land have a relationship with human beings and with indigenous people, and we have a relationship with land. But all that get disturbed, through this “development.” So, you know, myself, my community, experienced that displacement and disposition and disempowerment in 2019, at the heights of COVID. When our childhood beach that our community has been using for more than a hundred years, you know, we were displaced from it. And the displacement. It’s around 29 acres of beachfront land that the community... as an extension of our community that we use for everything, everything that Jamaicans use the beach [00:03:00] for, right? You know, recreation, fishing, spirituality, I mean, courtship, artisan work, farming you know all that space that offers a multitude of opportunities, multitude of possibilities, right, which made it that node, that connectivity to the community of Steer Town, to the community of Chalky Hill, to the community of Epworth and Davis Town and, you know, parts of, and tourism mecca of Ocho Rios. You know what I mean? This is what this space represented. It was a community that birthed ideas and continual livity of our people. And we were displaced from it, displaced from it by force. You know, a force that was part of the state, the Jamaican police, private security, the political class. It was violent. It was a very [00:04:00] violent displacement. And so, if you have ever experienced disposition and displacement, it unsettles you. It arms you. You know, I mean, you are rattled, right? And so, we had to figure out how this happened and how we need to move, because we’re a resilient people, we never give up. This is where we’re able to survive 500 years of chattel slavery. So, it took us a minute to kinda understand what was happening and knowing that we have to move from the grassroots. We have to come together in solidarity and farm something that could push back at our displacement. So Jabbem was born through state-sponsored violence and private violence, the displacement of communities from beach ecosystems, from the sea, in that time. Chris: Thank you for that, Dr. Taylor. You know, you mentioned 2019 as a kind [00:05:00] of watershed moment for your community and for the creation of Jabbem. But of course most people have some understanding that the tourism industry has a long history on the island, in Jamaica. And there’s something that arises quite a bit in the work of your organization and in the interviews and in the media that’s come out, and specifically around a law that was created or enacted in 1956, The Beach Control Act in Jamaica. And so, I’m wondering if you would be willing to offer up a little bit about this law, why it’s so infamous in your country and maybe a little something of what was happening in Jamaica before 2019 and perhaps since that act, that law was created in the fifties. Devon: Yeah. The struggle for beach rights, you know, access to the beaches use of the sea [00:06:00] is historical, right? There are giants before my time who stood in the fight. You know what I mean? We had Dr. Carolyn Cooper, you know what I mean, very instrumental. John Maxwell. We have Kabu Ma’at Kheru. We have Esther Figueroa and many other Jamaicans who lend their voice to a struggle, observing and seeing that, with every new hotel that’s built, every new villa that’s built, every new guest house that’s built, is a loss of the Jamaican people to really continue to enjoy spaces that they have been doing since childhood. Right. You know, as you mentioned, there’s a long history of tourism in Jamaica. Yes, there is. I mean, Jamaica is still a colony of England. The King Charles is still the king of Jamaica, right? With all that said, Jamaica does have its prime minister who runs the country, and the king don’t really get in his way, so all the experiences of the Jamaican people now is [00:07:00] actually a product of the political class that is running the country. And the tourism model at one point was more integrated, right? There was more a blend of locals and visitors traversing in beaches and enjoying these spaces, walking around in the country, participating in other cultural activities that are not based along the beach, right? You would come into villages, enjoy villages. You know, that was true for, also, my community. My community was close to a couple of these hotels and guest houses at the time. Many members in our community work in these spaces. Some of those tourists would venture up into the village and enjoy all that we offer, you know, in the Jamaican life. I should point out that musical albums, between Keith Richards of the Rolling Stones was made with members of of the Steer Town community. “Wingless Angel” is the name of that album. So this was a time when it was more [00:08:00] of that kind of integration. But the colony that Jamaica is right, and just pre-independence, Jamaica became independent in 1962... a law was passed in 1956 just on the eve of independence, which you alluded to earlier - The Beach Control Act of 1956 - and we’re still trying to fully grasp why there was a need to put a law in place that says that no Jamaicans have the right to the foreshore, or the floor of the sea and was translated by the head of the National Environment and Planning A gency (NEPA), that we do not have the right to swim, to bathe, to fish, to walk along the foreshore. All those rights are vested in the government, in what they basically call “the crown,” controls all that kind of things. And the thinking we are trying to understand, is that the [00:09:00] result is very clear, that it’s stripped us of any inherent rights to the foreshore. Stripped us. And very important for accessing beaches is the rights, the land. So you cannot get to the beach or the sea without traversing land. Chris: Right. Devon: And so this legislation, really inherently, did not give us any land rights. And that is what you know happened post-emancipation. There was never any reparative justice around the rights of descendants of enslaved Africans to land, where compensation was given to the enslavers. They got millions and millions of dollars when slavery was abolished. There was no compensation to the descendants in any form. No rights to land, no distribution of land, nothing [00:10:00] that was constitutionally put in place, nothing for provisions were made. In fact, the secretary of the islands made sure that they put tariffs so high on government land that the descendants could not afford them. So it kept the Jamaican people, and for that case, most of the Caribbean Islands’ peoples, landless, right? So we walk out of slavery as a homeless people, despite the many rebellions and revolutions that were fought by our ancestors to free our people. You know, the powers to be never gave us any of that rights to land. And so, the 1956 Beach Control Act is consistent with colonial logic of dispossession and disempowerment. Chris: Wow. Devon: And that’s what that legislation has really done to us. Chris: Wow. Yeah. I mean some of the statistics that have [00:11:00] come up in Jabbem’s research is that at least 35% of Jamaica’s GDP is tourism, that 25% of all jobs on the island are tourism-based jobs, that 70% of tourism dollars go to foreign investors while only 10% goes to the community and 20% going to the government. Then finally, less than 1% and maybe less of Jamaica’s shoreline is accessible to Jamaicans. You refer to this, I think as coastal colonialism. Is that right, Devin? Devon: Yeah, it is coastal colonialism. It’s a kind of plantation tourism, right? And the numbers speak, for themselves. I mean, they’re very consistent with colonial logic around ownership of land, possession of land, what land is used for, and who the [00:12:00] usage of land benefits. The resources of the land benefit the colonial master. Of course, in this case, it is the government of Jamaica with it’s elite. You know, the elites are sometimes Jamaican. Sometimes they’re multinational corporations. So all of these kind of things are linked to plantation tourism and the exploitation of labour. Now there’s no way that you can have, in 2024, a tourism product made 4.3 billion US dollars, and more than 3 billion of it, did not stay in Jamaica. It may not even enter the country, because of the way all these transactions are done. You could book your tour from overseas, pay for your hotel from overseas, you pay for your flight, you pay all these things. So those dollars does not even enter the country. Even many of the Jamaican tours, their banking companies are in international spaces. Many of these entities are the owners of these hotel, these [00:13:00] corporations, also registered in other countries. You’ll have some of them registered in other Caribbean islands, St. Lucia and other tax havens across the planet. So, I mean, all of these things are very similar to the way that the plantation work. And then of course the workers and the exploitations of the worker, being paid very low wages, wages that are not livable wages. I mean, they’re overworked. And so, the whole thing is consistent just the way the plantation works, right? And so we have to call it what it is. And at the same time, you work at the hotel and you can’t enjoy the beach, right? Not while you’re working there. Neither can you go home and say, “I’m taking my family of five to where I work, and I’m gonna put my towel down on the beach and take a swim, or I’m going to go roll out, and I’m going to fish. So I mean, the whole model, as to how it’s constructed right now is very [00:14:00] oppressive, and is a continuation of the systems of oppressions that were characteristic of the plantation. So it makes it a plantation tourism model that the Jamaican government is supporting. And it is the government of the country because as you mentioned, you know less than 1% of beaches in the country is accessible by the Jamaicans, right? The country, the island is 494 miles around right now. 150 miles of it is technically sandy, right? Most of it is are rocky terrain, but the rocky terrains are beautiful terrains. You know, these are terrains that we all meditations from. You know what I mean, we go fish at, you find your moment in these spaces and they’re becoming far and few, and that is supported by just the way all the legislation is constructed, and no government in the history of [00:15:00] “independent Jamaica” from 62, right... The law will be on the book for 70 years, and none of them changed that law to empower the Jamaican people with inherent rights. Not just to... because I know sometimes the reasoning is that, “well, we just wanna go to the beach to swim.” Well, we are thinking about a new imagination of our relationship with the coastline that we have been having for many, many, many decades. It wasn’t just swimming. You know? No, no, no. It’s beyond that. So, they may project that that’s all we need: is just to go into the water. Right? I mean, absolutely. That’s part of it. Absolutely we need to go there where our deads were washed upon the shores from these slave ships, that many were thrown overboard, many jumped overboard. But livity along the coastline for fisher folks, for vendors, for those who harvest [00:16:00] seaweed, right? For those baptisms, for the artists who get their inspiration there, for farmers who farm there, all of these possibilities, that we used to use the space for. We are saying that we should be able to continue doing so. Right? And we are fighting for this kind of a justice in this space. Chris: Wow. I mean, this is a theme, a through line, that that comes up in so many of the conversations I have with people like yourself who are fighting for land and land rights in their homes, in their places. It seems there’s so much in common. One of the strange things... I don’t know how strange it is really, but I was reading recently on the history of what they call “the enclosure of the commons” in Britain from I think the 13th or 14th century on, and how slowly, little by little, the rich landowner started kind of carving away, the land from the peasants and forcing them into the [00:17:00] towns and cities to work for wages, essentially, and to undermine, not only their ancestral relationships with the land, the places where they’re dead were buried for many, many centuries, but also the kind of lived spiritual relationship they have with it. Right. And so, this is something that I’ve seen on Jabbem’s website regarding the organization’s principle goals. And that one of them is “the promotion of environmental personhood to beaches, selected rivers and important land formations to protect nature for future generations and to safeguard the intrinsic value of nature by recognizing them [that’s the beaches, the selected rivers, and land] as living entities.” Now, I think this is something that’s a common understanding, if not something that ecologists and environmentalists today campaign for, which is giving waterways and [00:18:00] land rights, but also legal and judicial protections. And so I’m curious, how do you think giving legally-bound personhood to land and water could change the lives or the relationships that travellers and local people have to those places? You know, when we come to live our lives in the presence of rivers and beaches and land as alive and sentient and as having history, their own personal history, how do you think our relationships to places might change, either as tourists or locals. Devon: Yeah. I mean these ideas are not distant to the human consciousness, because it was like that in the beginning. If we look at the scientific history of earth, right? You know, the sea, oceans are the birthplace of humanity. We crawled out the [00:19:00] sea onto land, and where did we enter first? It was on the shoreline? So, historically, ancient shoreline is the birthplace of humanity. And we just imagine, what happened in that space was the beauty of evolution. Evolution, physically. Evolution, spiritually. Evolution, in all ways and form you could think of. That space was a space of a multitude of births and rebirths. A space of energy, that led to all that we know it right now - plants and animal life, running around and terra firma. So I mean, that recognizes that this space of a right to exist because without it, I mean, I and I would not be in existence in this present formation. So it’s not really a kind of thinking that is outside of the grasp of humanity. [00:20:00] It’s just that a version of humanity turned its back against nature, you know, to degrade it, to use it without recognizing the relationship that it had with us. And so to really raise these ideas, that the space has its own consciousness, has its own intrinsic value, has its own understanding of I and I, knowing what I needed within such time. Give it to I so that I could thrive and manifest. So it did its work and it continues to do its work. It’s just that humanity, a version of humanity, is robbing the space of its ability to continue to serve as a crucible for next generation, even the protection of the planet Earth. And you will hear it all the while that the shoreline is very important to protect us against the fallout of climate change, in terms of [00:21:00] protecting land. You know, we hear those words, but we don’t live those words. So I think the recognition of personhood status to these kinds of ecosystem will bring us back to our relationship with the land, whereas we are custodian of it and it is custodian of us. And so that kind of duality, between man and environment can reign again, so the environment can serve its role in the next phase of human consciousness, right? It’s not just a space to degrade, but it offers many things. I’m sure you go to the beach and when you go to the beach, you’re alive. And you feel more alive when you go to a beach that is rustic, that when you look around you, you hear the sounds of nature. You can feel the beauty of that sun under your foot, and the smell that you are smelling is smell of a natural coastal forest, a natural ocean. You’re not smelling [00:22:00] chlorine or suntans, or you’re not hearing the bustling of engine mechanizations. You know what I mean? All what we have created in these spaces, right? You’re not seeing the beautiful crabs run, the crustaceans in the space. You’re not seeing the vibrancy of all the creatures that live in the ocean at near shore, because you take out hectares of grass beds, which is necessary for replenishing life. You know, the ocean produce more oxygen than the land, because earth is more than 70% water. So the importance there of understanding personhood status is for us to understand our livity and our life is critically linked to this space. And that’s what we’re trying to say. Understand this space for what it meant for human evolution, what it means for our continued survival, [00:23:00] and allow it to do so, but we have to give it that kinda legal protection. We have to make generations coming on board understand what it is in terms of how critical it is for livity. My work is based in the gift economy. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Chris: Wow. That’s beautiful. Yeah. Thank you so much Dr. Taylor. When I think about all the times that I spent on beaches, I mean maybe not as many as other people, but I also think about how much, in our time, in the last few generations that so many people go to the beach to relax. And you know, as far as I know, this wasn’t a very common thing around the world before the Industrial Revolution - to go to the beach to relax, at least en masse, at least with so many people. And it makes me wonder, what might be happening mythically or mythologically or mythopoetically, when people go to the beach, they lie down in front of the [00:24:00] sun and in front of the ocean, and in terms of what you were saying, I always wondered, this seems like a kind of devotion that people are almost, in a religious way, devoting their bodies to being in this place with the sun and the ocean. But also in this place, as you mentioned, just between the ocean and the land. Right. The shoreline. And while it seems like a kind of religious devotion, maybe the fact that it’s kind of commodified and industrialized and manipulated in such a way so that people don’t recognize the life or lives of the shoreline, of the rivers, of the beach, of the ocean, et cetera, that there’s something in there that humans are longing to express, but it gets turned into this really, really strange and almost demented form of, you know, “oh, take my picture and let’s put it on Instagram” and all that kind of thing, right? So yeah, thank you for that, Devin. It was really beautiful to [00:25:00] hear. And for our listeners who can see some of the work that Jabbem is doing on their website, there are many, many campaigns that your organization is involved in in Jamaica, and some of them involve court cases, but I’m curious if you’d be willing to comment, I guess, on how your organization, how your team has been dealing with the campaigns, what kind of successes or failures, what kind of learning has come your way. What can you tell us about the work that you’ve been doing with the people on the ground there and what, if any kind of successes you’ve had so far. Devon: Yeah. Yeah. So, so we have just been around like four years now. This is our fourth year. Right. You know, kinda listening to how you were kinda talking about the reverence when one goes into these spaces, because the sea is medicine. It’s a medicine space. And I think that’s why a lot of people gravitate towards it. And what we are trying to do [00:26:00] is saying that everyone should be able to experience their birthplace, which is the foreshore, right? And so our fight and our struggle is that, as the United Nation Convention and the Law of the Sea puts it, the sea is the common heritage of humankind. So what we are doing is consistent with what the United Nation goal, that this space, this sea, this ocean, these rivers are common edge heritage of humanity. And so, we must be able to access them, engage them, we must be able to experience them and they must remain protected for all generations. So, Jabbem’s campaign on the ground are not campaigns that are just for the liberation of the communities, where these beaches are. But it’s for the community of humanity, that when they come into our country, they will experience the ecological heritage of the country, not [00:27:00] restricted by how much money you have in your pocket, by how much you could pay to go to one of these all inclusive hotels. Or one of these high-end villas that are encroaching in the sea, or any of these hotels that they are now building in the sea, is that you could’ve travelled from another country to experience what the foreshore and the sea - which is your heritage, as a human - in Jamaica. So the campaign, we are fighting for liberation of the coastline, right? So we have five of these cases right now in the Jamaican court system, right? Yeah. We have the case fighting for Bob Marley Beach. I mean, I could speak uniquely to what these spaces symbolize, about what they have been for the Jamaican people. You know, that particular beach has been a space where Rastafari, who are oppressed in Jamaica as a black liberation movement, with its central spiritual nucleus being [00:28:00] Emperor Haile Selassie I. That beach was the cradle of where thoughts and ideas were born in versions of Rastafari, and we had to move into protect that space because ultra-luxury hotels is slated to be built here that was going to displace the community. And so, that fight continues, right? We have the fightof Mammee Bay, which is my childhood space. As we explained to you earlier, you know, more than a hundred years of usage within this space, an extension of our community. It’s a space that provide livity for many, right? And we speak to Blue Lagoon, right? Very historical, very beautiful mix of salt and fresh water, which many underground springs being fed from the Blue Mountain, a space that was used by the indigenous Tainos and Africans used this space for spirituality, for food, for all that you could imagine beyond recreation. This space is being commandeered by elite private interests. We have that in the court. We’re fighting [00:29:00] our own government for liberation of the Blue Lagoon, which is a national monument, which would means that, “oh, can a national monument be privatized?” But Jamaican laws allow for this to happen. And if we don’t fight to protect the space for humanity, then you may not be able to see this majestic space. It is the same that is true for a Little Dunn’s River. Again, the intersection of a beautiful waterfalls with the Caribbean Sea, that was occupied by Rastafari from in the fifties. This space is majestic. You know, the rush of the water, the sound that we hear in this space, just brings you to these meditative spaces. You know, feel the blend of sea water meeting fresh water and how that turns into the warmth. Right. It is just beautiful. We are fighting for that and we are fighting... you know, our newest case is in Providence/F lanker in Montego Bay. One of the tours in mecca, which, you know, the hotel [00:30:00] giant, Sandal Resort International, applied to the National Environmental Planning Agency for a permit to build hotel rooms in the sea and to build villas on this land. And so we are in the courts trying to defend that, because when we lose these spaces, right, it’s not just Jamaicans lose. It’s just not, you know, “we have been ripped from our culture.” I mean, it’s that humankind loses. Humankind loses. You know, it’s cultural desecration, right? It’s exploitation. It’s a form of capitalism that see the concentration of wealth in the hands of few people. And the exploitation of labour and, degradation of coastal forests. So we are fighting with communities, so the way we work, every community that we go into expresses their willingness to protect their spaces. I mean, most of the time they reach out, because we’re grassroots. You know, we’re not a NGO. We don’t [00:31:00] operate and move like these spaces. We are truly community-run. You know, as members from the community that leads up those fights. And we collaborate and we build, because we are one people. And the struggle is led by these communities. You know, I mean, we are just networking the struggle across the island, just as the struggle for people across Earth is always finding brotherhood, sisterhood, and connection in the struggle for liberation. Chris: Amen. Amen, brother. I’m curious as well if that solidarity has reached beyond the island’s shoreline, if you have any brothers and sisters that you’ve been working with in other Caribbean islands or other countries to forward the cause. Devon: Yeah, man. Yeah, man. We work very closely with Stronger Caribbean Together Network. It’s a network with other Caribbean countries who are undergoing similar things, similar land struggles for coastal spaces all across the [00:32:00] Caribbean. You know, so while Jamaica has this Beach Control Act that gives us no inherent right to access the beaches and to use the sea, most of the other Caribbean islands, you can access the foreshore, and you can use the sea. All right. You know, Jamaica is one of the unique countries that does that. It’s not withstanding though that the tourism product across the Caribbean is now where most Caribbean economies are moving towards in terms of investment. So, they are building out these hotels and these overwater bungalows across the Caribbean, which is impacting lives and livelihood as well, because yes, you can go on some of these beaches, but you can’t truly enjoy them in their fullness. And they are building on these beaches, as well, which is also causing environmental issue. So, I mean, it’s funny that the commonality among Caribbean Islands, since the time of enslavement was plantation [00:33:00] economy, based on sugar and cotton and rum and all these things. And that was not good for us. And the region now is moving towards a very similar tourism model, that doesn’t pay its people as much. Seeing these lands, coastal lands, being owned by private interests, that is actually displacing the indigenous population, and the descendants of enslaved Africans from these spaces. So we’re not really benefitting at scale to the kind of tourism that is coming into the Caribbean. I mean, I think you are in Mexico, you are seeing it in different parts of Mexico too. I mean, wealthy people come and buy coastal lands or, lease them, I guess in the case of Mexico, of a slightly different kind of law where you, I don’t think you can own coastal lands. I mean, you have a right to beach, but there are barriers that are put in place that makes it difficult for you to sometimes traverse these spaces. And they’re intentional. [00:34:00] All right. You know, I mean, we have experienced them in Puerto Rico as well. You know, we’re seeing them emerging in places like Costa Rica and and in St. Lucia. In spaces, they’re wide open, but in spaces you can see the creep is coming, Because there’s a thing about capitalism where when it comes in, it takes everything. It swallows everything. It’s not a good political economic model, that takes the environment into consideration as to what it gives back to humanity. So it takes, and it takes, and it takes, and that’s not the sustainability that you will hear being preached on the planet. If we truly want to be sustainable, then the environment must have as much rights as a moving animal. It was here [00:35:00] before I and I. Earth existed before I and I. So, all I and I come, in the context of Earth, and treated Earth like it’s a second class entity in existence. It must be afforded that right. I mean, it’s only 3% of the planet that is water, fresh water. So, we know water is a very essential source for life. So we cannot allow this to be controlled. Access to the sea, access to the oceans, must not be controlled by no entity. We must freely move in these spaces. So Jabbem is at the view also that all coastal land must be public land. You know, must be public land. Chris: Yeah. I mean, I completely agree, you know, that offering rights in these regards can definitely change our understanding of how we are with land, of how we [00:36:00] are with other people. And I think that in order for the function of rights to work that we need to undertake a degree of responsibility for how we are with the land, with each other and the way we implement those rights. And you know, it’s been a great pleasure to speak with you Dr. Taylor. I know we’re just running out of time now. Before we finish off, I’d like to ask in regards to those responsibilities, you know, I’m sure this conversation or question has come up many times for you and your team, your people there on the island. If local people have a responsibility to their homes, to their places, to how they live and even host in those places, then what do you think the responsibilities are of the guest, of what we would otherwise call the tourists in our time? What do you think their responsibilities are when, either coming to your island or just even thinking of planning a vacation, because I’ve had many guests on the podcast who are [00:37:00] fighting similar fights as you and your people are. Some of them say, “please come, please come, and we’ll figure it out.” And some of them say, “please don’t come. This is not the time.” So I’m curious what those conversations like look like with Jabbem. Devon: Yeah. Yeah. No, it’s a good question, because we know that there are some countries that too much tourists goes there, and it has a critical mass that it can’t take anymore. And so there’s need to kind of regulate the number of people. You know, Jamaica’s not at that point right now. And myself and our team believe in freedom of movement. We see this as a world without borders, despite how politicians, and kings, have drawn artificial borders across the world to limit all your move, and requires visa to go in spaces and validation, that you can afford your stay within spaces. Yeah. We don’t have that view still, you know. Those kind of views are colonial logic, because [00:38:00] if that unconsciousness was birthed in humanity, then the migration of I and I outside of Africa would never have happened, and would’ve never had the multitude of nations that make this planet a very beautiful space. So freedom of movement is something that we cherish. So come to Jamaica. What we would say is that you need to do your homework. You don’t want to participate in injustice. You don’t want to participate in discrimination. You don’t want to participate in displacement and disempowerment of people, so do your homework. Before you come to Jamaica, look where you are staying. And check out whether or not these communities can freely access these beaches, use the sea, whether these fishing communities are thriving, as they were before, whether or not workers are compensated enough, whether the social health of the [00:39:00] community where this hotel is is good, whether or not the space that you are actually coming to is degraded. I think these are question for you to ask yourself. I would say you boycott those spaces, because I think one thing that the capitalists understand is that when his money is in danger, his behaviour changes. He first gets violent. He first gets violent and come after you, which would be we the people, but if we have the protection of the international community who is demanding a more equitable and just product interact with, a product that is fierce. So you can’t be charging me $3000-$6,000 to stay in a hotel room or $500 to stay in a hotel room, but you’re paying your people minimum wages that are, I think, $15,000 Jamaican dollar might be a hundred US dollars a week. You know, I mean, that is labour exploitation. “ Then I’m not going to go there. I’m gonna participate in some other products across the island.” [00:40:00] I know Airbnb have their own sets of issues, but though that’s a growing space in Jamaica. Small mom-and-pop establishments that are there. So it might not be easy, but search them out, you know? And we are getting ready to actually help the international community by importing some of that resources on our page, so you could see places that you could stay. So we are saying, being responsible, be responsible in your travels. And when you come, venture out. You know, come amongst our people, come experience the real Jamaican culture. You know, those things are important because tourism is an educational thing, right? It’s idea sharing, right? It is cultural exchange, right? It’s getting to feel outside of your normal space and getting to a new mindset to understand how other people are living around the world, and what adjustment you can make in your life. What can you impart? What can you take back? And these things are important for the [00:41:00] growth of humanity, for us to understand each other. I think these things prevent wars and conflicts. But contrary, you know, I mean, what we see world leaders are doing is driving domination of particular cultures, domination of particular economic systems that are unjust. And Jamaica is still growing. We still have a lot to offer to the world. We provide real good, music to the world, but we are beyond music. You know what I mean? We are very creative people of just a lot of goodness and a lot of niceness. So come to Jamaica, but you know what I mean? Be responsible in your travel and seek out the spaces that are equitable and just, and help in our struggle, advocate on our behalf in the international community for the repeal and replacement of the Beach Control Act of 1956, for different tourism models to come into play. Chris: Mm mm mm Thank you, Dr. Taylor. Our listeners can find out more about [00:42:00] the actions and campaigns on the Jabbem website, jabbem.org, if I’m not mistaken. Devon: That’s it. Chris: And I believe on Instagram as well. Devon: JabbemJabbem on Instagram. We are also on Facebook and on your Tiktoks, and all your other spaces. You know, I mean, and reach out to us. We have a GoFundMe page where we are trying to raise money for legal struggles. You know, we have many more cases that we need to push forward to protect communities. So if you want to help out, you know check us out on GoFundMe there. And when you come to Jamaica, just link us up and we’ll bring it to couple of the spaces and in some of the communities then you’ll get the real Jamaica, you know? Chris: So, I’ll make sure that all those links are up on the End of Tourism website and Substack page when the episode launches. And on behalf of our listeners, Devin, I’d like to wish you an amazing, amazing day and to your team, to your organization. It seems like you’re doing incredible work and with a really grounded and [00:43:00] equally political and spiritual basis or foundation for the way that you and your team walk in the world. I’m very, very grateful for that and for your time today. So, I wish you also the best of luck in the so-called, capital of the free world there, and all the best. Devon: Yeah, man. Give thanks. Give thanks, Chris, and give thanks to you and your team for having us. Give thanks. My work is based in the gift economy. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. Get full access to Chris Christou at chrischristou.substack.com/subscribe [https://chrischristou.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_4]

S7 #4 | The Sufi Guest House | Kerim Güç (Kerim Vakfı)

On this episode, my guest is Hasan Kerim Güç. Kerim graduated from Istanbul High School in 1992 and from Yildiz Technical University in 1996. Between 1997-2004, he completed his master's degree in Information Systems and Business Administration in Baltimore, USA. He returned to Turkey in 2010. Realizing that the treasure he had been looking for for 14 years was right in his own home, he took the position of Chief Editor at Nefes Publishing House in 2014. Kerim nourishes his business life with Sufi studies and is pursuing a doctoral degree from the Usküdar University Institute for Sufi Studies. He has published four books. Show Notes * Rejecting the American Dream * Anatolian and Sufi Hospitality * Sufis and the Ottomans * Tanri misafiri (“God’s guest”) * Togetherness, and the roots of Religion * When we welcome suffering, we make honey out of pain * Submission, servants and the prophet Mohammed * The Conference of the Birds / Stories from the Thirty Birds * Limits to hospitality in the Islamic world * Bereket / Baraka * Rumi’s Guest House Homework * Kerim Vakfı [https://kerimvakfi.org/en/] * Stories from the Thirty Birds [https://fonsvitae.com/product/stories-from-the-thirty-birds-from-i-to-him-hasan-kerim-guc/] * Cemalnur Sargut: A Sufi Life of Love, Suffering, and Divine Union [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2p4d7XxlkM] * Cemalnur Sargut Books [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i2p4d7XxlkMhttps://www.amazon.com/stores/author/B00J1UGWC0/allbooks?_encoding=UTF8&ref_=aufs_ap_ahdr_dsk_ab&pd_rd_w=uPgqS&content-id=amzn1.sym.7e190e19-9f6f-4df8-807a-5a7608594741&pf_rd_p=7e190e19-9f6f-4df8-807a-5a7608594741&pf_rd_r=140-0769624-1143010&pd_rd_wg=UwYng&pd_rd_r=a1b75c38-c7f6-4f4b-ab89-5a2ce5ffb7dd&ccs_id=a0cb5311-0e49-4e39-abe7-8c243ddfcf11] * Kerim Guc - Instagram [https://www.instagram.com/kerimguc/] * Kyoto University Kenan Rifai Center for Sufi Studies [https://kerimvakfi.org/en/vakfin-calismasi/kyoto-university-kenan-rifai-center-for-sufi-studies/] * Ken’an Rifâî Chair of Islamic Studies at Peking University [https://turkkad.org/en/hizmet/kenan-rifai-chair-of-islamic-studies-at-peking-university/] * University of North Carolina (UNC) Ken’an Rifâî Chair in Islamic Studies [https://turkkad.org/en/hizmet/university-of-north-carolina-unc-kenan-rifai-chair-in-islamic-studies/] Transcript Chris: [00:00:00] Welcome to the End of Tourism podcast, Kerim. Hoș geldiniz. Kerim: Thank you very much for having me. Chris: Yeah, it’s my pleasure. Thank you for joining me today. Perhaps you could tell our listeners, where you find yourself and what the world looks like there for you. Kerim: Well, first of all, I’m an immigrant also. I was an immigrant. I lived in the US for a while, and then I came back to to my own country. And things are very different here than there, than it is in US. From the perspective of what I did... I was actually an engineer, and I was working in the IT fields, and I was living the American dream, and then I realized that there was some kind of an emptiness, and this whole thing, and I decided to go back to Turkey and [00:01:00] study Sufism, and since my mother was actually a Sufi teacher. She decided to actually move this whole Sufism into academia. So, she basically established an institute in Istanbul - Üsküdar Istanbul - at the University of Üsküdar. The difference between this institute and the other schools, the people like myself, like engineers, coming from different disciplines, including lawyers and whatnot, they were not able to do their masters or PhDs in Sufism, because in other universities, they require for you to actually have theology backgrounds. But with this new establishment, we were able to educate people from all different disciplines and, [00:02:00] so we basically concentrated on ethics rather than the religion itself. So, a lot of people coming from different areas, especially the white-collar people, living this, like - how do I say that? - it’s a world of money and materialism and all kind of that stuff. They’re coming to our institute and realizing that money or career is not the only goal for life. And we started to concentrating on things like spirituality more than the materialist world. Chris: Thank you. Well, I’m very much looking forward to exploring these themes with you and a little bit of the work that you do with Kerim Vakfı. Kerim: Sure. Chris: And so for the last season of the podcast, I’m very much interested in focusing on different hospitality traditions and practices from around the [00:03:00] world, as I mentioned to you. And, one of the key themes of the podcast is radical hospitality. Now, the word “radical” comes from Latin and it means “rooted,” or we might even say “local” or “living.” And so. I’m curious if there are any radical hospitality practices that you think are unique to your place, to Istanbul, or to the Sufi community that you might be willing to share with us today? Kerim: Well, Istanbul, actually, is a very metropolitan city. So like the other metropolitan cities, we kind of lost that - what we call the hospitality of Anatolia. Anatolia is basically the Eastern part of Istanbul. And in Istanbul, we have, right now, 25 million people in a very small area. And in older days when the population was smaller, [00:04:00] we were able to show our hospitality, because the Turkish hospitality is very famous, actually. In this area the hospitality is very famous, including the, you know, Greek and Arab hospitality. Usually, it’s a little bit different than the western countries. For instance, we welcome people - we used to, and probably still, in the countryside - the people coming from other cities or countries or whatnot. The locals actually helped them out as much as possible. They even invite them to their own houses and let them stay for how long they want to stay. And this was kind of like a regular thing in the old days. It’s still going on very much in the eastern side of Turkey, pretty much in the countryside. [00:05:00] But Istanbul, like other cosmopolitan cities, we kinda lost that. You know, neighbourly things. We have a lot of neighbours and we we have always good... we used to have a lot of good relationship with them, but nowadays, again, because of this material world, we kind of lost this hospitality. So from the Sufi point of view, hospitality is very important. It’s interesting that you mentioned the “radical.” You were talking about where “radical” come from, but you didn’t talk about where “hospitality” comes from. See, there is a relationship between the hospital and the hospitality and the way the Sufis look at things is very much like the illnesses in our body are our guests. So, we don’t think that they’re bad for you. They’re actually [00:06:00] the guests of our house for a time being. So we show them the hospitality as much as we can, and then hopefully we say goodbye to them. Chris: Wow. Wow. That’s fascinating. I do know that the term “hospitality,” hospital is part of that, and hospital historically came from these notions of hospitality. I mean, in the western world in, and at least in the Christian world, there’s a kind of unauthorized history in which a lot of this hospitality, as you mentioned, that was offered to the stranger, was done by the families or the individual houses or homes within a community. A stranger would come and they would ask for hospitality, ask for food and shelter, and the family would have to decide whether to do that and how to do it. [00:07:00] And then at some point, the institution of the Church kind of stepped in and said, “you know what? You don’t have to do this anymore. When the stranger comes to the community, when they show up at your door, just send them to us. Just send them to the church and we’ll give them what they need.” And so this did a number of things, but the two most obvious ones, I think, are that the family, the individuals in the family and the community on a grassroots level, slowly ended up losing their ability, their unique kind of familial or personal ability to host the stranger. And at the same time, of course, the church used this as a way to try to convert, the stranger. Kerim: Right. Chris: And so I’m curious if there’s anything in that realm that you see in the Islamic world, maybe in the Sufi world... you mentioned that, since the [00:08:00] imposition of modernity and the industrial Revolution in the world, we see less and less possibilities for small-scale, grassroots hospitality between people, in part, because there’s so much movement, and of course, because the hospital has its brothers and sisters in the sense of the “hotel” and the “hostel.” Kerim: Absolutely. Chris: So, I’m curious if there’s anything like that that comes to mind for you in regards to the Islamic world. Kerim: Well, one thing is about like the Ottomans. The Ottomans, when they were coming from the Anatolia and then started conquering all those places in the Balkan area, Greece and Bulgaria, Hungary and all those places, after they actually conquered, they sent Sufis to those places. And, like in Hungary, there is a person, his name is [00:09:00] Gül Baba, which means “Rose Father.” That’s what they call him. He actually has his own tekke (tekke is like a church for Sufis). And this place, it’s like a school more, more like a school, but it’s a religious school. And in this tekke, he actually finds all those people with needs, and he pretty much helped them out with all those needs. And the people coming from different religions, they actually started liking people like from the Turks’ point of view, because the Turks were symbolized by these Sufi movements. And instead of, you know, pushing people to convert or demolishing the churches and rebuilding mosques and stuff. Instead of that, they actually [00:10:00] welcomed people from all over the world, or all over the place, basically, to stay in the tekke, to eat and to get education in the tekke. So this was a great strategy of Ottomans. That’s how they actually stayed in Europe for almost like 600 years. So that was very much like, you know, their strategy, I think. And in a good way. Chris: Yeah, you know, in my research I found out that there’s still Sufi orders in the Balkans a group called the Bektashi. Kerim: Right. Chris: And of course, with the very little historical understanding that I had, I was very surprised. I had no idea. But of course, when I eventually went to visit the regions that my father is from, I saw churches, synagogues, and mosques, all in the same little neighbourhoods. [00:11:00] So, quite an impressive kind of understanding that the major religions in those places could coexist for so long. And that in the context of someone who grew up in North America, who thought it was the opposite (previously) and such things are so difficult. Kerim: Right. Right. Chris: So, Kerim, a mutual friend of ours has told me, that in the Turkish language, there is a phrase (and excuse my pronunciation). The phrase is tanri misafiri. Kerim: Right. Chris: Which translates into English as something like “God’s guest.” Kerim: Right. Chris: Or “the guest sent by God.” Kerim: Right. Right. Chris: And so I’m wondering if you could speak about this phrase, maybe what it means to you and where you think it comes from? Kerim: Well, in Anatolia, it’s a very famous phrase. And like I said previously, you know anybody coming from somewhere else, who comes into somebody’s [00:12:00] house, is allowed to stay in the house as “the guest of God,” because we believe that God has sent that guest to us and we try to... you know, it’s more like making that guest happy means making God happy. So, that’s the understanding of older generations. In today’s metropolitan areas, I don’t think it’s possible because of the security problems and everything. But like I said, in the countryside, people are very welcoming when it comes to this, because it is very important that knowing that person is actually coming from God, from Allah, so we have to take care of that person as much as possible to please God, actually. So that’s how it is. I still see that in many cities in the [00:13:00] more eastern side of Turkey or south side of Turkey, or even north side of Turkey except in the bigger cities. But in the smaller cities, people are much more welcoming, again because of this specific idiom, actually. Chris: From tanri misafiri? Kerim: Right. Tanri means “God” in our language. In the original Turkish language, it’s tanri, and, misafiri means “ the guest.” Chris: Yeah. So beautiful. Thank you for sharing that with us. Kerim: Absolutely. Chris: And so when guests arrive in a home, you know, in English, at least in, in the context of the older traditions, it is said that the guest or the potential guest, the stranger, asks for hospitality. They don’t necessarily say “ they ask for food,” which we can imagine that surely they [00:14:00] do. They don’t necessarily say that “they ask for shelter” or “accommodation,” which we surely we could imagine they do. But the literature often says they ask for hospitality. And so, when we think of hospitality today, we often think about people sitting around a table eating food together. And so I’m curious if there’s a shared understanding among Sufis or at least the community that you live among and in, about the importance of both eating food and eating food together. Kerim: Togetherness is probably one of the most important things in the Islamic religion. Because like even our way of worshiping God - Allah - we try to do that in a union as much as possible. It is very interesting, the words that “religion” comes from. [00:15:00] Re- means “again,” and legion means “union.” So it’s almost like “religion” itself means “to recreate the union,” “to reshape the union,” “ to have the union back,” because we have the tendency to be alone. And even you can imagine that in the western countries, in the western world, a lot of people want to be alone. Like, there’s a lot of individuals rather than a group of people. And in the eastern world, it’s a little bit different. We are more like family-oriented people. We try to do things together. I mean, there are advantages and disadvantages obviously, but there is a difference between them. So, we always had this [notion that] “the more is better,” basically. You know, more people is better. So, we help each other, [00:16:00] we understand each other, we talk about our problems. When we try to solve them, it’s easier together. And if there’s pain, you know, the pain actually, can be eased with more people, easier, I think, compared to have this pain alone. So, again, we’re more family-oriented people. And the Sufi are very much like that. The Sufi always pray together, and they think that it creates a n energy, basically. It produces an energy that basically helps all of them at the same time, in a union. Chris: Hmm hmm. And do you find that sitting down for a meal together also creates that kind of union, or recreates as you were saying? Kerim: I think so. Doing any kind of activities, including eating... eating is basically the most common activity [00:17:00] that we do in our daily life and getting together, to talk about our things together, and discuss things together, all those things - togetherness, when it comes to the idea of togetherness - I think, is beautiful. Chris: Hmm, hmm. Amen. Yeah, I very much agree with that, Kerim. And so, when we think about hospitality, and we think about food, we often imagine big banquet tables and as you said, this sense of togetherness and celebration. But there’s also, you know, from what little I’ve read, there’s also this important aspect of the religious life in the Islamic world, and perhaps in the Sufi world as well that points to, maybe not the absence of food, but a different way of being fed, and a different way of feeding that doesn’t [00:18:00] include the food we’re used to, the kind of material food. And we often refer to this as fasting. And so, there’s a beautiful video that you sent me, Kerim, of your mother speaking, and she recalls a phrase in that video from her own mother who said that “when we welcome suffering, we make honey out of pain.” And so, this is a question I very much want to ask you because I’ve fasted myself quite intensely. I’m curious, what is the honey that comes from fasting? Or, what do you think is the honey that comes from fasting? Kerim: Right? First of all, yeah, fasting is in our religion. So, we basically do that one month in the whole year. It’s called Ramadan. In some cases, we actually do that because our Prophet Muhammad, when he [00:19:00] lived, he was fasting every Monday and every Thursday. So it was like a common practice for some of the religious people. And at least we do that one month in the whole year. And obviously, that month is a little bit difficult, you know, because we not only stop eating, we also stopped drinking and all that stuff. In theory, we should not be lying, we should not be telling bad things to other people or gossiping and all that stuff, but usually we do during that time. I mean, in theory, we should not be doing that. So it’s like a whole discipline thing - the whole fasting. And at the end of the thirty days, you become a really, really different person. And first of all, one thing that [00:20:00] I feel, is that you understand the people who do not have food. We still have people in the world, unfortunately, in Africa, and all those places, the people, having less access to food as we do, and we feel like, oh yeah we don’t actually thank God for all those things that he’s giving to us. And this is the time that you start thinking about the reality and start thanking God for actually giving us all that food, twenty-four hours, seven days [a week]. And when you are fasting during that time, you are understanding the feeling of these people, who are like poor and who cannot eat. There are people now, in the social media, we are seeing people, who never had [00:21:00] chocolates in their life. The people living in these countries or in the cities or metropolitan cities, we never think about these things. So, we take these things for granted, and during that time of fasting, you start thinking about these stuff and then you become more thankful, and that’s basically honey itself, after the suffering. And I wouldn’t say “suffering,” because we don’t suffer as much as they do, honestly. And we’re just telling our egos, “just stop for a day to do bad things and stop eating,” and all that stuff that ego wants to have. And again, it’s at the end of the thirty days, you become a new person because now you have a different mentality. Now, in the other eleven months, you still forget about these things, but [00:22:00] again, it comes through. It’s like a cycle. Chris: Yeah. Yeah. I totally agree with you that, you know, gratitude is the honey and... Kerim: Absolutely. Chris: ...I remember the fasting that I did over the course of four years, and I don’t know if it was as intense as the fasting that happens during Ramadan, but doing that fasting and trying to feed something other than myself for a time imbued a degree of hospitality and gratitude that I don’t think I had ever felt before. And it sticks to me. It sticks to my bones to this day. And it’s something that, like you said, I also have to constantly remind myself of those moments when I sit down to eat a meal, because it’s so easy to forget. Kerim: Absolutely. Absolutely. And one thing is [00:23:00] basically during that time of fasting, you basically stop feeding your ego, and start feeding your spirit, basically. That’s what I think. Chris: That’s beautiful. Yeah. I absolutely understand that. Thank you, Kerim. So my next question is around the word “ submission.” So, translated into English, the word “Islam” means “submission.” Now I’ve read that this word can also be translated to mean “servants of God.” Servants of God. Now in English, the word “servant” can be synonymous with “host.” A servant and a host. Now, there’s a book by an author named Mona Siddiqui called Hospitality in Islam. And in that book she writes, it’s actually a quote, but she writes, “’What is faith?’ The Prophet replied, ‘the giving of [00:24:00] food and the exchange of greetings.’ He ends on a most dramatic note saying, “a house which is not entered by guests is not entered by angels.” Kerim: Perfect. Yeah. Chris: And it seems that in this phrase, the Prophet is suggesting that the way we are with guests and strangers has something to do with how we are with the divine, which I think you kind of alluded to a little bit earlier. And so I’m curious, is this something that you’ve seen in your own days or in those of others that you know? Is hospitality a practice that connects us to the divine? Kerim: Absolutely. Because reaching God, you need to reach people first. To be able to reach God... when I say “reach God,” meaning be in communication with Him, is basically being in a communication [00:25:00] with the people he created. So, to serve the people is basically serving him from the Islamic point of view. So, and that’s a hadith that you mentioned in the book. It’s a hadith of Prophet Mohammed, like you said. And Prophet Mohammed always... it was a common practice that he was hosting maybe, you know, 10-15 people every night. And he was a poor person, by the way. I mean, he doesn’t have much money, much food or anything, but they share. There was a time that... there’s a story that somebody, actually, one of his apostles rather, asks him to visit him for a dinner. So he invites him to a dinner. But during his conversation, Prophet Mommed said, “can I bring my friends too?”[00:26:00] And the apostle says, “of course you can bring your friends.” And he brings hundreds of people. Now, the host only have some bread, and maybe a little bit meat, and a little bit rice in the cup. So, he was ashamed because he doesn’t have any money, and the Prophet Mohammed is going to bring all those guests together, and he didn’t know what to do. But he uses submission, basically. He said, well, if Prophet Mohammed is coming, then something is going to happen. And as he was thinking all those things, Prophet Mohammed puts his hand on top of the rice holder. And every time he was putting rice onto the dishes, the rice never ends, the meat never ends. So he served like 200 people during this invitation and the food never ended.[00:27:00] So he was happy for his submission, basically. Chris: Wow. Beautiful. Thank you, Kerim. Kerim: Of course. Chris: You know, you have this beautiful book - that is still in the mail, unfortunately I haven’t got my hands on it yet, but I’m very much looking forward to it - called Stories From the Thirty Birds, which I understand is inspired by The Conference of the Birds, this incredible book from I think the 1300s. And I’m curious if you could tell us a little bit about that book and what, if any inspiration or maybe teachings around hospitality that come from both, The Conference of the Birds and how you’ve employed it in your book. Kerim: Right. The Conference of the Birds is really a beautiful story of Farid ud-Din Attar who lived in Nishapur, which is in Khorasan, in Iran, today. And he was one of the very famous [00:28:00] Sufis at that time. He was the teacher of Rumi. A lot of people know Rumi. And he wrote this book about birds, millions of birds, who are in the process of going to their king, which is the phoenix (or what we call it simurg). And during that time, during that travel, they go through seven valleys, and in each valley some of the birds get lost, because the valleys actually symbolize things. Like, the first valley is the valley of intention. So, a lot of birds actually don’t have the intention to reach their king. The king is basically symbolizing Allah (God), and the birds are symbolizing us very much, and we are getting [00:29:00] lost during the time of life. Like, our intention is basically this world. If our intention is staying in this world, then we stay in this world. And that’s the valley of intention. And a lot of birds, like half of them, actually, get lost in this stage. And the second valley is the valley of love. And the birds that get lost in this valley are the ones that actually think the beauty is in this world, rather than they don’t see the beauty of God himself. So they see the shadow of that beauty in the world, but they’re content with that beauty, and they don’t really want to move on. And again, the third valley is the value of wisdom. And the birds that get lost in this valley are the ones who think that knowledge, [00:30:00] in this world, is more important than anything else, and they don’t realize the source of the knowledge is actually their king. So on and so forth, they go through the seven valleys and at the end of the seventh valley, only thirty birds remain. And the thirty birds, they’re ready to see their king, and they go through this mountain called Qaf, where the  simurg, the phoenix lives (behind the mountain). And it’s very difficult to get there, basically. When they get there, they can’t find the king over there. They only find a mirror. So, they realize the king is themselves, but more specifically, the union of thirty birds. So simurg - the [00:31:00] phoenix - in Iranian, in Persian means “thirty birds,” actually. Si is “thirty.” “Burg” is “bird,” actually. So from what we understand is, the union of ourselves, what we are seeing, is our reflection, because the king is actually a perfect mirror. But we don’t see ourselves, only, we see the union of thirty birds together. So there are birds that we don’t think live together. For instance, a hawk doesn’t live with a smaller bird together, but in this union, they live together. There in one. And they use whatever advantage they have together. So it’s almost like being one and using the characteristics of every single bird [00:32:00] itself. Chris: And I imagine that someone growing up in a culture like that, whether back then or more recently, and hearing this story or hearing it multiple times throughout their life or maybe once a year, that that notion also might arise in the way that they are with others, the way they are with strangers. Kerim: Right. Chris: And so, I have one final question for you, if that’s all right? Kerim: Absolutely. Chris: So, before we say farewell I’d like to ask you about Istanbul, and I’d like to ask you about the limits to hospitality. So, last year, on a trip I took to the city I met a friend of a mutual friend of ours, and for a couple of hours we walked around the Karakoy neighbourhood and he spoke to me about how the city has changed quite a bit over the last decade. For many people who grew up in Istanbul, the city [00:33:00] might now appear to be very difficult to live in. He said that the cost of living has skyrocketed. The rents, the rent prices or costs have doubled. And much of this is a combination of tourism and gentrification in the city. Now it seems that many religious traditions speak of the importance of welcoming strangers and offering them hospitality, but they also speak of the limits to such hospitality. In one particular, hadith or saying of the Prophet Mohammed, it is said that “hospitality is for three days. Anything more is charity or sadaqah.” Again, excuse my pronunciation. Kerim: No. That’s perfect pronunciation. Chris: And so I’m curious, you mentioned a little bit earlier, in the Sufi community and perhaps in the Islamic communities, there is this notion of togetherness, but also that “more is better.” And so I’m [00:34:00] curious in the context of what’s happening in Istanbul and what’s happening in many places around the world, do you think there should also be limits to the hospitality that is offered to the guest or stranger? Kerim: Well, of course. I mean, of course we have financial issues here, and it’s very difficult for us to actually serve other people as much as we want to. But again, when we are together, even if it’s very difficult to live in the city, it’s still something, you know? What I see: the rent went up, like you said, so the people try to move into their family houses, the houses there of their families and everything. And in western countries, it’s difficult. You usually don’t do this kind of stuff, but in our community, it’s much easier to do these things. And, you know, the families welcome the children [00:35:00] more than other countries. So that’s something I think that’s a positive thing. But to the strangers. What do we do for strangers? Obviously, we do as much as possible. We may not be able to serve them as much as we used to, obviously, before this inflation. And we have the highest inflation in the world, or probably the second-highest inflation. So again, it’s difficult, and Istanbul became probably one of the most expensive cities in the world. But even that, again, we may not be able to take them to dinner every night, but we serve what we have in the house, like in the Prophet Mohammed’s story. Whatever we have, we share. And, we call it bereket, as in Arabic baraka, they call it. Baraka is something [00:36:00] like... we use it for money. It’s not “more money.” That’s not important. How do I say that? I don’t even know how to say it in English, but it’s more like “the luck of the money, itself.” Basically, you may be able to buy more stuff with less money based on your luck. That’s basically what we call it. Bereket. So the bereket is much more important than the amount of the money or the financial thing. And the bereket always goes up when you share it. Chris: Beautiful. Yeah, I love that. I mean, in English, not to reduce it at all, but in English we say, quality over quantity.” Kerim: Yeah, absolutely. Chris: And you said that, in order to offer hospitality or the hospitality that we would like to offer to our guests, sometimes maybe that means not doing it all the time, [00:37:00] because one simply cannot. Right. It’s not possible. Kerim: Right. Chris: But yeah, it’s a really beautiful point. Kerim: Rumi is a very important Sufi, probably known by many Americans. Even the world knows him. He wrote a poem, which is about the guests. So, if you don’t mind, I’m gonna read that, uh, it’s called the Guest House and it goes like: This human life is a guest house. Every dawn, a new visitor arrives. A gladness, a sadness, a pettiness, a flash of insights all come knocking, unannounced. Welcome them all. Make room even if a band of sorrows storms in and clears your rooms of comfort. Still honour every guest. [00:38:00] Perhaps they empty you to prepare you for something brighter. The gloomy thought, the shame, the bitterness, greet them at the door with a smile, and lead them inside. Be thankful for whoever comes, for each is sent as a messenger from the beyond. So that’s a poem by Rumi, and I think it pretty much explains the whole hospitality thing. Chris: Yeah, that’s a gorgeous, gorgeous poem. I love that. I’ll make sure that’s up on the End of Tourism website when the episode launches. And so finally, Kerim, uh, I’d like to thank you so very much for being willing to join me today, to be willing to speak in a language that is not your first, or mother tongue, and to share with us some of the beauty that has touched your days. Before we say goodbye, [00:39:00] perhaps you could tell our listeners how they can follow and learn more about Kerim Vakfı, Stories from the 30 Birds, your book, and any other projects you might want them to know about. Kerim: We have a Sufi centre in North Carolina, at the University of North Carolina. We have a centre in China, Beijing University, and another center in Kyoto University in Japan. And my mother’s book about the commentary of some Quranic verses is the one. For instance, Yasin is available through Amazon and my book Stories from the 30 Birds is available on Barnes and Noble and all that other places in US. Chris: Beautiful. Well, I’ll make sure that those links are all available on the End of Tourism website and on my Substack when the episode comes out. [00:40:00] And on behalf of our listeners, tesekkur, tesekkur. Kerim: I thank you. Get full access to Chris Christou at chrischristou.substack.com/subscribe [https://chrischristou.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_4]

S7 #3 | Gentrification: Intersectionality & Invisibility | Leslie Kern

On this episode, my guest is Leslie Kern, PhD, the author of three books about cities, including Gentrification Is Inevitable And Other Lies and Feminist City: Claiming Space in a Man-Made World. Her work provokes new ways of thinking about and creating cities that are more just, equitable, caring, and sustainable. Leslie was an associate professor of geography and environment and women’s and gender studies at Mount Allison University from 2009-2024. Today, she is a public speaker, writer, and career coach for authors and academics. Show Notes * Gentrification and touristification * Naturalization of gentrification * The new colonialism * Intersectionality * Who’s to blame: renter or landlord? * The hipster and the safety net * The invisible face behind gentrification and touristifcation * Transactionality or hospitality? The case of Airbnb * Commercial gentrification * The right to stay put Homework Leslie Kern - Website [https://lesliekern.ca/] - Instagram [https://www.instagram.com/lellyk/] Gentrification Is Inevitable and Other Lies - USA [https://www.versobooks.com/books/4047-gentrification-is-inevitable-and-other-lies] - Canada [https://btlbooks.com/book/gentrification-is-inevitable-and-other-lies] Feminist City: Claiming Space in a Man-Made World - USA [https://www.versobooks.com/en-gb/products/2626-feminist-city] - Canada [https://btlbooks.com/book/feminist-city] Higher Expectations: How to Survive Academia, Make it Better for Others, and Transform the University [https://btlbooks.com/book/higher-expectations] The Tenant Class [https://btlbooks.com/book/the-tenant-class] by Ricardo Tranjan [https://btlbooks.com/book/the-tenant-class] Transcript Chris: [00:00:00] Welcome, Leslie, to the End of Tourism Podcast. Thank you for taking time out of your day, to speak with me. Thank you. To begin, I’m wondering if you’d be willing to tell us where you find yourself today and what the world looks like there, for you. Leslie: Sure. I find myself in Cambridge, Ontario. It’s a city of about 130,000 people. If I looked out my window right now, I would see a lot of blowing snow. It’s about minus 27 Celsius with the windchill, or something hideous like that today, so taking the time to talk to you this morning means I don’t have to go out and shovel anything just yet. So. Chris: Well, thank you. Thank you for joining us. it’s a great honour and I’m really looking forward to this conversation that bears a great deal of complexity. So, I had invited you on the pod in part to explore your book, Gentrification is Inevitable and Other Lies. And [00:01:00] in it, Leslie, you write that “Gentrification has come to be used as a metaphor for processes of mainstreaming, commodification, appropriation, and upscaling that are not necessarily or directly connected to cities. In this story about gentrification, gentrification stands in for any sort of change that pulls a thing or a practice out of its original context and increases its popularity, priciness, and profit-making potential.” Given that some of our listeners might not have heard of the term “gentrification” before, although I doubt it, but given that those who have heard it might understand it also to be what you and others refer to as a “chaotic concept,” I’m wondering if you’d be willing to take a stab at defining it for us today? Leslie: Yeah, absolutely. If we [00:02:00] look to, I guess, a kind of typical scholarly definition of gentrification, it would be describing an urban process in which middle or upper class, or in some other way, privileged households start to move into a neighbourhood or area of the city that has historically been more working class, or perhaps an immigrant neighbourhood, perhaps more industrial, and begin to remake that neighbourhood, kind of in their own image, thus driving up housing prices both in the rental and ownership markets, driving up the cost of living in the area, and critically, as part of the definition, resulting in some level of displacement of the older inhabitants of that neighbourhood. “Displacement” meaning they’ve been kind of priced out or otherwise pushed directly or indirectly to leave and [00:03:00] move to some other neighbourhood. So, typically with gentrification, the definition is centred around it being a class-based process, but in more recent decades, many scholars, myself included, have wanted to broaden that and to acknowledge that other axes of power and privilege, for example, race, gender, ability, age, sexuality, and so on, also play a role in contributing to the kinds of forces that propel gentrification. And we can maybe get into some of that later. So for myself, in the book, I talk about gentrification as “any kind of process of taking over claiming space and remaking it in the image and for the interests and benefit of a more powerful group of people, or perhaps even corporations, to some extent.” So, [00:04:00] gentrification is really the process of taking and claiming space. And I also do include displacement as part of that process, although I also acknowledge that sometimes people can be kind of psychologically displaced, even if they aren’t necessarily physically pushed out of their neighbourhoods. Chris: Mean it’s something that I was noticing in Toronto before I left and moved and migrated here to Oaxaca. It’s something that I think in the last five or ten years has become an unfortunate mainstay of city life in the vast majority of places, of urban places in the world. And this is also something that I’ve seen quite a bit here in Oaxaca, Mexico in a somewhat prolific tourist destination. And so, in places that have [00:05:00] been deemed “destinations” in this way, there’s often a kind of reductionism, here anyways, and in other tourist destinations in which gentrification and what’s sometimes called touristification is confused. And so one definition of “touristification” is simply “the process of transformation of a place into a tourist space and its associated effects.” So a kind of very vague and broad definition. But we also understand that gentrification can happen in places that aren’t necessarily tourist destinations. And so, we’ve also discussed in the pod the possibility that a place doesn’t necessarily need tourists in it to have touristic qualities or context what we might say. [00:06:00] And so I’m curious for you, do you think it’s important to distinguish the two concepts, gentrification and touristification? And if so, why? Leslie: Yeah, great question. I think a distinction, to some extent, is important in that, yeah, there may be elements of touristification, for example, that are somewhat unique to that process, especially in terms of the kind of impact that it might have on local inhabitants who may not necessarily be displaced, but who may see their everyday lives kind of radically altered by the touristification of an area. And as you say, gentrification happens in all kinds of areas, many of which are not geared to tourism, although sometimes that is a kind of later effect of gentrification, is that tourists might be drawn to certain neighbourhoods or places that they would not have otherwise gone to in the past. As [00:07:00] you mentioned in your earlier question, there’s been some concern in the gentrification literature that it’s a bit of a chaotic concept, by which it is meant that it’s maybe too broad of an umbrella [term], and so many different kinds of processes are kind of lumped together under that umbrella. I think it’s a useful umbrella, but under that umbrella, we can try to be clear about what we’re talking about when we look at particular locations, and try to articulate the impacts that these processes are having on the local community, economy, environment, and so on. Chris: Thank you, Leslie. Thank you for that. So your book is broken up into chapters that reveal the deeper realities behind the tropes or lies sometimes spouted about gentrification. And there are often many. And so I’m curious if after having done the research and writing for this book, and it was published in [00:08:00] 2022, so perhaps there’s been some deeper reflection in that regard, I’m curious what you feel might be the most important lie about gentrification that requires our attention and why? Leslie: Ooh, really putting me on the hook to like pick a favorite child there. No, I’m joking. Ultimately, I mean, I guess the most straightforward answer would be the first one that I discuss in the book, which is right there in the book’s title, which is the idea that gentrification is inevitable. And we can kind of unpack that a little bit further, as I do in the kind of first main chapter of the book, which is to say that in some accounts of gentrification, it’s presented as a sort of natural process, right? As something that is just akin to evolution, for example. So there’s this idea that if you kind of start with, for example, a working class or immigrant [00:09:00] neighbourhood, lower income community, with some other kinds of attributes that might not make it seem wealthy or desirable, that over time, just through, I don’t know, a kind of mystical series of properties, the way that species evolve or human beings develop from fetus and baby to an adult through this series of difficult to trace impacts, that somehow it just happens. Right. And of course, the problem with that, again, is that if we think it’s natural, then we don’t really think there’s any way to stop it. And also when we describe something as “natural,” we often imbue it with positive qualities. Well, if it’s “natural,” it’s just meant to happen. It’s just the way things are. And why would we want to stand in the way of that process? From a kind of political standpoint, it becomes very problematic, because it means that there’s not really a [00:10:00] willingness perhaps on the part of those who have some power and influence to slow down gentrification, to pause it, to use whatever tools they might have in their kind of legislative toolbox to create guardrails around the process happening or to try to prevent it altogether. And from a kind of community response standpoint, it can be very disempowering to believe that gentrification is inevitable, unstoppable, that once you see those first, white, middle-class families move into your neighbourhood, “boom, you’re done. It’s over. The clock is counting down to the time when it’s not your neighbourhood anymore and you’ll just have to leave, so why bother to do anything about it?” And as I also try to show in the book, you know, it’s hard to fight gentrification, but there are examples around the world of communities that have pushed back and kind of “pumped the brakes on gentrification,” as one [00:11:00] activist described it to me. So, we, I think, don’t want to fall into this trap of believing that communities themselves are powerless, or that our politicians and policy-makers have absolutely no tools that they can use to change this. So I would say that is probably the most important kind of first line myth or lie that we need to challenge. And then we can kind of go down the line and pick apart some of the other ones, which is how I’ve structured the book as you point out. Yeah. Chris: Thank you, Leslie. Yeah, I mean, that was a really jarring chapter for me, in part because of this notion that not only is quote gentrification inevitable or natural, but that the city is, according to different philosophers and thinkers, imbued with this kind of biological life and [00:12:00] and that it follows as you were mentioning certain processes that are “ natural” as far as evolution is concerned. And imediately, this brought me back to my research on what’s often referred to as 19th century social evolutionist thought, these notions that were often created or maintained by kind of, elite, wealthy, white men in the 19th century, not all of whom were academics, some of them were bankers, for example, among other things, but essentially promoting this notion that certain races or genders or types of people had evolved along the natural processes of evolution either faster than others or got ahead in certain ways, and that, of course, this was a way for those people, not only the non-academics, but those in academia [00:13:00] to employ hypotheses theories as a way of justifying colonial histories and the ongoing conquests of different people around the world. And so, in that context, I’m curious if you imagine or think that gentrification understood or described as “natural” in this way is a kind of extension, a historical extension of that kind of colonial power play of the 19th century. Leslie: Yeah, I absolutely do. And there are many ways in which the power dynamics and even the language or the vocabulary around gentrification mirrors that around colonialism with all of the problematic tropes there of neighbourhoods or areas of the city being taken over where “there’s really nothing there,” right? [It’s the] same kind of justification for colonialism. “There’s nothing there. [00:14:00] There’s nobody there that we need to care about,” so European colonizers are entitled to this land. Similarly, with the way that many developers, for example, I think, rationalize or justify the kind of projects they engage in. “Oh, there’s nothing really happening in that part of the city. There’s not really a community there. It’s just a space of problems or deviation from the norm or disorder. And so we, as developers, as city planners, we’re going to bring order and light and civilization, quite frankly, to these neighbourhoods.” So I’m sure you’re hearing in this, all those echoes around colonialism. And this point around the social evolution part of it, I think that is the kind of darker, maybe less acknowledged side of gentrification, is that when we start to talk about neighbourhoods as “nothing’s happening there, there’s nobody there.” [00:15:00] Who’s “nobody,” right? Who falls into that category of “nobody,” right? It’s poor people. It might be unhoused people, working-class people, people of colour, queer people, disabled people, sex workers, right? “All people who we don’t really think of as kind of counting as citizens, people who we don’t think have a legitimate voice in the city, people who we don’t think have a right to the city or a claim on the city.” And they’re just seen as disposable, as easily displaceable, as not really contributing anything to the community or to the city at large. So I think there’s definitely a sense of kind of hierarchy in terms of, “who are the seemingly new people who are coming in, right?” And they’re viewed as “bringing all of these kind of gifts and benefits to the neighbourhood, and in some ways, perhaps even uplifting the poor [00:16:00] or downtrodden inhabitants of the ghetto or the barrio or whatever. And the locals should somehow be grateful to receive gentrification similarly to the way that people were, say, ‘oh, you should be grateful to receive an education if you’re from the lower-classes or working-classes.’” So, yeah, I think there’s definitely echoes and traces of that same kind of logic, right? It’s a logic of superiority, a logic of dominance, a logic of control that resonates, whether it’s colonialism or social evolutionism. Um, yeah. Chris: Wow. Fascinating. Fascinating stuff. I mean, this is, I think, to a large degree culture or what we call culture or what culture might be is made on the tongue, and that the, the kind of unacknowledged ways in which we speak the world into being [00:17:00] is something that’s been direly overlooked in our time. So thank you for speaking to that in that way. And I think it’s something that we would properly kind of continue to wonder about as we speak and as we think, and perhaps before we speak as well. You know, you mentioned in there the different types of people that are often displaced as a result of gentrification. And this shows up quite a bit in your book. So I wanted to ask you about what you refer to as “intersectionality,” an intersectional approach to gentrification. Some of the conventional critiques that you mentioned in the book, including the economic critique (kind of follow the money), the aesthetic critique (the kind of clean lines and fancy bakeries that show up), as well as the class critique, which you mentioned kind of upward mobility, among others. That said, you focus a good portion of the book, I think, on this neglected importance of intersectionality. And so I’m curious, why do you think an intersectional approach has been ignored in the [00:18:00] past, and why might it be crucial for a cohesive or integral analysis of gentrification? Leslie: Hmm. I think an intersectional approach has been kind of sidelined, if you will, in part because most of the key kind of prominent gentrification scholars of the late 20th century and into the 21st century have been, honestly, white men probably themselves from middle-class backgrounds, or obviously university educated scholars and they’ve been, like neo-Marxist, or Marxist. That’s their theoretical perspective. That’s their training. They come from a kind of Marxist, political economy, background. That’s the lens of analysis that they bring to whatever kind of problem they’re looking at in the world, including gentrification. And they’ve done brilliant work, right, and created a lot of really foundational [00:19:00] concepts, gone and done really important empirical work so that we can actually see what the impacts of these processes are. And there’s nothing I want to take away from that being a key voice within the field of gentrification studies, but I think too often either there’s been kind of minimal lip service paid or kind of outright pushing to the side of feminist perspectives, anti-racist perspective, anti-colonial perspectives and more, because it’s sort of seemed like, well, “class is the main driver and anything that maybe disproportionately impacts women or people of colour, or queer folks or elderly people, that’s like a side effect, right? Like the main driver is class and those people are simply impacted because they also happen to fall into lower income brackets.” So it’s a pretty neat and tidy [00:20:00] story and you can kind of see why it has some appeal. So I think, you know, those political economy, neo-Marxist scholars is not that they don’t care about race or gender or other factors. They’re just like, “well, it’s all really rolled up under the umbrella of ‘class.’ And if we just figure out the ‘class’ piece, then those other things will kind of fall into place.” But for feminist scholars, critical race scholars, anti-colonial scholars and so on, they’ve wanted to point out that assuming that class is the primary driver behind things is maybe an assumption that we’ve held onto for too long without questioning it. And instead of seeing racial impacts and so on as something that’s just happening off to the side through a class process, maybe we want to also look, especially in something like an American context, but in other places as well, at the deeply foundational layer of race to the development of cities, to the development of the [00:21:00] nation, and we can’t kind of sideline the impacts of racial discrimination and the kind of hierarchy of race that has developed over many centuries in these locations and say, “oh, well it’s a secondary factor.” For myself, I’m a feminist scholar. My background is in women’s and gender studies before I kind of accidentally stumbled into being an urban geographer. And to me it was always kind of obvious, but I think I’ve had to argue this point so often that processes like gentrification, neoliberalism, urban revitalization, as it’s called, doesn’t just kind of impact women as a tangential side effect, but that gender inequality or assumptions about gender roles and so on are like part of what drives the process. And so I try to bring that out in the book by looking at different kinds of examples of the ways in which different sorts of [00:22:00] communities or people are impacted to hopefully show, to hopefully make a case for this idea that taking an intersectional perspective doesn’t deny the class factor at all, but that it allows us to look at gentrification through a more nuanced lens and one that respects the fact that class is not the only, and not always the most salient marker of hierarchy and status in our societies. Chris: Hmm, hmm. Yeah, I did go to university a long time ago, and it seemed that what was offered up on the proverbial, kind of conceptual, bill, politically speaking was, here are your five major theories or perspectives and kind of like choose one and decide what you like the best and then argue for it or against it. But it does seem that the more apertures that we have onto the world, without necessarily needing [00:23:00] to collapse our considerations into a single one can broaden our understanding of the world deeply, right? Deeply, deeply. And it’s something that I see anyways less and less of. I think there’s more and more possibilities for experiencing that in our time, but I think there’s a lot of processes that are happening in which there’s less and less of it that’s actually occurring - a kind of collapse of maybe ontological diversity or philosophical diversity. I don’t know what to call it, but seems prevalent and at least from this little aperture. So. Leslie: Yeah, I would agree with that, as someone who, just in my own little brief lifetime here on this earth has been peddling my little feminist arguments for 30-plus years. And then we add on to that, the 30 years before that and 30 years before all of the previous generations. It seems like we are, [00:24:00] not just from a feminist perspective, but we are kind of constantly having to make these arguments for that ontological diversity, as you put it, or even just the idea that, oh, you can view things through different lenses and learn different things about whatever kind of process or force or issue that you’re interested in. Chris: Hmm. Well, thank you for that. I’d like to, if I can, Leslie, there was something I’ve been wrestling with for a while and it was very much front and centre, this kind of inner wrestling when I was reading your book. And so, I’d like to share that with you at the moment if I can, and we’ll see where it takes us. So part of the reason that I left Toronto a decade ago was that the housing crises, that perhaps for some wasn’t yet a crisis in Toronto, has of course ballooned. But in the past five years I’ve watched that same housing crisis play out here in Oaxaca. [00:25:00] And what arose almost immediately in the, we’ll say media sphere, the online world and certainly on the streets as well, was a kind of xenophobic campaign or campaigns blaming tourists, digital nomads, and “expats” for the rising cost of rentals and housing. Now, while not entirely misguided, the percentage of such people is insignificant in comparison to the total population of renters and homeowners here. And then I ask myself, well, “why isn’t anyone questioning the role of homeowners and landlords, those who actually decide the price of rental units, those who decide to turn long-term rentals into Airbnbs, and those who are, some of them anyways, more often than not, part and parcel of the political ruling class in many places?” Why not blame them? And so, if you think about this enough, you can [00:26:00] begin to imagine that the willingness to blame specific people, types, classes, races, et cetera, can ignore the cultural, economic and structural elements of society that allow and encourage such dynamics to emerge. And it seems to me that you speak to this, to some degree, in your book writing, how “it is not helpful in a critique of gentrification to get overly stuck on the styles and preferences of a group, when, for many decades now, gentrification has been propelled by much stronger forces than aesthetic trends.” And in another part of the book, you write that “cultural factors cannot be hastily dismissed, not when their power is easily co-opted by capital. Trends in denim and facial hair are not responsible for gentrification, but when large groups of people are redefined as a class based on their tastes, occupations, and aesthetics, they become a market and a justification for urban [00:27:00] interventions.” And so my question has to do with what I might call, I don’t know if this is something that shows up in your work or in your research, but a kind of “ecological analysis,” one that doesn’t necessarily separate people into essentialist categories, but contends with how maybe the rules of the game produce the player’s behaviour and beliefs. And so I’m wondering, you know, in your research, is that something that is tended to, a way of, “okay so, we’re not going to only blame or ask the tourists to take responsibility or the digital nomads, et cetera, and we’re not only gonna blame or ask the landlords to take responsibility, but understand that they live and inhabit a kind of web of relations that has, for a long time, created the context that allows them or even [00:28:00] encourages them to proceed in a particular way? Leslie: Yes, a hundred percent. I really love the way that you put that there and giving it that kind of label of like an ecological perspective there. I think it’s so important to do in the book. You know, the first quote that you read there, I think has to do with this idea that, “oh, you know, hipsters were causing gentrification” kind of thing. And I wanted to kind of, not defend the hipster per se, but to just say, well, in a city like New York, for example, the takeover of midtown Manhattan and the absolute sort of pricing out of regular people, well, from Manhattan as a whole in many cases is not to do with artists and yoga teachers moving into those neighborhoods. It has to do with massive multinational corporations buying up housing, developing condos, like all of these other things that [00:29:00] are going on. And as you say, I mean, I think it is useful to question and critique landlordism for example, and even home ownership itself, but there’s a reason why people engage in these practices and as you say, it’s because of these all sorts of other like prior sort of conditions and causes this kind of web of possibilities that so much of our... the policy, the legislative world, our national context shapes for us. Like in Canada for example, home ownership is, as you well know, sort of seen as the ultimate goal in the housing market. Renting is seen as very much a kind of transitional stage for people. And the idea is to eventually, sooner rather than later, own your own home. And of course there’s all kinds of cultural myths around that, of homeowners being like responsible people and better citizens and all this kind of stuff that is, maybe like [00:30:00] largely nonsense. But why, in this context, do people become homeowners? Well, this is the way that we’ve been told “you secure your retirement in the absence of a truly kind of robust old age security net.” Yes, we have some. We have pension, old age pension, but for many people, the home is ultimately their social safety net, and government policy has very much been set up to encourage us to treat our homes in that way and to rely on paying off a mortgage and having that home to be the basis of survival into our old age. Right. And there are many other things. That’s just one example. So I think, as you say, it’s really important to kind of look at that whole ecosystem. And that doesn’t mean that we don’t say, “well, okay, what are homeowners doing that might be potentially problematic and contributing to the problem?” Well, that could include things like turning units into Airbnbs or acting in NIMBY-ish (Not In My Backyard), kind of ways that limit, for example, the amount of affordable housing that might go up in their neighbourhood and other things. Of course, all of those dynamics have to be critiqued, challenged, pushed back against. But, keeping, at the same time that kind of zoomed out perspective of like what’s going on on a larger scale, in the kind of corporate and investment world and the government policy-making world, I think at least helps us to understand why these different groups are kind of positioned in the way that they do and the kind of range of possibilities that they see for themselves within that web. Chris: Mm mm Yeah. Yeah. That reminds me of a moment that I had here in Oaxaca, maybe three or four years ago. There was a student group that had come down from a Canadian university, and they were here for a couple weeks, and I was having dinner with them. Not all of them, but there was maybe four of the women from the student group that I was having dinner with. And one of them was probably in her, I would say [00:32:00] mid-fifties, an indigenous woman from Ontario. And the other three were much younger, probably in their early twenties. And they were suddenly talking about the sudden or at least recent kind of housing crisis in their university town, we’ll call it, maybe a small city, but big town. And how in previous years they could afford the rent, but suddenly, and of course this was 2021-2022, when a lot of these dynamics started changing extremely rapidly. And I was kind of moderating the conversation at first. And then it turned out, she wasn’t so quick to out herself as a landlord. But the indigenous woman, the 55-year-old kind of alluded to it and then said, “well, you know, for a lot of people, it’s a pension plan. “It’s my retirement plan, essentially.” And it was this really interesting dynamic about how these four women, who had come to this place and were in the same program, studying the [00:33:00] same thing, that one of them had to perhaps, unbeknownst to her, undermine the economic life and possibilities of those younger women by virtue of requiring a retirement plan. Right. And I think at least in Canada, in countries that are very much still welfare states, that it speaks to a, the incredible degree in which the care that’s offered, especially to the elderly, is almost entirely top-down. There’s so little, if any, community care. And, you know, of course this is a very kind of small example, a very kind of minute example. I think maybe a common one. But of course you also have other examples of, as you mentioned before, corporations... is it BlackRock this massive mutual fund that I know in, in Europe and places like Barcelona and the major cities there end up buying entire apartment buildings or blocks even, and evicting [00:34:00] the residents and then setting up Airbnb buildings, essentially. So, I mean, there’s this incredible kind of degree of difference and diversity in terms of how, as you mentioned landlordism and rent is affecting people. But I just wanted to mention that. It was a really kind of interesting moment for me to see this dynamic and the young women kind of complaining about, you know, I guess the future, the present and the future of their economic lives. And then, this older woman also not necessarily complaining, but very much concerned about her ability to live as well, economically and to thrive economically into her older age. Leslie: Yeah. And there’s these kind of ironic situations popping up all over the place where so for example, someone might have a public pension. And as you point out, many public pensions are deeply invested in real estate income trusts. This is like a huge piece for example, in Ontario, of [00:35:00] Ontario public workers’ pensions, but around the world as well, and I don’t have the details, but a story that was in the news several years ago about a man somewhere in Europe who was being evicted from his apartment because that one of these real estate investment corporations was taking it over and was gonna redevelop it in some way. But his public pension was invested in that very same company. Right? So many people are kind of caught in these loops where it’s like, we would very much like to not be like, displacing ourselves or our neighbours or community members, but we don’t necessarily have control over how our pension funds are invested, right? Like you might have a choice like, “oh, I’d like to divest from fossil fuels, for example, or from tobacco or military, like arms deals.” Like, sometimes, you can opt out of those things in your pension funds, but there’s not really a way to like opt out of real estate investment. My substack is a reader-supported publication. To receive new posts and support my work, consider becoming a free or paid subscriber. It’s such a huge part of those things now. So I think that’s an area where there’s increasing kind of research and critical perspectives on that in gentrification scholarship and so on that I think is really important to look at, because it’s also very hidden, right? This is another aspect I think of contemporary kind of gentrification touristification even, is that there’s no face to it, right? There’s no face to this process. And maybe that’s why it’s tempting to take, as you put it a minute ago, that kind of like xenophobic perspective or to blame “expats” in the case of Oaxaca and touristification or in cities to be like, “oh, it’s these urban hipsters, maybe these like trust fund kids” or whatever label people might want to put on someone, because there’s a face, right? There you can look and be like, “that’s the problem.” But the reality is there is no face, right? There’s no individual or even group of individuals that’s easy to identify. And people doing [00:37:00] research into some of this pension fund stuff that I’m talking about, they hit very opaque walls, even just trying to get the information about how these companies work, the kinds of decisions they make, what their rubrics are around what they call “socially responsible investing.” So it’s very deliberately mystified and hidden from us, and I think that is part of the challenge now is like, how do you fight this monster that you can’t see, that you can barely name? So yeah, that is I think one of the kind of frightening things, if you will, about, whether we call it “gentrification,” or we think about it in this broader sense of the housing crisis, who’s the face of that, the cause of that crisis? Very hard to say in many cases. Chris: Wow. Yeah, I know that these mutual fund companies that end up buying, you know, whole city blocks or buildings, apartment buildings, and then tending to renovictions or whatever they [00:38:00] might use in order to get people out. Once the buildings are “ renovated” as Airbnbs, what happens is those corporations end up outsourcing all of the operational and cleaning duties to companies that they’re not involved with at all. So, again, you could have this person who’s in front of you, who might be a cleaner or who comes ou in and out of the building or who might run the reservation books or something like that, but they’ve never met anyone from that mutual fund company. Right. They just get a paycheck. Leslie: Yeah. And it’s happening on this kind of global level. The people behind the company that’s investing in that building in Oaxaca, like they may have never set foot there, and they may never set foot there. Right? So it’s happening from around the world, from thousands of kilometers away from behind these kind of screens of, as you said, these kind of shell companies and these subcontracted, property management companies. I mean the story you were just telling about the woman who’s a landlord, like on that small scale, not that [00:39:00] there’s nothing problematic about it, but it is also like, you know, she’s probably met her tenants, right? She probably occasionally sets foot in the property that she owns and that she rents out, and there’s like some aspect of a relationship there. It’s still, you know, a problematic power dynamic and all of that, but it’s on a very different scale than the investor from London who’s has a stake in a condo in Oaxaca. Like, it’s a very different web of of relations that goes into that. Chris: Yeah. And even if someone like that, and I’ve had many, many landlords over the years and I’ve been blessed to have a number of them who are really incredible people and really incredible in terms of showing up when they’re needed in that regard. But it’s something, I discussed on a previous episode regarding the Airbnb-ization of the world, a couple years ago. And one of the themes that came up was around hospitality, right? [00:40:00] And even if you have people who are kind of really engaged and really excited and responsible about having a tenant in their home or in a particular building, the kind of transactional nature of that rent almost (and then of course the history of it) precludes, almost by default, the possibility of there being a kind of host-guest relationship, right? Instead of that we are “clients” and and, and “salespeople,” businesspeople to some degree. Right. So another layer of it is this question of like, “well, is it even possible within the dynamic or structure that renting implies and incurs, is it even possible to create a dynamic wherein a person can be understood as a guest in another person’s home, and another person can be understood as a host to people who are coming to live in their home? Right? That that same [00:41:00] woman, the 55-year-old landlord said that she had tenants who refused to leave for, I dunno, a year and a half or two years, and once they finally did, left her with a $40,000 damage bill. So, I think there’s just layers and layers that are extremely difficult to kind of get into, I shouldn’t say in terms of dialogue, in terms of investigation, but in terms of the possibility of creating different dynamics that would maybe represent or produce the kinds of dynamics and worlds that, I think, a lot of people would want to live in. Leslie: Yeah, I totally agree. I mean, I think in a lot of cases, and you honestly don’t have to dig very deep, you can open up CBC News and see some poor, sad landlord story most days of the week or listen to kind of corporate or larger scale landlords talk and they often see tenants as a nuisance. “The tenants themselves are a problem,” and if they could invest in real estate and still make [00:42:00] these returns without actually having tenants, that would probably be ideal. And I think that is also part of the push to an Airbnb is that with a temporary guest, you know, a week, a weekend or whatever, you don’t have the same responsibility to them as you do to someone with a year lease or perhaps the right to stay there for a longer period of time. So, all you have to do is kind of provide this very basic amenity of the space. You can even impose all these rules on them that you maybe otherwise wouldn’t be able to do if it was a longer-term rental. You know, the people who check-in have many fewer rights than actual tenants do. And so in some ways it makes that relationship even more transactional and even more hands off in many cases. And of course there’s the quicker profit motive is really the main driving force behind that. But I think there’s also this piece of it where it’s like, “well, how can I maximize the profit potential of this space with as little actually dealing with other human beings and their needs [00:43:00] as human beings as possible. And yeah, I think that is really, again, from my kind of feminist perspective, that is also interested in thinking about how do we create systems of care in our cities, and what does “care” mean, and what are our responsibilities to one another that, when we look at something like Airbnbification and the touristification and gentrification more generally, those things, in many cases kind of act against the possibility of creating more caring and careful spaces. Chris: Hmm, hmm. Yeah. Thank you for that, Leslie. I have a couple more questions for you, if that’s all right? Leslie: Yes, go ahead. Yeah. Chris: All right. Wonderful. So this next question maybe requires a bit of imagination, which I think you have a good amount of, and it has to do with rent. And so one of the lies that you highlight in your book is the belief that gentrification is natural and hence forth inevitable. [00:44:00] And of course, as we’ve been discussing, nothing is natural nor inevitable and you make an excellent case for that throughout the book. And I feel that there is an equally and perhaps more subtle incarnation of this myth, of this inevitability, in regards to rent, that we as urban people or modern people who grow up in contemporary societies often reinforce and even naturalize a kind of rent slavery that most people rarely see, that most people rarely see their lives as indentured to their landlords. And so, when we talk about gentrification, does this show up at all? Should it? You know, this notion that, “well, if we can come to gentrification and understand that it’s in fact not natural and it’s not inevitable, can we do the same thing for rent? Because, maybe I haven’t read much of the research, but it doesn’t seem to be something that [00:45:00] people are so quick to aim their arrows at, we’ll say. Leslie: Yeah. I love that question. And I think A, you’re right that there hasn’t been enough conversation about that. There has not been nearly enough attempts to kind of denaturalize this and B, that that perspective is emerging and growing. If I could recommend a book called The Tenant Class by Ricardo Tranjan. It’s also a Toronto-based author, and he does an amazing job in this very short book of basically laying out the case against landlordism, and it totally, as you say, kind of denaturalizing and pushes back on this idea that it’s inevitable that there are a class of people that own property and a class of people that rent property, and that this is not inherently a deeply problematic relation. You know, this idea that it’s not in some way akin to some kind of indentureship. And he really asks us to look deeply again at this [00:46:00] idea that, if you’re a landlord, “well, I have a mortgage to pay, so it’s somehow natural that this other person will pay my mortgage for me,” which, when you start to think about it, like it’s really messed up in a way. And once you see it, you can’t unsee it. So yeah, I think looking more closely at some of these ideas, these kind of statements that come out, and again, you can see it in news articles, these kind of horror stories, and not to diminish, I’m sure, what are very real, like economic and psychological impacts of the so-called kind of nightmare tenant and all of those kinds of things. But you’ll hear those kinds of statements: “you know, I have a mortgage to pay.” Well, why is this other person paying your mortgage, then? And then we could probably take a step back and be like, “why do we have mortgages to pay?” But that’s maybe another conversation. But yeah, so I definitely recommend that book, The Tenant Class, as a really quick, easy to read, and kind of unforgettable primer on this question. And [00:47:00] I really appreciate you asking it, and I hope your listeners will be like, “oh, yeah, I gotta dig into that a bit more too.” Chris: Yeah. Yeah. I mean, you know, in part because, as prices have risen in most western countries in the last four or five years, there’s of course, of course, protests and backlash among people, and “oh, this bakery raised their prices” or “ my rent’s going up,” and all these things. But specifically in terms of products and services, you know, people complain or they just accept the fact that prices have risen to a degree that’s pricing a lot of people out of their lives, really. But, you know, in the conversations I’ve had with people and in the literature that I’ve read, there’s no consideration, I think, that the businesses who are raising their prices have had their rents raised, that so much of a business’ costs include rent, right? And that very few businesses actually [00:48:00] own the building that they’re working out of. Leslie: Yeah, commercial rent is a whole other story because, you know, the protections on residential rent are not what they could be in most places around the world, but there’s no protections on commercial rent, like no limitations there. So it’s entirely possible that local bakery, their rent could go up by, like double. It could go up from $20,000 a year to $60,000 a year. There’s no restrictions on that. There’s nowhere to appeal that. There’s nothing. So, they are, in some ways, even those small businesses, especially, independent businesses and so on, are very at risk of this. And there’s a whole branch of kind of retail gentrification studies as well that kind of looks at the impacts on the local economic landscape of things like this as well. Yeah. Chris: Hmm. Wow. Thank you for unveiling that for us. I mean, uh, so much. So my last question, Leslie, has to do [00:49:00] with what is mentioned in your book, what you refer to as “the right to stay put.” And so, “the right to stay put is a common rallying cry in response to the dangers of displacement. Drawing inspiration from the broader notion of the right to the city, the right to stay put insists that communities are entitled to remain in the places they have contributed to. Furthermore, the right to dwell extends beyond simply having a home in an area, encompassing the right to continue using commercial, community, and public spaces and institutions, as well as the dignity of defending such rights. Importantly, it recognizes that agency is a critical factor. People do not want to be forced to move, nor do they want to be forced to stay in place. Rather, people value choice, the ability to participate in [00:50:00] decisions that affect their communities and the right to resist when they need to.” And so I’m curious what you think it would take for people, say, in urban environments to achieve or enshrine the right to stay put or the right to dwell in their places. Leslie: Yeah, I think we could talk about kind of two main avenues. One would be more of the top-down approach, which is to work to enshrine anti-displacement measures in neighborhoods, which can include everything from rent control or rent stabilization, to the right to return when there are redevelopment projects going on, to deeply affordable housing in new developments, to communities themselves taking on the role of becoming developers, but creating housing within the community for the [00:51:00] community. Not to draw in new residents or not to primarily draw new residents. Again, we’re not trying to like, build a fortress around communities or anything, but rather to say, “this is housing that we’re earmarking for people from the local community who are struggling with their rent or struggling to find housing, or who need perhaps entry-level home ownership opportunities and to kind of provide that. So there’s the kind of top-down approach, really pushing our local governments to have things like community benefit ordinances when new developments are happening that force developers to actually pay attention to what the community needs and to provide those benefits and such. And then, from the kind of ground-up or more grassroots piece, the right to stay put is the the willingness, the ability to organize and come together in some of the places that I mentioned throughout the book. You know, it really [00:52:00] is community-level organization where people have really rallied to make it deeply difficult for planners or developers to kind of roll in and roll out their vision without any pushbacks, to the extent that their neighbourhoods become less of a target for gentrification, because it’s like, “oh yeah, we wanna build something there. Oh, that’s gonna be a real pain in the butt. The community is not gonna let us get away with what we wanna do.” And that means really making it possible for people to come out to meetings, organizing protests, that kind of right to resist. Sometimes taking... You know, we have long histories in many cities of squatters movements and perhaps we need to revitalize some of that old energy, as well. A kind of refusal to leave. And to find ways, you know, perhaps they don’t always have to be kind of in-your-face protest ways, but what are ways to mobilize things like mutual aid to help make sure that our [00:53:00] neighbors are supported, for example, if they have to go before a landlord-tenant board, how can we use community resources and knowledge to actually support one another to stay in place? And that can be everything from addressing food insecurity to having a local rent bank, to partnering with nonprofits, churches, other religious institutions that may have an interest in building social and nonprofit housing to create some of those options. So I think it’s about looking at the kind of wide range of alternative forms of housing and housing provision, looking at community mobilizing, community resources, and also tackling the local policy agenda to make staying put as possible, or to enshrine it as a right at a kind of higher level, as well. Chris: Hmm, hmm. Yeah, you go into [00:54:00] great detail about this in the book, and I’m very grateful for that. And the right to stay put kind of jumped out, the text jumped out of the page at me, because living here in Oaxaca, I came to know about this declaration that was created in 2009 by people in a number of communities here in the Mixteca region of Oaxaca who were meeting with their migrant kin who had gone to work in California and the people who had stayed in the community. And the declaration is literally translated as “the right to not migrate.” The way it was translated in English by the author of the book of the same name, was “The Right to Stay Home.” And so while there’s a lot of differences between these contexts in terms of rural, indigenous communities here in Mexico and modern urban communities in the global north, there is this sense, [00:55:00] this kind of perhaps shared context wherein the ability to to stay in a place in order so that community can be conjured and maintained and of course enjoyed and lived in, seems to thread its way through these different social movements from the global north into the global south. So, I’m really grateful to see that and to know that there’s similar understandings, of course not the same, but similar understandings that are even somewhat unorthodox and unexpected given the political context that sometimes challenge them or preclude something like that from coming up. So that’s a little way of saying thank you for your time today, Leslie. On behalf of our listeners, I’d like to thank you for your willingness to join me and to speak to these often complex issues. And on behalf of them, I’d also like to ask you how they might find out more about [00:56:00] your work and your books: Gentrification Is Inevitable And Other Lies, Feminist City: Claiming Space In A Manmade World, and finally Higher Expectations: How To Survive Academia, Make It Better For Others, And Transform The University. Leslie: Yeah, thank you so much for this conversation. People can find out about me and my work at my website, which is just lesliekern.ca. If you just google my name, it will come up easily enough. Feminist City and Gentrification Is Inevitable And Other Lies. For an international audience, you can find those books through Verso books in the US and UK. There’s also many translations of both of those books, so you may have the opportunity to read it in your local language if you want to do that as well. The more recent book, Higher Expectations is available from my Canadian publisher Between the Lines Books and in the US [00:57:00] from AK Books, as well. And there’s also Epub versions and for the first two books, audiobook versions as well. And I’ve written lots of articles on these topics as well, in the Guardian and other places. So you can get a little snippet of my thoughts if you, again, Google my name and all of these things will come up in short order. So thank you for letting me share that as well. Chris: Yeah, of course. I’ll make sure that the links to all those pages that you mentioned are available on the End of Tourism website and the Substack when the episode launches. And once again, Leslie, a really beautifully revealing conversation today. I think it’s something that will not just provoke generally, but provoke a willingness in our listeners to reconsider some of the assumptions that they’ve had about gentrification. So, once again, thank you for your time today. Leslie: Thank you for having me. I really enjoyed the conversation. Appreciate it. Get full access to Chris Christou at chrischristou.substack.com/subscribe [https://chrischristou.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_4]

S7 #2 | Animism, Healing and Psychedelic Tourism | Adam Aronovich (Healing From Healing)

Show Notes Adam’s doctoral thesis and time in the Amazon Iatrogenesis and Healing Culture Epistemic Humility Our Traumadelic Stories Clash in Understandings of Causation Disneyfication of Plant Medicine Individual vs Relational Healing Psychedelic Tourism’s Local Consequences Spirit Realm Fallout Animistic Perspective Narrative, Cults, and Conspirituality Get full access to Chris Christou at chrischristou.substack.com/subscribe [https://chrischristou.substack.com/subscribe?utm_medium=podcast&utm_campaign=CTA_4]