world ever since the imf was created, 1944, and since we went off gold in 1971. i can assure you that although it will be changed over the next several years and decades, it will not be cataclysmic and it won't happen on july 1. host: ted truman from the peterson institute for international economics, thank you for your time. guest: you're welcome. host: i want to bring you over to the justice department. we are waiting on attorney general eric holder, set to announce charges against individuals in the chinese military c-span.erage here on

>> we are live at the justice department where eric holder is set to announce charges against the chinese military, accusing them of hacking u.s. companies for trade secrets. "the wall street journal" writing that this is the first time the u.s. government has

charged. worked for thes people's liberation army to hack into companies. officials have long complained that china aggressively targets u.s. companies for trade secrets that give them a competitive advantage, a charge china has denied, saying it has no basis in fact.

we wait for this briefing, here is a look at what is ahead this week in congress. two veteran reporters here in

washington. here to give us the week ahead in washington. what is on the president's agenda? st: this is energy savings and climate change. last week he did infrastructure. this week if there is a thing it is foreign investments in the u.s. he is bringing business leaders to the white house on tuesday. later week he is going to cooperstown to the baseball hall of fame to discuss tourism. that seems to be the name of the week. they call it his pen and phone think when he tries to do things on his own. on his agenda this week? it does that sound like something is asking congress to do.

guest: this is basically highlighting things he thinks he can do or has been able to do. he has this program called hich is a way he is coordinated a lot of agencies to help city and states to attract into the u.s.. he has a couple of examples that are a big lands in puerto rico. they just got a deal with a belgian aerospace up a need for oklahoma. these are the showcase moment he's got. it underscores how limited his power and ability is without congress. back this week. the senate was in last week. start with the house. what is on the agenda? guest: the defense authorization bill is coming to the house. hundreds of amendments had been filed. they will decide on voting some of them.

nsa issues come up, military sexual assault. givingas been talk of people who have served in the military green cards. this is something that is very controversial. it is half of what the dream act is. some democrats and republicans [indiscernible] that is something to watch in both the house and the senate. in the senate site, the tax extender bill we talked about last week. that got bogged down in disputes over amendments. they cannot come to an agreement. of bill is similar to the medicare formula where they cannot get a big tax reform bill through congress so these tax breaks are popular in both parties. said this is it. we're going to do this one more

time and we are going to attack this. she could get a boat. her process has gone as smoothly as it could go. she would get probably a big bipartisan vote. the other big thing i think to watch is tomorrow. we have a tea party test. we have big primaries in kentucky, georgia, idaho, oregon. you have incumbent republicans being challenged from the right including mitch mcconnell. also in the house you have mike simpson, an ally speaker john boehner he was being challenged. we have some legislation moving. not huge pieces of bills. the election season is up and running. will be talkedat about on the floor, there are the debates that happened off the floor. ehe bead story for -- th

--d story for the hill.com are on john boehner. there was controversy last week for a white house senior adviser. she said she had a commitment from john boehner to move immigration this year. boehner has mocked his republican colleagues back home a week or so ago. he had to walk those back when he got to washington. what is he going to do? is he going to be the speaker next year? is this a legacy? boehner has been a dealmaker. he wants to move immigration reform but it is so hard to move the house republican conference. hartley because of republicans say "why are we doing this?" something devised?

boehner does feel when it sits in the house the ball is in his court. there has been a lot of talk very concerned of what john boehner could do. of course, what would eric cantor do? the possible successor. he has indicated he is not ready to move on anything unless he has the support of the house republicans. boehner is saying we are not going to passes through the senate. we are not going to move any bill unless it has the majority of the majority. anything on immigration right now is not supposed to have the majority of the majority. it is very intriguing. the auguste is recess. if it does not happen by the august recess, what democrats sharply criticize republicans. they have held off. house, we havee

until august to make a determination as to whether the house is going to move. there have been back channel discussions between the speaker's office in the white house. i think they believed the speaker want to go. they understand what his political limitations are. in the meantime, there is this parallel track going on with the department of homeland security where jeh johnson is looking at how he can soften deportations. they have gotten a lot of criticism on the advocacy committee on how many. they are trying to figure out how far to go, whether to make this a wholesale executive action that vastly diminishes the number of deportations. they think this was certainly destroy any deal with republicans.

this might be more on the margins. even if congress does not act. i think what you will see from the administration will be some tweets but nothing that is a wholesale change in immigration law. host: last tuesday the president was on a law-enforcement briefing on immigration. here is what he said. [video clip] r public opinion is on side. we have republicans not allowing it to get to the floor. to their credit, i think speaker boehner and some of the other leaders there to believe that immigration reform is the right thing. they have got to have a political space that allows them to go ahead and get it through the caucus and get it done. ideas iaid if they have

am happy to talk to them. surennot help in on making that every letter of what is in the senate bill is exactly what lands on my desk. there are some core principles that we've got to get done. we have to have stronger border security. sure we areake dealing with companies that are not doing the right things by workers. we need an improved legal system. the weights are so long through the legal process. long through the legal process. we need to make sure there is a way for people to earn some pathway to citizenship. clip]ideo guest: the senate bill right now

has a pack to citizenship for the 11 million immigrants here illegally. there is some interest in the house and certainly some of the republican proponents have talked about a legal status for immigrants who are here illegally but not necessarily a path to citizenship, not something that puts them ahead of others who have been waiting in line to gain citizenship. when the president said he is not hell-bent on getting everything that is in the senate though, that is an important point. opening and an area that would allow the house to come up with a compromise. >host: do this kind of comment help or hurt? guest: i was thinking about that when the president was praising the caribbean appeared boehner has said not to publicly praise him on immigration. -- was praising

him. speaker boehner has said privately that to publicly praise him on immigration. signals weree all go. then house republicans had a meeting. are not ready to move on this. it is a real tough spot for john boehner in the president. they do not have the best relationship. cited 2000 11,g there are still scars from that. they had so many fiscal battles. boehner has said the president needs to step up and have house republicans build some trust. how does he do that? would he did the speech? it will be effective for the next president.

if there is a deal, and i am doubtful, that could be some kind of compromise. host: let's talk about a new story that dominated last week. health care facilities. the story continues through the weekend. what do you think is going to happen with the pressure building for general sense that go.-- shinseki to guest: you have seen this with previous issues that have serious problems for the white house. they do not chop the heads off of people in positions of authority until much later in the process. it you saw the white house during the debacle since in one of his trusted fixes to go into hhs and bail kathleen sebelius out of the problem.

he has sent his deputy chief of staff. he used to be the legislative director for the white house. him with this review of what the problems are. between a difference this was that it was centralize. it was in one place. the hospitals are diffuse. these are scattered across the country. anyone of them can be a problem. it starts looking systemic way that is the problem the white house needs to get a hold of. the front page the story this morning is that it was warned back in 2008. that there were problems with the system. there were inaccurate waiting

into and those that are deny veterans health care. what do you make of the story and the impact that is is having this week? sayhe white house likes to that anymore and the president at the very beginning that he should realize that every day some plays someone in the federal government is screwing up that eventually some of those end up on his desk. you might have warnings. they have tried to tackle one of the persistent problems, these long list of just the foot -- disability claims. they say they have been able to shorten that. assertion comes into question that they were gaming the system and the numbers on other types of treatment.

the white house is that we have tried to deal with some of these problems we were presented with. here is one where you had 40 people die while waiting. it is a big problem for the white house. it is probably overshadowing yesterday the chief of staff had to say that the president is mad as hell. we have not seen the president mad as hell yet but certainly his chief of staff is saying they're taking it seriously. on the hill, there efforts -- a legislative efforts, i believe, to give sin jackie more authority to fire people, which

does not have at this point -- that is to give him more authority. guest: the house considers that bill that would give him that much more power. in his testimony last week, he did fairly well. he said he was mad as hell. he took a lot of blame. a trio of republican senators had him step aside. we do not know how many of these ongoing investigations will be lawsuits but overall, he has been able to keep his job and said he has served at the pleasure of the president. his first impulse is not to fire people. he has not called for his resignation. but this will go on for a while. one of the most damning things is you have these not only cooking the books, but the cover-up. >> you have a former senator of nebraska. why does it matter?

>> if you are in trouble, whether republican or democrat, if the other party is calling you to step aside, -- if members of your own team, we have seen that over the years, where different politicians have gone into trouble, but when your own team turns on you, that is when you are in trouble. maybe this could be the beginning of it here and we are in election season. democrats do not want to be defending him when he is in a moment of fire. maybe this could be the first of several democrats, we will see. guest: bob kerrey is a veteran navy seal who lost his leg in action. he brings more weight to the argument. host: served in vietnam were, >> good morning.

i am joined by the system attorney general, executive ,ssistant to rector of the fbi and the special agent in charge for the fbi pittsburgh office. in the 2013 state of the union, president obama caught the theft of corporate secrets by foreign companies "a real threat to our security as well as to our economy." we are here to discuss a matter that proves this threat is all too real. today we're announcing an indictment against five officers of the chinese people's liberation army for serious cyber security breaches against companies.n victim these represent the first [indiscernible]

inederal grand jury pittsburgh has found that the five chinese military officers conspired together and with others to hack into the computers of organizations in the western pennsylvania and elsewhere in the united states. westinghouse , technologiesa incorporated, united states steel, united steelworkers union, and a solar world. by membersew notches of the chinese military. the range of trade secrets and other sensitive business information stolen is annificant and demands aggressive response. it alleges that they maintained unauthorized access to computers to steal information from these entities that would be useful to their competitors in china including state-owned enterprises. in some cases, they stole trade secrets that would have been particularly beneficial to chinese companies at the time

that they were stolen. in others, they still sensitive internal communications that would provide a competitor or adversary in litigation with insight into the strategy and the vulnerabilities of the american entities. the alleged hacking appears to be conduct did for no other reason then to advantage state owned companies and other interests in china at the expense of businesses here in the united states. this is a tactic that the united states government categorically denounces. said, weent obama has do not collect intelligence to advantagecompetitive to united states companies or to the united states commercial sector. our economic security and ability to compete fairly are directly linked to our national security. the success of american companies since the founding has represented hard work and fair play by our citizens.

this is how it ought to be across the globe, success in the international marketplace should be based solely on a companies ability to innovate and compete, not on a sponsored government ability to spy and steal secrets. when a foreign nation uses intelligence resources and tools against an american executive or corporation to obtain trade secrets or sensitive information for the benefit of state-owned companies, we must say "enough is enough." this administration will not tolerate actions by any nation that seeks to illegally sabotaged american companies and undermines their competition in the operation of the free market. this case should serve as a wake-up call to the seriousness of the ongoing cyber threats. these charges represent a groundbreaking step forward in addressing that threat. this makes clear it that state actors who engage in espionage

even from faraway places like shanghai will be exposed for their criminal conduct and such for apprehension and prosecution in an american court of law. it is my pleasure to turn it over to the assistant attorney general for the national security division. thank you, sir. the national security division commission is to -- a mission is to protect the nation security by using every legal tool available to confront and defeat threats to our country. today that tool is an indictment ofked by the great ability our justice system. the threat is from members of unit 61398 of the chinese military that both targeted the u.s. private sector for commercial advantage. conspiredthat members to hack into computers of six

u.s. victims to still information that would provide an economic advantage to the competitors including chinese state owned enterprises. only broad, consensus as these two chinese government officials they responded by publicly challenging us to provide hard evidence of their hacking that could stand up in court. today we are. for the first time, we are exposing the faces and names behind the keyboard in shanghai used to steal from american businesses. thanks to the investigation of the fbi and the hard work of the western district of pennsylvania, this indictment ascribes with particularity specific actions on specific days by specific actors to use their computers to steal information from across our economy. it describes how they targeted information in industries ranging from nuclear to steal to renewable energy.

-- steel to renewable energy. women ofthe men and our area spent their days competing in the global marketplace, these members of units 61398 were spending their days in shanghai stealing the fruits of our labor. it shows the business information that these individuals still, including trade secrets, would have been particularly beneficial to chinese companies. let me give you some examples to the allegations. that solot the time world was rapidly losing its market share to chinese competitors rising exports will be low-cost, these hackers were stealing cost, pricing and strategy information. while westinghouse was negotiating with the chinese state owned enterprise over the construction of nuclear power the hackers stole designs for component of the

plants. to be clear, this conduct is criminal. it is not conduct that most responsible nations within the global economic community would tolerate. at the department of justice and the fbi, we have repeatedly pledged that we would do more to hold those accountable who engage in these actions. today we begin to fill that pledge. we will continue using all of the tools at our disposal to pursue those that steal our intellectual property matters who they are or where they reside. i would now like to turn it over , who has been a valuable partner in these efforts. >> thank you. good morning. pittsburgh has long been preeminent in the metal industries and home to organized labor. now as a result, pittsburgh has become the target of state-sponsored cyber intrusions.

by organizations targeted the chinese defendants named in the indictment are united states steel am of the largest still company in the united states, westinghouse, and of the world's leading developers of nuclear alcoa, theology, largest aluminum company in the united states, allegheny technologies, a large specialty metals company headquartered in pittsburgh. union,ted auto workers the largest industrial union in north america and solar world, it a leading manufacturing company. beingvictims are tired of raided. it is important for their government to take a stand against criminals who infiltrate and exploit their computer networks. activity appears designed to benefit the chinese own steel industry.

we struggle to compete with china on the pricing of steel and other goods. our competitive advantage has been to engineer superior, stronger, and more advanced cts such as tubular goods and seamless standard line pipes. these initiatives cost of dollars in capital and research and development costs. intrusions and able the theft of this technology and blunt our ability to compete. at the time of these computer intrusions by the chinese ati and, u.s. steel and other companies were involved in disputes to reduce dumping by china's state-owned steel companies. rick -- mechanisms. the extent also made them targets.

the hackers stole internal trade attorney/client communication, and cost and production analysis. the conspiracy by chinese hackers targeted each of these suchies at critical times as in the midst of negotiations to build a nuclear power plant in the middle of a trade case. of espionage are far-reaching. the victim companies use -- lose their capital investment in research and technology. the important message is that cyber it left impacts real people in real and painful ways. the lifeblood of any organization is the people who work, strife, and sweat for it. intrusion occurs, production slows. parent close. workers get laid off and lose their homes. towns inens in steel

western pennsylvania. other similarmany towns and cities in the united states. this 21st century burglary has to stop. we would not stand -- we will not stand idly by if someone pulled a tractor trailer to a headquarters, cracked the l ock, and loaded up information. theft ornd cyber commercial advantage can and will be prosecuted criminally even when the defendants are state actors. these organizations and every organization are entitled to a fair shot in the level one. it took world-class investigators to follow a complicated evidence to one building on one block in one

city in china. we stand ready to bring these adjusters. now you'll hear from the executive assistant rector of the fbi. >> thank you. good morning, everybody. said, weleagues have are charging five chinese hackers of illegally penetrating networks of six u.s. victims. it demonstrates that we will not stand by and watch other countries steal our nation's intellectual property. that the chinese government has brightly slot to use cyber espionage to obtain economic advantage for its state-owned industries. diplomatic efforts and public exposure has failed to curtail these activities. we have taken it to the next step of securing an indictment

of some of the most prolific hackers. these individuals are alleged to have used a variety of techniques including e-mails that launch malicious software to steal proprietary and sensitive information from our u.s. victims. they have suffered significant losses as a result of the tactics. being built every day by the innovation and efforts of american workers. none of us can afford to watch it be stolen. that there are many other victims and we encourage them to come forward and talk with us. as stated earlier by the attorney general, this announcement is a culmination of several years of work by those represented on the stage and many others who are not here today. that includes a task force in

the department of justice national security division, united states attorney office, the fbi pittsburgh office, the cyber division, the counterintelligence division, and the criminal division at fbi headquarters. this investigation has touched 46 fbi field offices in the last several years. it is a landmark case that shows how interaction between u.s. government and private enterprise can succeed. this clears away additional clears the way for additional charges to be made. this is the new normal. this is what you're going to see on a recurring basis, not just every six months or year. it is very clear if you're going to attack americans, whether for criminal or national security purposes, we are going to hold you accountable no matter what

country you live in. thank you. before we take any questions, we would like to make one further statement. just want to confirm that over the past week and there were a series of law enforcement actions undertaken across the globe related to a separate cyber hacking case. ouring in" or nation with international partners, we conducted a series of arrests targeting the purveyors of software that can victimize ordinary americans by stealing and exploiting personal information. noon is an announcement at in new york city. i would refer you to the southern district of the new york attorney's office for other questions related to this case. these two cases show that we are stepping up our cyber enforcement efforts around the arbitratorser the are foreign government or

civilian hackers. we will simply not tolerate these activities. we would be glad to take your questions. [inaudible] our hope the chinese government will respect our criminal justice system and let the case proceeds as it should and let justice take it core. we hope they will work in connection with this and bring these indicted men to justice. we are continuing to remain vigilant when it comes to cyber threats that emanate from china or from other countries. likelyholder, is it these defendants would ever stand trial in a u.s. courtroom? if not, what is the real goal? >> our intention is for the defendant to have due process in an american court of law. that is the intention of what we to holde today,

accountable people who have engaged in activities that violate american criminal law. that is our attention. >> it seems unlikely. do we even have an extra duty -- extra 2 -- extradition treaty with china? aree have stated what intention is. we have brought a charge of indictment. it is our hope to have these people stand before an american jury and face this justice. >> what new tools were available to you to make this happen in 2014 or what obstacles did you remove? >> [inaudible] intoam reluctant to get the details below we shared with you in a fairly detailed complaint. i'm very grateful for the leadership of the president and the attorney general who gave us the green light to proceed. we have both the will and manner

and means to achieve what we have put before you and western pennsylvania. >> since these are state actors, it is impossible -- possible that you bring indictments against a state entity? to discussot going what possible charges might be brought in the future be on to say these cases are hard. it was through phenomena work at the fbi that we are able to bring a case that could save by name what people did and the specific actions and that they took. we hope the conduct will stop by burdening criminal action. if it is not, we will use every tool at our disposal. one thing is clear. the status quo cannot stand american businesses cannot continue to have their secrets stolen day in and day out.

is there any way they can retaliate in an illegal contest and start filing against u.s. officials who spied on china? that the chinese are now on intervals and they cannot travel outside china. the nations are engaged in intelligence gathering. what a stick which is this case is that we have a entity usinged intelligence tools to gain commercial advantage. it is not possible to put a dollar value. know what itf you

research andhe development in an increasingly competitive global market. you know what the impact is. the dollar value will be substantial. >> millions or billions? to give a not like range but it is very substantial. that the you said investigators were able to track these hackers to a block in a building where they work. wouldn't that give an opportunity to apprehend them to actually bring them to justice? we have been able to charge a specific individuals i name -- by name. we mentioned where they work with the people's liberation

army unit 61398. wehope and anticipate that will be able to bring them to justice in the western district of pennsylvania and have them have two process and be able to face their charges in a court of law. able to find them in this building or was this just a building like another government building and they were not in there? and the impression that i got thatthe statement was these individuals were tracked it down to a building on this particular block. why not take them in? >> the building is in shanghai, china. hope that these individuals come to face the charges in the u.s. courtroom. beyond that, i'm not going to comment further. can you speak a little bit in

terms of the u.s. the jobs that have been lost as a result of these kinds of hackers? >> i think there is a lot more data on that and other forms. i can speak directly from western pennsylvania. that hasken everything been thrown at us in western pennsylvania and faced all of the challenges that take over the marketplace. if you look specifically at the example i told you about earlier an oilinvestments in country to come at u.s. steel bought a plant in texas to compete. they expanded their capabilities at great cost and expense. this is over and above research and development. in theese intrusions hit market was flooded with a low-cost pipes in china, these plants were padlocked and people lost their jobs. it has a real and direct

negative impact in the jurisdiction where i've cracked this. the same is true in ohio. that was another location for some of this investment to compete. country there has been a real and demonstrable loss of jobs and negative impacts in our community. >> you are saying the plant in texas was shut down as a result of the allegations you are making today? >> the low-cost sales of competitive products and the cyber hacking, there was a very substantial trade case about this in 2009 that you can look at. >> the contact occurred. what made you decide that this is the time to unseal these

charges? tothese cases take time bring. we bring cases when they are at a point where we can identify individuals or entities responsible for the conduct. to a question about a missed opportunity, when thing you have to keep in mind is the people who were charged with this have never been in the united states. these hackers employed by the people's liberation army, they would not have done this without the approval [indiscernible] the happen without the chinese approval. -- this does not happen without the chinese approval. what else can you do to bring them to justice? >> we hope you will have cooperation with the chinese government. we will see what happens. it is in the interest of china

to be seen as respect yours of the rule of law. our hope is that they will operate with us to the extent we do not have the cooperation we will use all the means that are necessary to us and also have these people appear in the federal court. >> there are a range of things we can do and we will employ all of them. >> why now? you mentioned these cases take a long time to develop. a lot of this activity has been going on for a long time. mention that the leadership gave a green light to this case. was this a problem in the past? was it simply that decision? this is a great investigation zumba the people who were standing behind me. it took a number of years to put

together. it was a matter of getting comfortable to bring them forward. not as a result of any interaction or problems we had with in our own government. >> last question and then we can spend some time after. what extent do you see other american industries being vulnerable? >> i would expect concern about other industries that potentially are at risk not only from china but from other countries as well. as we have all indicated, this will serve as a notice i hope to every nation around the world that would engage in these kinds of activities. we will bring charges where that is a probe writ. we will take all measures that we possibly can to hold individuals responsible for their conduct. >> thank you. >> thank you.

♪ >> some of the people on the stage will be available for one-on-one's. we are going to do, for those in getting a better look into the indictment, we have a person available from the national security division to walk them through, give them a little bit of background. if you are interested in following up, we're going to mingle back at the room. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2014] >> you can watch this this conference any time at our website to spend.org. here's a look at our live coverage today on the c-span network. pence will discuss his proposal to extend his date health care plan for low-income earners as an alternative to medicaid.

he is speaking at the american enterprise institute and washington, d.c. that is live on c-span2. gives aamson commencement address today at lake forest university in winston-salem carolina. this is her first public appearance and being hired last week from the newspaper. she is the first woman appointed as executive editor of the new york times, taking over the position in 2011. see here remarks today at 1:00 p.m. eastern. the house returns today following a weeklong district work period. today a number of suspension bills including awarding congressional gold medals to ariel sharon/ week, funding for water infrastructure projects and national defense operations. when the senate returns for legislative business tomorrow, they will to eight and go on a

number of executive branch nominations. see live coverage. the communication policy had not been reformed since 1934. there was really a compelling need in 1995 to begin a process of massive telecommunication reform. you basically had boxes. you had a box for broadcasters, telephone companies, a box for cable,istance, satellite. we had to come in and try to eliminate the lines of demarcation and promote competition. leaving the competition there would be innovation and more investment, more consumer choice. think the results has proven as correct. that is exactly what has happened. focused onlargely

telephone service, whether it was local or long-distance. to some extent we focused on cable tv service and we wanted to take the steps to make that market competitive which we did. the primary focus was really just what we called plain old telephone service, p.o.t.s. vanished as well if they can about how the transition from the air at telephone service to the time when everything is delivered over the internet should take ways. in my mind, they have done a good job. >> evaluating the 1996 telecommunications act. tonight at 8:00 eastern on c-span2. michael is an author and architecture critic for the new york times.

up next, he discusses his recent travels were public spaces have become the site of mass protest activist movements. eating at yale university, he asked things feelings between the design of public faces of politics. >> thank you. is that you must have one most of those. thank you for coming today. i read last week that the mayor of madrid wants to ban all protests in the center of venice capital. anyone who has traveled to they werecome across protesters

a village collapsed. it to the one in this art. last month sense of thousands of squarerators to go for imagery, rallying against continuing unemployment. during the night some crashed with. correct down, provoking a wave of populist outrage petitions and to prove and all caps airings and central majority at a time when the city needs to attract tourism and investment. it undermines the city's image. i would say the reverse is true. . they now include tacitus is

handed down by a judge -- the death sentences handed by a judge in march. the muslim brotherhood are accused of attacking a police station in minya where an officer was killed last august. there we are. summer'stanbul, last i went to watch it. the crackdown by government pursueemboldened them to corruption charges against him. last month he blocked twitter and youtube to prevent the wereng of what he said false on additions of corruption and wrongdoing. provided a vote of confidence for those who use victories to threaten mass arrests and encourage -- encourage enemies to flee the

country. point about threatened freedoms. they speak for the religious conservatives that constitute for roughly half of the country. many fell themselves marginalized over turkey secularize. intellectuals, secular minded, nationalist, all who have discovered each other. i want to unpack some notions about public space today, the topic of widespread discussion. i will restate the obvious about the politics. we are talking both about space and bodies, about the physical presence of bodies occupying inseparable from

and reformed by the interactions of those body. not fixed. they constantly change. i want to look at specific public spaces occupied by protesters. been to broaden the discussion to include public space. we talk about public space we miss the point if we limit to went to focus. asked about the death of migrant workers constructing a stadium 832 workers have been killed so far working on world cup construction sites. a well-known architect was recently quoted as saying "i am nothing to do with the workers. it is not my duty as an architect to look at it." her partner didn't denounced "moralizing political correctness."

trying to paralyze us with that conscious and inspirations." i sort of added earlier that the spaces we design and not just the bodies they are using but the ones that use them. i am grateful for these unfortunate marks by the architects because they helped exonerate a timely conversation. there is an undercurrent that runs throughout this talk between design and adaptation, intention and improvisation, control and formlessness, engagement in isolation. alone.cts do not act i see here a rich and promising vein for architects today he wanted to reclaim architectures place at the decision-making table, to return into the center of discussions about how we live

and who we wish to be as a society and not only make formally pioneering buildings. purely we cannot say that protest -- clearly we cannot say they're taking over public space. those are migrant workers. prague. urban public space has grown. awareness on the government and populist level of its meaning into use in a graduate -- democratic society, the relation of design to things like of e public health. when we talk about politics and public space, we should begin with the given that politics already exists "in the home or on the streets or in the virtual

spaces that are equally unbounded by the architecture of the house and square." architects, and planners designed public space to serve certain functions or prevent others. this is a political act. this is how you will be able to drive in and out of the supposedly open streets that have been created around the buildings of the world trade center. what happens when people use the spaces when other politics are enacted? it is enacted by changing configurations of bodies within the space that makes architecture inseparable from politics. space is at page four action. requires action space of appearance and a true one is the organization of the people as it rises out of acting

and sticking together. they expected this through the interaction of people in a place. she added"it's true is between e living together for this purpose." a polis happens in the places between us, which concentrate in public space. publicid about gezi, spaces make visible to the world people who might have remained to each other. occupation requires disrupting spaces designed and maintained for other purposes. this is a picture of zuccotti. you can see the various areas set aside. it looks chaotic but there is a tent area, a media area, a library. none of which were authorized by the people who designed the

park. this challenge is a far day. public space functioning as the object of that challenge and the instrument of protest. the challenge might be as benign orsleeping in a square holding a sign. a challenges territory. it is a complex capability with embedded logix of power and recognition. protests like the ones in tahr cast intoor zuccotti doubt the binary of national versus global by which modernity is formulated into structures. "to occupy the spaces is to make their territory reality and thereby their embedded logix of power. by introducing logics of sharing ." bodies and space together, crucially this combination implies a fiscal sacrifice and risk.

broadcastsmedia protests in real time around the world. the 24-hour news cycle, facebook, twitter feed the global publics appetite for drama and the expectation of bearing witness to anything and everything instantly. from a safe distance. facebook and twitter can call people to arms and, like television and smartphones, keep an eye on what is happening so wiceorities might think t about cracking down. it is not a coincidence that turkey police who fired tear gas in gezi were chastened by worldwide broadcasts critical of their actions. cities off the media radar where protesters also gathered the police felt no such constraints. there is a symbiotic relationship. protesters count on there being witnesses remotely in a

virtual space but it is only real bodies that provide the drama. to quote butler "the immediate requires bodies on the street to have an event. even as the bodies require the media to exist in a global arena. this constitutes a contemporary version of the public sphere. bodies on the line have to be thought of as their and here, now and then, transported and stationary. with different political consequences following from these two modalities of space and time." that spacesot just be physically occupied but which spaces are occupied and how. by howuildings, squares, many people or who. protests in gezi, tahrir, plaza catalunia, they shared

traits. they were the consequence of .rban modernization programs all were surrounded by buildings and are contained but porous spaces. de catalunyaaca are traffic hubs. tahrir is a traffic circle. plaza has a park at its center. akin to gezi, which has a part with and taksim where. -- taksim square. this is gezi. this is the square of taksim. planned --t erdogan this is the original ottoman

barracks, this is the plane he have for tearing down gezi and replacing it with basically a shopping mall in the form of the old ottoman barracks. . t's focus on zuccotti it is a theater in the round. a mostly concrete, rectangular plaza typically used by office workers and bounded by streets and tall buildings. here you see broadway. i will show you a map in the moment. a few hundred people can make it look crowded and more people can watch it and watch what is happening inside from the sidelines and above. it was not until 2011 a site for protesters.

there are hundreds of rallies and protests in new york every year. the parks department issued 250 permits for rallies and vigils last year, most of them for the plaza near the u.n. or union square in washington square park , thomas payne plaza near the federal courts. was a serendipitous choice. protesters wanted to occupy wall street so they set up three blocks north and a park next door to the world trade center site. let me go back to point out. of the layout of how the protesters arranged the park, rearranged the park for their occupation. how many people were at zuccotti site? the a fair number. there were all these areas of food delivery. .he media centers

much of the observing crowd was here. the world trade center is going to be there. i will get back to that. just to show you -- here is zuccotti. here is wall street. they went to blocks north. this is the world trade center. it is around the corner. this was not a public park but one of the cities so-called privately owned public spaces. u.s. steel built the park in 1968 in return for the right to add additional floors to its office building on the north side of the park. the citywide program created similar quasipublic spaces by granting private developers exemptions to zoning restrictions. mostly developers created barren inzas, which we all know, return for these bonuses.

purposely undesirable and poorly maintained. they did not want anyone to gather in front of their buildings. step up was a designwise from the earliest classes and was originally called liberty plaza park. it became a popular spot in warm n ather after a million-dollar renovation after 9/11 when it was renamed zuccotti by brookfield properties. because of the park, because the park was not published, it rulest subject to the that govern public parks. like the prohibition on sleeping overnight. of this.photograph this was the original sign that told you what you could not do at zuccotti park. this is why people could settle in zuccotti park. you could not skateboard, rollerskate, or bicycle. that's the short list.

this is now of the list of the things you can no longer do in zuccotti. small print. you can't put up a tent, lie down, sit for a period of time, in otherbags down, words you cannot sit in zuccotti park and stage a protest. it had not had those restrictions, it was a place people could occupy, unlike a public park that close at night. it became a site by default. the irony that occupy could only occupy a public space because it took over a private one by u.s. steel and then owned by a big commercial real estate company was lost on no one. just as important was how that space was occupied. it's renovation a decade ago added trees that you see provided cover and divided the space in ways the protesters

capitalize on. park, oneccotti me, as a told venn diagram of characters with economic disenchantment. i do not think it is incidental that the strangers who came zi, andr in zuccotti, ge elsewhere formed pop up towns. of what theyorm imagined to be a larger, equitable city with separate spaces for free food, legal services, libraries, medical stations and so forth. aristotle talks about the ideal polis. stance of the di a herald's cry. people communicated face-to-face. the shifting between bodies. it was meaningful zuccotti using microphones.

a containeding space, allow protesters prevented by the police from using microphones. repeated phrases that speakers at the park uttered so that heardes could be farther away. a game of telephone. the same crowd would have looked puny in central park and there would have been no one to notice. on manyk had not been people's radar before. it was a shambolic, michael modestly used space. it turned out to be a meaningful site. it is on the edge of taksim, a very fluid, unpredictable, open place reflecting the area's

historic identity at the heart of modern multicultural turkey. europeanwhere poor immigrants settled during the 19th century. it was a honky-tonk corridor, a bians,for gays and les florida movie theaters and french arcades. it is were young people and tourists congregate. gravestones from an armenian were demolished and used to create stairs. it was a project that brought modernism to the urban fabric. as it did a jumble of hotels and the opera house that surround the park. all this was precisely what prime minister erdogan did not like. he triggered the protest by threatening to demolish and taksiremake taksim as a neo-ottn

themepark. getting ready of -- getting rid of gezi. what several turks described as their unruly commons. there is little public green space in istanbul. the fact that gezi was unpredictable made it suspicious to erdogan and a natural center of gravity for protesters. compactccotti, its design surrounded by streets with walkways dividing lawns and is used fountains turned out to be ready made for the hodgepodge of services, and commitments, gardening efforts at the site. there was some created use made of materials to provide areas for picnic tables and exhibition spaces. something called the revolutionary museum, a pop-up gallery that chronicled the history of turkeish protests. me, people feel

it is truly theirs. not something awarded to them by leaders. this is critical. the notion of top down versus bottom up public space. space is are given and possibly use -- spaces that are given and ely used.sivly the entirety of the public realm. politics are no less present when this realm constitutes sidewalks, transit stations, streets, highways, and playgrounds where daily life happens in public. our very definition of public, of democracy is tested by the design and use of these spaces. who controls these spaces, shapes them, and what do their physical properties say about

us? this is a view of the plaza at madison square park in new york. i will interrupt myself to tell you briefly. it is where fifth avenue and broadway cross. around 20 3rd street. there is madison square park and then there are these triangles e crossing.the one of the early things the bloomberg administration proposed was to turn that triangle and part of the crossing into a pedestrian plaza. whoael beirut, a designer has his office right there. even he said this is insane. you have one of the most beautiful parks in the city, who is going to want to sit in the middle of the street? why were they going to sit in the street when they can go sit in the park?

this turned out to be one of the great urban renewal projects in manhattan. why do people want this -- to sit in the street. park is different from being into a plaza. a plus is continuous with the rest of the city. people want to be in the middle of things. where they can have views of the empire state building. there is things happening. we can reclaim these spaces that people use to move more freely before they were given over to cars if we look at the street as another kind of public space. plazas.one of the it has been converted. the definition of public is tested by those distribution,

design, and use of these spaces. who controls these spaces and what do their physical properties say about us? the questions have been at heart of the critique of neoliberal values. whose bankruptcy helped promote the collapse that inspire the occupy the front. the 1% is epitomized by million-dollar apartments and the skyscrapers around new york's most cherished public site, central park. leveraging views of that while casting shadows onto it and on the people who use it. this is a picture of what is of what57, the first are going to be many extremely tall luxury towers around 57th .treet this will be the puny asked of them. it is 1000 feet tall. most of them are about 1400 feet tall. as tall as the world trade center.

some people paid $90 million to get the penthouses in this ugly building. which is a mystery to almost everybody. there you are. these are some of the buildings around central park, just to give you an idea of what has happened to development in the city. partially for reasons that are technological. the ability to create very elevatorsildings with and stairs that can take up very little space and get people onto the top of these buildings. the zoning rules, i do not want to get bogged down in the weeds. it is interesting, the relationship of architecture, zoning, and public health. basically, these buildings have happened. get cityaving to approval. developers bought a lot of

related plots, added up the rights for all of them and created a building. nobody imagined you would be able to create a building that was 5000 feet high with one thatment on each floor -- was 1500 feet high with one apartment on each floor. unless you had people who were happy to pay $100 million for an apartment. economy has made that possible and then the technology of the buildings has conspired to make that possible. that is what is happening. as i said, it leverages a public space in central park, which is what they are essentially selling. a few over the park. -- a few over the park. ath street is not in itself fantastic place to live. the privileging of private property, the reshuffling of public resources, these type of neoliberal issues cast the spotlight on public space.

it was noted that the assumption was not widely made that streets were a public space. it was space you move through. only poor people dwell in the streets. i do not think that is quite true but we overestimate the perspective of jane jacobs, who extrapolated theories about design and public space from living in the west village. that is jane jacobs on her bicycle. happened to grow up, the west village. the village was not like most urban neighborhoods. the famous german restaurant on union square during the middle of the last century had an open air café. that mayor laguardia shut it down as an affront to public morals. it encouraged men and women to loiter in the streets and only the destitute and depraved wood or in the streets. the restaurant closed in the 1980's because nobody went to union square and longer.

the romance of the new yorkers hanging out on their stoops and children playing stickball belies the fact that while there were hugs of street life on the lower east side, streets were corridors and not where the middle class dwelt. they were not public spaces. public spaces were parks handed down by authorities like robert moses, who created nearly 800 of them. today we would regard robert moses's park program as a socialist. it was the contribution of sociologists like william white to show how able might like to use parks and streets, to index what makes them friendly places. this is not william white, but this is bryant park. this is bryant park now. it took decades to institute the necessary improvements, some of them financed by public-private partnership. in a sense these

city and public caught up with jacob white with the concept of the public realm just in time to realize how public space was compromised by the neoliberal ruling class and occupied by powerful agencies focused on security and surveillance and powerful agencies exploiting the public advertisement. i would just say about the koch theater, this was the gift of $100 million from david koch. the theater had been created with the idea that was a gift from new york citizens to themselves. it was called the new york state theater from the beginning. and mr. koch was also financing, paid $65 million to create the koch plaza in front of the metropolitan museum, which will

open soon, pretty much outside his window. this gives to the heart of agency and authority. some of the most intriguing examples of -- there he is seen with his wife. so, the construction site. some of the most intriguing examples of political action in public space are not protests per se, but the reconfiguration of public spaces by people, urban designers and architects included, who take matters into their own hands. officially or otherwise. the addition of the ring road in cairo, made by residents of a neighborhood bordering that highway. here you see the ring road as it winds through cairo's sprawl. the highway is a project of hosni mubarak and is part of the disastrous exurbanization that has insulated many of egypt's

wealthy. the proliferation of gated communities is a global phenomenon. perhaps the most disturbing urban trend today. cities are exploding around the world, as we all know. many of them in latin america, india, and china are modeling themselves not after places like boston or new york or berlin. they are mimicking an american-style gated communities, the antithesis of healthy urban growth. the gated residence has become the housing complex of choice in much of the developing world. in terms of open space, it is akin to the enclosures of agricultural land during the 17th century that did away with the commons. the trend is accelerating, and you see its effects in cairo. this is a place called heights, which i went

to see. you have these gated residence with golf courses. that is smack in the middle of the desert. pandering to the elite, focused on the sprawl to encourage these developments. discouraging public transit and public space and he also created the october bridge and causeway, linking to tahrir square with affluent centers in a country with only 14% of the population owns cars and more than 20 million people have almost no green space. mubarak envisioned modern cairo as a middle eastern version essentially of postwar america with automobiles and exodus from a festering city center. it is only natural that the sixth of october bridge became the site of violent protests during the revolution. something even more important happens after mubarak's fall and the purgatory of morsi's rule.

post-revolution cairo residents whose neighborhoods had been ignored by mubarak constructed their own public spaces. in a neighborhood sometimes nicknamed the islamic republic with a population larger than manhattan, residents formed popular committees, neighborhood coalitions, and they pooled resources to fix roads to enhance public squares and police the streets. this was actually a neighborhood committee taking over an area. an egyptian architect with whom i spoke about guerrilla urbanism in cairo -- this was before the military takeover -- told me what has definitely changed is before in cairo, someone always used to dictate where you are allowed to sit or walk, what you're allowed to do or say. this new rights to express yourself in the street is not

minor or a luxury. the street was not really public space. now it is. i saw this nowhere more clearly illustrated than on the ring road which was built specifically to bypass and thereby isolate an immense informal settlement. for years, workers, including government workers living there, had to wait hours every day getting to jobs downtown because they could not take the roads. so, in the absence of help or interference by the government, residents constructed their own on/off ramps to the highway. they built these ramps out of dirt, sand and trash and then , they invited the police to open a kiosk at the interchange, which the police did. it was full on, do it yourself infrastructure. a massive assertion of genuine public authority over public space.

and of course, an implicit rejection of exclusionary politics. i, an egyptian architect and planner put it to me before the takeover, this is always a revolution about unjust urban restrictions on space. people realized they had to determine their own space. they are erupted a battle of ownership throughout egypt overthis is and who determines whoit is. -- whose space it is. in caracas, there is an unfinished and abandoned 45-story office building from the early 1990's and the former central business district of the city which has famously become the improvised home for more than 750 families. those of you who are architects in the room might know this. they have created a vertical

-- vertical squats. the team, which calls itself urban think tank, have studied the tower for years and sees him -- creative reuse that characterizes external settlements. i would say this is true. residents of the david tower have created essentially a mixed-use development. with electricity. a kind of rube goldberg water system. grocery stores, security, office-supply stores, hairdressers, tailors, basketball courts with teams that play in local leagues. a gym. and an evangelical church around which the building's system of government has evolved. what had been an ad hoc adaptation to a site has

increasingly become regulated and redesign. squatters use brick and found materials to demarcate apartments and rooms. bringing a vernacular style of arched doorways, interior windows, all sorts of things that they have seen elsewhere, often in the barrios. bringing this to a glass concrete, modern office tower. , this adaptive reuse, reclaiming public space, is a microcosm of the mega city itself, as pointed out by think tank. as a site for reordering a social metric. the residents unencumbered by design, theories of aesthetics, organism -- or wisdom of the past build what make sense to , them. they go on to say if this is the

id is a if torre dav formal city writ small, urban architects face a major challenge. who and what are we to those we serve? what exactly are we designing and to what end? that is all urban think tank. the group partly tries to answer that question by proposing to put a wind turbine on top of the tower and create a pulley system that would cheaply transport goods and people up and down the tall shaft in the absence of elevators. there are no working elevators in the building. i think there is an answer in the project of the refugee camp in southern west bank, and i will end with this example, and i'm very anxious and happy to take any questions or comments. two architects worked with residents of the camp to create a public plaza, virtually unheard of in such places, and especially problematic among palestinian refugees for whom the creation of any permanent

amenity by establishing normalcy undermines their fundamental self-image as temporary occupants with the right of return to homes in israel. we see this as a notion of eating in public is behavioral, not just a spatial condition, which nonetheless depends on certain spatial aspects. in refugee camps, public and private do not exist conceptually as they do elsewhere. property is neither public nor private in the camps. refugees do not own their homes. nor are streets municipal properties as they are in the cities, because refugees are not cities and the camp is not a city. the legal notion of the refugee camp according to the united nations is in effect a temporary site were displaced individuals, not a civic body. there is no municipality to care for lights and garbage. things like inside and outside are blurred.

a mother may not wear the veil in the camp, whether she is at home were out on the street, but she will wear it when she leaves the camp, which is outside. so, there is a powerful sense of community. six years ago the two architects begin a conversation with residents about creating a public plaza or square. residents were suspicious. not just about normalizing the camp, but creating a space for men and women might come together in public. they consulted groups of women and one described the discussion as two way, not just architects passively listening to what the women said, but they themselves trying to envision what the women might want and what everyone could use. the question was, how to make a space that could be open so that men and women would gather together, while allowing women some enclosure. they did not want to feel exposed or criticized or made

uncomfortable. the plaza needed a filter. so, it was decided the space -- the size of 50 by 100 meters -- there were three is used shelters from the 1950's that needed to be removed anyway. they decided it should not be completely open. a wall was devised. they interviewed residents whose the site and discussed the permeability of the wall with respect to their houses. the surrounding wall is here. but where it meets some of the houses, each resident can say how open or closed they wanted the wall to be to face them. at a cost about $300,000 for demolition and construction, the architects created this limestone plaza with stones,

stone and brick walls. i should say the cost was high and the material of stone was used because residents became very committed to doing something that really looked permanent and was unlike the rest of the camp. something that spoke to their aspirations of and to their ambitions for the community. so, more money was found and spent to create something that looks better. but in effect what was created was a house without a roof, and this was to address the women's problems. the idea of a house without a roof redefines public space as a space for collective privacy and ownership. the plaza is akin to the camp in making ambiguous the distinction between inside and outside. women use it without being criticized for not being home.

the site has fostered meetings, activities. children play there. it is a refuge from the overcrowded streets. you cannot underestimate what it means to get off the streets of the refugee camp and find a place to gather that is not in one's own home. an older resident recalling a former life and cities were palestinian culture happened outside said, we did not have any adequate area where we could sit without feeling we were basically sitting in the streets and blocking traffic. i think the plaza is giving us the possibility of re-creating our culture of using outside spaces. we can design public spaces that represents us in our diversity. can we design spaces specifically for protests? i don't think so. what does protest yield? asia ties become a military dictatorship. i think it is too early to say tahrir did not have impact since democratic revolutions are

messy, require generations to play out. occupy have the effect of making concepts like the 1% part of everyday speech, which instantly contributed to the election and victory of bill de blasio with his tale of two cities. i suspect most politicians and developers took away from the occupy movement that in future they need to work harder to design spaces that can't be occupied. i think another lesson is millions of people dream of opportunity and equality and those dreams will continue to be contested and expressed in the public spaces we build for each other and for ourselves. thanks very much. [applause] so, mostly, i would love to hear if you have any comments or questions. you have to come up to the microphones.

>> [indiscernible] >> unless i have stunned you all into silence. we can talk about other things as well. none of you getting up. so, thank you very much. it was a pleasure. yeah? yeah, really? usually somebody says something about "the times." you're welcome to take a pot shot. >> it sometimes takes a minute. you started out with an architect saying very gloomy things about the responsibility of architects. you ended with the zürich group saying the opposite. i'm wondering, what is the play of the architects that stand behind the developments, particularly in new york city, being this extraordinary kind of neoliberal spectacle, these huge towers? is there any sense of these responsibilities coming home to roost in the united states?

>> yeah, i should say very clearly at the beginning, obviously architects are not responsible for everything. and architects also, you know -- i didn't mean to suggest we don't need luxury apartment buildings or places for people to, places of beauty or stadiums or whatever. it is a complicated problem. i think a lot of it has to do with a question that has now arisen, particularly more acutely within the architectural community -- what is the responsibility of architects and how is their role legislated? it is my impression that an architect in a certain sense sacrifices some of the responsibility that they had years ago, partly because there was a public reaction against

certain kinds of urban plans in the 1950's, the whole reimagining of cities and suburbs, that essentially limited the architect's role. they had their fee and they do their thing and for litigation reasons as well, it does not go beyond that. i think there are a lot of things going on. i think there is a conversation taking place within the world of architecture that has a lot to do with, as it should, about formal and material possibilities. but i also think it is incumbent upon architects to discuss the question of how they function within the society they are helping to create. you see these buildings, these buildings, the spaces as not simply objects, but places that are affected by and affect the people who use them. i think this needs to evolve.

my impression is that there is still a kind of opposition created, and false opposition created, between those people who want to become -- and get to design fancy big buildings like this, and those people who sort of say they want to do good works. the people who do the one kind of think the other one is not really doing architecture. and the people doing this, i think, also feel somehow they are not respected by the people doing architecture. i think that is an evolving conversation. i think that will change. some of it i see as my own small role, and that is where the spotlight turns tends to be where mighty power and interests congregate. if you only focus on one kind of architectural project, and if that happens to be the sort of

towers you are describing then , those will continue to be things people think are rewarded. let me say one other thing about the 57th street development. i think it is a good question whether architects involved in these projects -- i think the architects need to be able to answer questions like, "what is the payoff for the public at large for that building?" what is the building demanding of the city around it? what is it taking in return? there are different ways they can be answered. in some ways they can be answered by the beauty of the building. but the architect should have answers to those questions. otherwise i cannot imagine taking on such a project. one of the issues that comes up in relation to that is, if

you're demanding space that is very conspicuous on the skyline, then in a certain sense you're not just taking up the space that you occupy. or even the space casting a shadow. but a larger space in the city itself. and there are cities like london which do consider view core -- they do consider view corridors and the ways which we protect the view. when i wrote about the u.s., i mentioned it is sort of like a chessboard in which the original buildings around central park south are the pawns, but now the giant buildings are around it. that does change the city itself. there are a lot of issues that relate to public responsibility here. it leads architecture to try to answer. some architects do have answers. >> as an architect, i actually would love to continue that conversation.

it is complicated. that is not my question. i do think architects tend to think they are getting the scraps, that they are not players at the table to make those choices, which is trying to get any work whatsoever. if it happens to be really tall or big, great. i'm not trying to justify that. but we feel not at the table for that kind of discussion. >> sure. to clarify this, this is true, but the projects i mentioned like the one in west bank, and we can think of others. there are ways in which architects can pick and get to the table by taking on an issue and taking on a project. you can't just create a project that is a 1500 story tower on 57th street.

>> it really does mean looking for the work you want to do. >> yeah. >> the question i wanted to ask us to do with your emphasis on public spaces being our right and not a gift handed to us. and i think that lingered in the conversation about streets, such as in cairo, in some way when they took back the streets, it was not that they were taking something that had not been theirs. originally it had been theirs and it was the right to reclaim it. i'm interested in all of the places you have been, whether you feel confident to say that is a condition of streets and other spaces, or whether the particular economic, historic, cultural conditions actually does very -- vary or help to modify that claim? >> i do think it varies from place to place.

i guess what i was trying to suggest was even the notion of the street as public space in a place like new york is a relatively recent concept. i mean, i am not -- i was not -- i thought somebody might mention this. i was not quite sure of this, but i think it was true that not so long ago people did not think of the street as public space. it is complicated. if you look back at a photograph of new york city in 1908, what you will see are very wide sidewalks and a continuum between the street and the sidewalk because the streets did not have many automobiles yet. there was a feeling that the whole space was pedestrian friendly. do people consider the street public space as we do now? i don't know about that. i think that is a slightly different thing. i think what we are developing is this sense -- and this is what i was trying to get at -- that there is this relationship between the space and the

democracy, the formation of physical space and the declaration, the demand of democratic space. that i do not think has been the discourse for a very long time. but of course, you know, i can't say that is the case everywhere. what i can say though is it is probably not coincidental that when protests have happened, they continue to happen in public spaces. there is an instinctive feeling that people need to find this common ground, and whether they define it as public space or demands for public space or related to their own ambitions or not, they somehow understand that the only place where these issues really are clarified, are somehow made physical, are in these things go public spaces. does that make sense? >> yes. thank you. >> but certainly not the way people think about it in bahrain

is different than the way people think about in copenhagen. >> [indiscernible] >> right. see, i do not think there was a notion of the commons in by -- in bahrain, but there were protests and they sought the closest they had to commons in staging it there. it did not work partially because it was not the same sort of enclosed space. it was much too easily taken back from them. there really aren't in many of the gulf states spaces where you can congregate. and that is on purpose. yes? >> thanks for a great talk. i was really interested in your idea about how the spaces were misused. none of these were designed for protest. i do not know that architects will ever be hired by the protesters, by the people, right? it seems like it will always be

this sense of misinterpretation or misuse that is really essential. anyway, i just wanted to mention something. i was part of occupy oakland, the most militant of the occupy movements, but also the most innovative. people only heard about our riots. that was one of only three branches going on. there were the mainstream liberals who thought we just need to tweak our democracy. they were hoping to be heard. the second were the writers who were the most extreme and they were very much there for another version of declarative politics. and then there was the third group of people who are interested in self valorization. it seems like the city is deployed as a way of creating capital valorization. it was not that people were rioting, but coming together and sharing and creating a second economy, --

can you speak to that? >> thank you. that was what i was trying to get at. people instantly set up these -- pop-up towns. they become-- propositional democracies. in zuccotti it became a problem because they were giving away free food or free clothing and the space essentially got taken over. but i think that is exactly what happens when people and acted these spaces as they imagined a better society to be, without really being programmed to do that. that just seems like the thing one needed to do. we needed to occupy the space. ok, how are we going to go about that? and suddenly you begin to evolve the space. much of occupy was unclear to people.

i remember people constantly saying, what is it actually about? war, whatagainst the was the thing? when you went to it, you realize the thing was that thing you saw there. the creation of the space. that is what occupy illustrated. i agree with that. and creating a space for protest, like i said, i don't think it's possible. any space can be occupied. i do not think that you can create a useful space of protest. everyone is trying to do it, by the way. they were creating a place in the south on a waterfront a place where you could put a huge or something.e where someone put a protest, it would be out of view. that is crucial as well to these places that are in the middle. >> a follow-up on the last comment and first, a couple of

observations. first of all, for those of us in the room, not me, who are not architects, i want to say that what you say so modestly about shining a light in a slightly different direction really cannot be underestimated. i think we have seen the cumulative result of decades of media attention to a certain way of making space and buildings that is far from a monolithic culture, but it has been presented as if it was the only culture that is valuable. i think a lot of us have been very grateful for again what you stay relatively modestly. it assumes enormous importance and encouraging maybe not meant generation but the next generation --maybe not my generation but the next generation. on a historical note, i think there is evidence that the kind of public space, or at least the

signifiers of public space that you presented today, going way, way back, at least in western history, when protesters tear up the streets in early 19th-century paris to make barricades, that is a conspicuous form of occupation and of stating the public availability of that alternate ways of compressing power. -- of expressing power. there are countless examples of that from parades to feast of fools in the middle ages, you name it. but to the point, i think that what you have introduced or suggested to me is that space as a medium for architecture and urbanism needs to be balanced by time. i wonder how you feel about that, having looked at these examples because most of them appear in the way that you present only after a certain

period of time. of course, and architectural contracts not only has limits of liability and responsibility in space that are bounded by a legally constituted site, it starts and stops at a certain point. some of the most interesting things that happened to what we design happened well after our formal relationship with them is brought to an end. the idea that an architect it can be something like an organic intellectual and belong to a community and not just serve our community and that an architect can be around to look at the uses for which there are spaces are put is important. the most obvious example is the occupation of the lower level of norman foster's bank of hong kong by domestics on their off day in hong kong, which he never anticipated, but which brings that building to life in a way

that he is happy to take credit for. >> exactly. >> i wonder what you think about that and also about the implicit message in the last remarks that if you can in a way learn from what happened in this case and there is a feedback loop built-in so that, for example, the explosion of co-working spaces in american cities after the occupy movement, which model that sort of cooperative hater is -- cooperative behavior is another example. >> you raise many interesting points and you answered your own questions. emaininge of r committing is very important. and it is totally outside the general working model but it came up in, and i will get back

to co-working spaces. it came up when i was looking at health-care design. which i still have not gotten around to writing about but i want to and the reason was because i thought in what sense can you pin down in some specific way the effectiveness of design? can you quantify on some level design? is there, is that a meaningful question to ask? is there any area in which such a thing can be done by someone? when i wrote about the housing project in the south bronx, i wanted to change the equation of what we consider to be of value because i thought, instead of putting some aesthetic value in terms of investment in the community, which is what architectural excellence was supposed to contribute. so in the case of hospital design, i was struck that there are people who work on such things who look at design, the effect of different kinds of

designs on patient care. in princeton, there is a hospital which designing a new facility and had a model room in which they tested out different designs on different patients and refined the design so that when they moved to the new building they would have what they had found to be the most effective design. what they found over the course of more than a year is that patients in the model room asked for 45% less pain medication and said that nursing care and food was 60% better than in the normal rooms. so this was an interesting question. i asked the guy who, what does this mean about the effectiveness of design? he said, when we build hospitals i would like to have architect more involved, but i would like them to work on a contingency fee like everybody else of a -- so that they follow-up. they do certain things and they

are responsible for the results. so if they built something and say it is going to be, i want to know the things that are built here will reduce infections, create happier hospital stays for patients and so forth. fewer mistakes by nurses and doctors. if they improve -- spreading of infections. if they can produce results that are tangible, i will pay them more money. i mentioned this to a couple of architects in the room, some of them had worked on these things, and i thought to a person architects would say, that is the most ridiculous thing i have ever heard. that actually, to a person they said to me, ok. that sounds interesting. if we really have responsibility, it is a slightly off answer, but it is a question of the extent to which architects can find ways to become more engaged. i think they should be responsible. if you put up a building that does not work, you should be responsible. it may look beautiful but if it doesn't work -- i can give you a

million museum examples. then you should fix it or somebody else should fix it. as for the coworker thing, i was in san francisco. i spent a lot of time going to the new setups for people like twitter and yelp and square. it is pretty funny. but their aesthetic, the things that arise out of occupy. it has this kind of like, we are here to make the world better and we share stuff. so there is a barista everywhere and food and common tables. this, too, is becoming really interestingly standardized. so everybody has edison bulbs. everybody uses reclaimed railroad ties. they all look exactly alike. yoga balls. this has become the kind of

version of -- >> we leave the last few minutes of this program. watch it in its [captioning made possible by the national captioning institute, inc., in cooperation with the united states house of representatives. any use of the closed-captioned coverage of the house proceedings for political or commercial purposes is expressly prohibited by the u.s. house of representatives.] the speaker pro tempore: the house will be in order. the chair lays before the house a communication from the speaker. the clerk: the speaker's room, washington, d.c., may 19, 2014. i hereby appoint the honorable jeff denham