Housing

Safe and adequate housing is a fundamental need for most people. A home should be a place of safety and rest. Currently, however, housing is increasingly being used to generate economic profits – especially in larger cities. This leads to ever-rising rents and property prices and to the displacement of people.¹

How does this contradiction arise? To answer that, we must take a look at our economic system and ask the question of ownership. In an economic system geared toward financial profit, private ownership of things necessary for life (such as housing) can only lead to these things becoming commodities for sale. In practice, this means that the actual purpose of the commodity—in this case, housing—is secondary, and that profit-making takes center stage.

Real estate companies and speculators specifically buy apartments, houses, and land to use them for profit. They are not concerned with ensuring that everyone has good and safe housing. Their primary interest is profit. Urban planning, too, often focuses on creating the most attractive locations possible for corporations. This leads, for example, to the creation of new development zones for office buildings and luxury apartments, the privatization of public spaces, and the gentrification of neighborhoods for tourists. People who do not fit into the streetscape are actively driven out. This type of urban planning serves to attract capital in the form of tourists, international corporations, or promising startups and their high-earning employees.

On the users’ side, there are three distinct groups: first, Landlords or apartment owners who not only use but also own their living space; second, tenants who do not own living space and pay the owners a fee – usually monthly – in exchange for the right to live there; and third, residents of camps, detention centers, or shelters. Although in different ways, all three groups are affected by the housing market. Owners often have to go into debt to buy or build a home. They usually pay off a bank loan over 20 or 30 years, which effectively turns them into tenants of the bank. As a result, many people lost their homes during the financial and economic crisis beginning in 2007 because they could no longer service their loans due to lower incomes or rising interest rates. Furthermore, these owners face the disadvantage that owning a property limits their mobility and makes it more difficult to adapt their living space to their life circumstances. As a result, an increasing number of older people whose children have moved out are currently living in homes that are far too large for them.

In rural regions, owners outnumber tenants, whereas in cities across Germany, tenants are the majority.² They are far more vulnerable to problems. Not only do they pay a large portion of their income to their landlord³), but they also have little say in decisions regarding their living space. Added to this, especially in major cities, is an ever-increasing pressure to displace residents. In order to generate higher profits, low-income households in particular are being increasingly displaced, especially from city centers. In addition, these households experience a displacement from their standard of living—meaning tenants cut back in other areas (e.g., can no longer afford vacations) or have to work longer and longer hours to afford their apartments. Finally, there is exclusionary displacement: rental prices for new leases, in particular, are rising so sharply that some neighborhoods have become unaffordable for people with lower incomes. All three types of displacement lead to entire neighborhoods being displaced and communities destroyed, particularly in working-class areas.

People who find themselves in situations where they have even fewer rights than tenants also suffer as a result. Refugees or homeless people often have to live in camp-like conditions where they have little say in their living arrangements.⁴ Here, living conditions are typically hazardous to health, insecure in the long term, and often severely restrict residents’ freedom.

For these reasons, many people experience severe insecurity and constant stress: at any moment, a rent increase, a notice of renovation, an opaque utility bill, or a notice of sale could be waiting in their mailbox. These existential concerns are not isolated cases but affect a large portion of the urban population, extending even into the middle class. Furthermore, this is not a matter of immoral misconduct by individual companies, but a structural problem stemming from the fact that housing is treated as a commodity. And this has not been the case only recently.

Berlin and its surrounding areas are particularly affected by displacement and rising rents. Until just a few years ago, it was one of Germany’s cities with particularly low incomes and affordable rents. In Prenzlauer Berg, however, the state began upgrading and privatizing former GDR housing stock shortly after reunification. The result was the first major wave of displacement. This was further fueled by the large-scale privatization of municipal housing in 2005 under a Senate led by both the left (Die Linke) and social democrats (SPD). After the 2008 financial crisis, more and more corporations invested in secure assets — the so-called “concrete gold” emerged. As a result, displacement and gentrification⁵ became a pervasive problem affecting all neighborhoods.Between 2008 and 2018, new rental prices rose faster in Berlin than anywhere else in Europe; in neighborhoods like Neukölln, the increase exceeded 100%. In 2022 alone, prices rose by another 27%, making Berlin’s rents the second-highest in Germany after Munich. All of this goes hand in hand with massive displacement, which occurs either invisibly or as visible violence, such as in the case of evictions. The consequences include the destruction of one’s own neighborhood and the deterioration of living conditions due to long commutes. In cases of forced evictions, the consequences often extend to mental illness, homelessness, and suicide.

As a solution to the housing crisis, the real estate lobby and many politicians usually cite new construction as a panacea. Currently, it is primarily construction companies and investors who own the land who benefit from this. However, very few apartments are being built for low-income people. Instead, exclusive condominiums and expensive single-family homes are being built. In Hamburg, for example, more apartments have been built in recent years than are needed. Rent prices have risen nonetheless due to ownership structures. Furthermore, the construction industry still has a significant impact on climate change: the use of cement, in particular, releases large amounts of CO₂. Working conditions on construction sites are also often particularly poor. At the same time, urban densification projects are destroying open, freely accessible spaces which are needed for breathing room, as community gardens, or as places for communal living, or repurposing them for commercial use.

This highlights the necessity to fundamentally question the concepts of ownership and renting. We must tackle the root of the problem: To solve the housing crisis, we must move beyond private ownership of housing. Houses and land belong in the collective hands of those who use them. They must be distributed according to need, not according to who owns them by luck or inheritance. Nor, however, do they belong in the hands of the state, which has shown often enough in the past that it poses a threat to tenants’ needs. Indeed, many struggles by tenants have already succeeded in bringing houses under municipal ownership. However, this form of ownership and the central concentration of power in the hands of state authorities is vulnerable to power grabs: as in Berlin, for example, municipally owned housing was frequently privatized again under subsequent governments. Furthermore, residents and their immediate neighbors must be able to make decisions about the housing and its surroundings. They are the ones who use and need it, not politicians or investors. That is why we are fighting for self-management of housing.

This demand for self-management by residents is not new. As early as the 19th century (Paris Commune, 1871), people were aware of the injustice of paying rent. They asked themselves:

“Who works to construct the apartments? Why is an apartment in certain areas of a city more expensive than in others? Why can only wealthy people afford an apartment in attractive neighborhoods with well-developed infrastructure? Why should a single person live in a five-room apartment when a family of five has to live in a moldy one-room basement apartment?”

It is precisely these questions that we want to bring back into the public consciousness—and fight for the self-management of our homes, neighborhoods, and cities.

1. Where do we want to go in the long term?

1.1 Principles (Ownership and Possession)

A. Housing is a basic need. It is important that this basic need be met. It must not be possible to make economic profits from housing. Therefore, ownership of housing must be abolished.
B. Homelessness is thus a collective failure. Housing scarcity and homelessness are not necessary. There would be enough housing if it were distributed differently and made available unconditionally.
C. The use value of “housing” is central; there is no right of ownership to it. This means that whoever uses the apartment for living or the property for working has a right to it. Adequacy is determined by the residents’ needs. Housing is no longer automatically inherited.
D. All (urban/rural) outdoor spaces are communal property. Depending on their use, they are either open to the public or accessible to a specific target group. For example, there should be enough public green spaces, space for community gardens, outdoor kindergartens etc . Especially in the city, these are a valuable part of everyday life: rest, sport and exercise, agricultural use. They should be open to everyone.

1.2. Self-Governance

From one’s own home to municipal self-governance

A. Self-governance is built from the bottom up. This means we organize ourselves into small communities, such as house communities, and organize ourselves through council democracy in the neighborhood, at the city level (municipal level), and beyond.
B. All decisions affecting the residents of a house (and only them) are made within the house. This includes, among other things, the form of communal living and building management, structural changes, and renovations.
C. The municipal administration handles the allocation of housing and the management of public spaces. The municipal administration is supported by the neighborhood councils and house communities in which the residents are organized (see the “Justice” chapter of the program). It is responsible for balancing out different local conditions (e.g., location, infrastructure, condition of the buildings).
D. Resident self-governance can be supplemented by structures at the municipal level that provide advice and support for remodeling, maintenance, repairs, etc.

Maintenance and new construction

E. Dilapidated buildings are repaired whenever possible. Instead of demolishing buildings when they are no longer profitable, they should be sustainably repaired. Criteria for deciding between demolition and renovation include the utility value for the neighborhood and the ecological cost-benefit analysis.
F. Houses and apartments should be energy-efficiently modernized. This means that the buildings are renovated according to sustainable criteria. The energy supply is converted to renewable sources, and the buildings are insulated to be as energy-neutral as possible.
G. Decisions regarding the construction of new buildings are made at the local government level. Local councils decide on new construction based on social and ecological factors. The stock of open spaces is factored into the decision (how much and where open spaces still exist, biodiversity of the surrounding area, climate adaptation based on wastewater and temperature criteria).
H. The architecture of the buildings and urban planning as a whole facilitate communal living. This means that space should be created for various lifestyles (communities, shared housing, single-family homes, etc.).

Housing Allocation

I. Initial Redistribution: Depending on need, housing is redistributed or residential buildings are renovated. Apartments that are too large are divided, and people who have lived in cramped conditions (or without housing) are allocated larger living spaces. Employees of the former housing companies (maintenance, upkeep, administration, etc.) can form new, collectively organized enterprises. They continue their work and can apply their knowledge and experience to the redistribution of apartments. However, these enterprises are no longer profit-oriented. Together with the residents and municipalities, these enterprises are responsible for maintenance and any new construction.
J. All apartments are part of a collective circulation system. They are exchanged and redistributed according to the changing needs of individuals and housing communities. In the distribution of housing, explicit attention is paid to criteria such as accessibility, need for assistance, and type of living arrangement (community, shared housing, family, single-person household).
K. The coordination and organization of housing allocation falls under the responsibility of the respective municipality. The municipality maintains an overview of the available apartments, the demand, and the specific needs of those seeking housing. It has a ‘knowledge function’ (gathering information) as well as an executive function.
L. Safe spaces and assisted living arrangements are easily accessible, without lengthy bureaucratic procedures. This refers to safe housing for people affected by violence and discrimination and forms of assisted living (case-by-case assistance, support for the elderly, supervised youth shared apartments, etc.).
- M. The supply of housing is increased by:
- M.1 Making vacant apartments and houses usable.
- M.2 Converting vacation rentals (Airbnb & Co.) into apartments.
- M.3 Housing is distributed more equitably, and large apartments where few people live are used by more people based on need, or they are structurally modified. In the distribution of housing, explicit attention is paid to criteria such as accessibility, need for assistance, and type of cohabitation (community, shared housing, family, single-person household).

Housing Concepts

N. New architectural approaches enable diverse housing forms (multigenerational homes, senior shared housing, alternative family models, single-person apartments, etc.).
O. Existing apartments must be made as barrier-free as possible. If this is not possible, at least the ground-floor apartments should be made barrier-free.
P. Open spaces and green areas are protected. Urban agriculture concepts are further developed and made accessible. Sealed surfaces should be used more efficiently (e.g., increasing the height of low-rise buildings, multi-unit buildings instead of single-family homes) or unsealed.

2. Transition Phase

Through direct rent struggles, create an organization that continues to grow—ultimately taking over the buildings.

A. Housing must not be a commodity: to solve the problems in the housing market, the only long-term solution is the abolition of the profit-driven housing market.
B. This means socialization: that is, placing the buildings in the hands of society or their residents. But how do we get there?

2.1 Pathways to socialization from below

A. The limits of state administration: Why socialization from below and not state administration of the housing market? Municipal administration of housing brings major problems, such as political dependence on the respective government, as evidenced by the state-owned real estate corporations in Berlin alone. Despite (or perhaps because of) state ownership, there has been pressure to maximize profits for years, and tenants are managed anonymously. That is why we need expropriation from below, carried out by the tenants themselves and placed in social, i.e. tenant, hands.
B. Grassroots Organization: Anarcho-communist and anarcho-syndicalist approaches from the labor movement can, in part, also be applied to the housing sector. As a foundation for building counter-power, grassroots organization is needed on several levels:
- B.1: within buildings (e.g., through building tennant councils)
- B.2: networking based on landlord (private or housing corporation) or by neighborhood (based on existing organizations).
- B.3: a merger of these networks into a tenants’ union or a similar organization
C. Exemplifying self-governance and intensifying struggles: Through organization at the smallest level within the building, residents can already gain significant experience with self-governance. As counter-power grows, gradual changes become possible. Struggles that enable the collective shaping of the backyard can be followed by struggles against high utility costs, leading all the way to collective rent caps through the unification of many buildings. In this way, the balance of power vis-à-vis landlords shifts, and collective counter-power becomes tangible and palpable. These gains could be secured and enshrined, for example, through collective bargaining agreements with the owners. It remains to be seen how capital and the state will react if we intensify our struggles. What happens in the wake of capital flight? How might the state, in the event of an escalation, use nationalization to make self-governance impossible?
D. Rent strikes can be used as a collective tool and a milestone. In such a conflict (e.g., over a rent increase), tenants refuse to pay rent for a specific period. In this way, they exert pressure on property owners at a new level. This requires high participation, stable organization, and possibly also a legal framework for protection.
E. Expropriation: in a revolutionary situation or an escalation of conflict with a property owner or within a neighborhood, and if the movement possesses the necessary strength and popular support, tenants can take over their building. The question remains open as to what effects the expropriation of such large capital assets will have on other sectors and how the state and capitalism will react to it.
- E.1 People who own multiple apartments will have these apartments taken from them through socialisation. This prevents people from deriving their income from other people’s rent payments. Apartments are removed from the cycle of exploitation and profit. This applies to real estate companies, but also to individual owners of multiple apartments.
- E.2 People who live in their own property do not lose their housing (“possession”). After socialisation they only lose the status of ownership. Existing debts (mortgages) will be completely forgiven. One question that remains is how rights of use will be identified and determined.

2.2 Structure of Self-Governance

A. Basis: Organization in pre-revolutionary times has established a foundation that supports self-administration. The goal is to involve all residents.
B. Organs of self-administration: Building councils, networks of owners, and/or a tenants’ union take on the role of self-administration. They handle maintenance, upkeep, and the allocation of housing. Distribution is based on residents’ needs.
C. Municipality: In buildings or neighborhoods without prior organization, the municipality can help take on the task of administration. The goal is to gradually establish a housing allocation system as described in the chapter of the same name (1.2 I-M). The expertise of property management staff should continue to be utilized; their involvement in self-administration makes sense.

3. What can we do in the short term?

3.1 Build counterpower

A. Build grassroots organizations, such as tenants’ unions and neighborhood networks.
B. Social insertion into existing struggles: lead and win concrete tennant struggles to build counterpower, e.g., through (partial) rent strikes for repairs or against rent hikes. The choice for the means of struggle are defined by and with the tennants and must take into account their living conditions.
C. Support struggles for the expropriation of real estate companies and the cancellation of existing mortgage debts. Convert condominiums into collective ownership.

3.2 Reforms

A. Immediate halt to the destruction of housing and spaces for social life; stop the displacement of residents.
- A.1 Stop all evictions.
- A.2 Decriminalize and preserve all occupations of commercial spaces, apartments, houses, and land.
- A.3 Ensure the straightforward and rapid implementation of pending and delayed repairs.
- A.4 Threatened social infrastructure and community centers must be granted affordable rents or rent-free status.
B. Remove housing and usable spaces from the market.
- B.1 Immediately halt conversion from social housing into private ownership, the construction of luxury buildings, luxury renovations, and the privatization of urban land and buildings.
- B.2 Convert ongoing construction projects and vacant buildings into social housing with indefinite leases.
- B.3 Expropriate real estate companies and transfer them to collective management
- B.4 Housing and social infrastructure are priorities: In the event of a housing shortage, convert Airbnb or similar vacation rentals, hotels, office spaces, etc.
- B.5 Effective and indefinite rent caps with a drastic reduction in current existing rents.
- B.6 Immediate provision of housing and supportive infrastructure for people without housing and the homeless. This applies unconditionally and, for example, according to the Housing–First principle.⁶
- B.7 Rent relief or waivers for social and self-managed cultural infrastructure (daycare centers, counseling centers, sheltered housing, museums, youth clubs, etc.).
- B.8 Strengthen structures such as the Mietshäuser Syndikat (Tenement Syndicat) that remove housing from the market.
C. Strengthen collective tenants rights
- C.1 Legal recognition of building communities vis-à-vis landlords; collective rights for tenant communities in court. When everyone shares the same problem, such as a broken elevator, building communities must be able to sue as a collective and reduce the rent.
- C.2 Right to co-determination for tenant communities regarding renovations, alterations, rent increases, etc.
- C.3 Legal recognition of collective tenant agreements for union members.
- C.4 Legalization of rent strikes.