• 1 According to the data of the General Register Office it had 8,761 inhabitants in 2020 (See Famiglie (...)
• 2 On the history of San Lorenzo up to 1945, one can look at the excellent reconstruction carried out (...)

1San Lorenzo is a neighbourhood just outside the Aurelian Walls that surround the historical centre of Rome1. It was a rural area until the last decades of the 19^th century, when it began to be populated by people migrating from the countryside; they found makeshift accommodation close to the Walls, while being employed in the building works inside a city that had just become the capital of the novel Kingdom of Italy. Given its location close to the city cemetery, San Lorenzo furthermore saw the development of artisanal activities related to funeral services2. Later in the 20^th century it became one of the most industrialized neighbourhoods in Rome, hosting factories from different sectors including food and beverage, glass and metal (Pagnotta, 2009). The process through which a strong local identity was then developed was interwoven with the construction of a working-class community. The latter was part of a more general (metropolitan and national) conflict that was played out in debates within the public sphere. To a certain extent, San Lorenzo’s history, like that of other working-class areas (whether semi-central or more outlying, such as the so-called borgate) can be summarized as the process of the progressive inclusion into the city that was becoming a metropolis (Seronde Babonaux, 1983): a city that presented itself as «an integrated reality (following a scheme of antagonistic integration) around a state of class conflict that was clearly legible» (Signorelli, 1996, 48).

• 3 On the decline of handicraft, see Famiglietti, Fassari (2022). After the big leap of the 1960s (+72 (...)

2That world, «rich with neighbourhood solidarity, chatting in the courtyard and working-class [popolari] struggles» (Tocci, 2019, 188), progressively vanished over the last decades of the 20^th century. Together with the other working-class areas, San Lorenzo underwent what Pasolini had – in the early 1970s – dubbed «anthropological mutation» (Tocci, 2020): the dissolution process of working-class communities and identity that historians and sociologists have reconstructed with less apocalyptic tones (Touraine et al., 1987; Paggi, 1989, 1998; De Felice, 1996). During the second half of the 20^th century, San Lorenzo went through a process of de-industrialization, while enrolment growth at the neighbouring La Sapienza University meant that San Lorenzo became the metropolitan area where students could find accommodation3. The social composition of the population has progressively changed as well. In 2006 it was estimated that there were 4,000 second-generation sanlorenzini out of a total of around 9,000 inhabitants. The incomers to the neighbourhood were «medical doctors at the Polyclinic, researchers and professors at the Sapienza, white collar workers, and professionals in the new jobs of the advanced tertiary sectors» (Risorse-RpR, 2006, 10, 147).

• 4 The municipal administration of Rome (Comune) is divided into 15 local Municipi. A long-standing de (...)

5The associations within the Libera Repubblica network are not the only ones enlivening the debate in San Lorenzo’s «public sphere» (Calhoun, 1992), namely the locus where the decisions made (or failed to be made) by the political/administrative powers are discussed and a more general debate unfolds on the present situation in the neighbourhood and the desired trajectories of evolution. In October 2017 a Comitato of the San Lorenzo neighbourhood organized a march against «degradation» in the area, highlighting issues such as the waste management system, the revitalization of the local food market and the unbearable noise produced by an open-air disco until late at night. I interviewed Roberta one summer afternoon in 2022 while sitting at a pub table in the main square of San Lorenzo. She belongs to another association, named Viva San Lorenzo and, when asked about the reason for her activism, she pointed at the huge expanse of graffiti covering the wall of the church. The activity of façade cleaning of the neighbourhood’s buildings is the main aim of one citywide organization called Retake, the San Lorenzo branch of which is very active. Viva San Lorenzo was created in the Fall of 2021 after local mobilization against the concession made by the Municipio4 to a self-proclaimed cultural association in one large area in the neighbourhood’s periphery. More than promoting cultural activities, they set up bars to sell cheap drinks and play loud music until 2 am. In practice, the movida – the wild, noisy nightlife – that was already annoying residents in the centre of the neighbourhood doubled in size in its periphery, disturbing the sleep of residents in that area as well. It is estimated that 1,000-1,500 teenagers and young adults were attracted to the new venue every night. In September 2021 citizen protests were brought to the main office of the Municipio, whose president met with a few representatives. The local authority realized that the concession had been a mistake and revoked it.

• 5 I discussed these features in Famiglietti (2022).

7These associations have established some mutual links, even though their operational area differs, as does their conception of the relationship with the political sphere5. More importantly, they are aligned in the way they address a series of issues within the themes in San Lorenzo’s life; themes that, in turn, can be included in one general overview regarding the present and future of the neighbourhood. It is then possible to define a camp made up of civic associations whose vision of San Lorenzo is quite as internally consistent as that of the groups that recognize themselves as belonging to the Libera Repubblica coalition. It will be furthermore argued that the discourses of these two camps compete in the public sphere of the neighbourhood.

• 6 A further burning issue within the theme of decorum concerns garbage collection and disposal, due t (...)

8The agreement between the civic associations first of all concerns the theme of decorum and security, that in San Lorenzo mainly revolves around the management of the out-of-control movida, polemically dubbed malamovida 6. The activists agree to ask for what is defined in the scientific debate as «space-situational prevention» for the safeguarding of citizens «from both possible crimes (defensible space) and acts of incivility (urban decorum)» (Battistelli, 2011, 217). When pursuing this approach, the civic associations have found an ally in the local police commissioner appointed to San Lorenzo in January 2022.

• 7 Raimo C., Chitarre sequestrate come mitra e poliziotti in posa accanto, lo scatto è virale. E a Rom (...)
• 8 Communia, ‘Ma ti rendi conto in che quartiere ti trovi?’, 25 giugno 2021, https://www.dinamopress.i (...)

10Activists of Social Centres are also critical of the uncontrolled nightlife movida, particularly as young women have to cope with aggressive behaviour in that context. The interviewees in question were around thirty years old and their lifestyle is quite distant from that of the teenagers who come to San Lorenzo for a night of pub crawling, attracted by a supply of drinks whose alcoholic strength is inversely proportional to their quality and price. However, the Social Centres network is firmly opposed to the policing of the movida as introduced by the new commissioner. A quite influential writer, who is also a council member in a neighbouring Municipio, is very active in the city-wide debate on this issue. In the Spring of 2022, in the local pages of the daily national newspaper La Repubblica, he stigmatized the «words alluding to a “clash of civilizations” contained in the social media pages run by the neighbourhood’s comitati», asserting that its members ignore the fact that the controversy over the movida is «a very complex kind of class struggle, involving the possibility of living in the city, the pleasures it offers, free time, space, freedom, the opportunity to meet new people, play sports, play and listen to music […]. Some can afford it, others cannot, and this disparity is the outcome of specific urban policies which exclude low-income persons from access to the city»; in July of the previous year the same writer had organized a public meeting in San Lorenzo’s main square, where various activists and experts in the field mentioned methods used abroad, including the employment of mime actors to calm down the movida attenders, as alternatives to policing7. One of the so-called Occupied Spaces in San Lorenzo, named Communia, had also participated in this debate with a document published online in June 2021. It criticizes «the security rhetoric, based on the opposition between “malamovida [the harmful movida]” and the “good movida”»; we should rather pay attention to the «systemic causes», namely «the true causes of why the neighbourhood does not offer a sufficient standard of living conditions. These are to be found more in-depth, and youngsters with spritzes in their hand is only the tip of the iceberg»: in the context of «40 years of neo-liberalism», San Lorenzo which is «a complex and multi-faceted neighbourhood, has become unrecognizable due to the greed of few private […] external profiteers». These economic forces brought in and imposed «a model of sociality based on consumption, drink and disorderly conduct»8. The Social Centre activists interviewed suggest the organization of cultural and entertainment activities by the local Municipio as an alternative to the movida; indeed, such a policy is called for by all associations. So far, it has however been hampered by the lack of funds.

• 9 Anonymous, San Lorenzo, al via il recupero di via dei Lucani: 90 giorni per le proposte, august the (...)

11A further theme where the civic associations are on the same wavelength concern the urban development of San Lorenzo, as highlighted by the issue of the regeneration of a particular street, via dei Lucani, where the above-mentioned tragic event occurred in 2018. The area was once full of artisan workshops with some that are still there; however, empty spaces with decaying buildings are also to be found. In 2019 the city administration was run by a mayor from the Five Star Movement. In that context a project was designed according to which – if the many owners of the plots did not reach an agreement – the City would have expropriated the entire area. The agreement should have included the building of a park and «places for socializing and cultural growth»9. The criticism of the Comitato di quartiere addressed the problematic nature of that proposal at many levels. First of all, the procedure was judged to be unrealistic: property owners would never reach an agreement under those conditions and the lack of funds would make the expropriation procedure unfeasible, leaving the area in decay for years. This would also be due to the legal squabbles that are typical in these cases. The activists of the civic camp agreed to the building of the park; however, they think that the area should also be lived in by people at night, to avoid having once again empty and unmonitored public space in a peripheral area of the neighbourhood.

• 10 See the data in Famiglietti, Fassari (2022, 32).

12More generally, the Comitato is in favour of building private housing. San Lorenzo lost almost half of its population10 in the thirty years between 1981 and 2011, sharing the same trend as the other neighbourhoods immediately outside the «historic centre» (Crisci, 2010). Demographers however amend this point, highlighting a reverse trend following the 2008 economic crisis (and the ensuing decrease in real estate market values): urban sprawl is slowing and new processes of «densification» and «rejuvenation» of the compact city are occurring (Crisci, 2018, 69). Thus, civic activists are in favour of the «repopulation of the neighbourhood» – as the Comitato writes in an internal document – which includes favouring the revitalization of local craftsmanship and stores, as well as infusing new civic energy into long-term projects in the area. According to activists this energy would stem from the return of residents; when interviewed the former group expressed the opinion that this would be a way to counteract «the demographic crisis of the neighbourhood». The latter should be seen as one relevant feature within the more general decline of San Lorenzo, according to those same interviewees. The president of the Comitato insists on this issue, given that she must cope with it in her professional life as a teacher in the primary school in San Lorenzo, which is struggling to keep its two sections open due to the lack of children.

• 11 I use the concept of competition for civic associations and Social centres are on equal footing and (...)
• 12 On the concept of hegemony see Cospito (2018). I owe this suggestion to Francesco Giasi. The overla (...)

15Previously, three themes have been highlighted in the intra-neighbourhood debate: decorum and security, urban development and economic development. The like-minded positions on these themes by the associations in the civic camp amount to a general view of San Lorenzo, of its present situation and future perspectives; a view that is internally rather consistent. In the public sphere of this neighbourhood the aforesaid view can be contrasted with the equally consistent position of Social Centres. The controversy between these views is a competition11 concerning which narrative on San Lorenzo is hegemonic: meaning that the competition between alternative projects depends on the analysis of the present situation provided by the two camps, starting from the processes that led up to it over time. The term “hegemony” represents the capacity that one actor has in the public sphere to impose certain facts as relevant and certain causal nexuses as taken-for-granted features of the situation; and the above-said is applied both to the media (or even academic) level and to the awareness of common citizens12.

• 13 See Simone (2021, 93) who quotes an activist in San Lorenzo commenting the state of the building wa (...)

16If we focus on the theme of decorum and security and look at the burning issue of the night-time movida, it is evident that the subject of the dispute concerns the use of public space. In San Lorenzo, the «conflicts [that] revolve around the needs of residents vs. those of the revellers and local businesses serving the evening economy» (Carmona, 2010, 126) are complicated by the slogan «no to the police in San Lorenzo» launched by Social Centres. An underlying controversy concerns the definition of quality public space. The issue emerges more clearly when we consider the different ways in which the two camps look at the issue of graffiti signatures and drawings on walls. While Retake, together with the other civic associations, mobilize citizens to cleanse those walls, Social Centres argue that «degradation […] is caused by the commodification of the neighbourhood»13. In the above-mentioned public assembly of July 2021 dominated by Social Centres, with reference to the controversy concerning the walls, one of the experts summoned stated that «beauty is a social construction», rephrasing the sociological commonplace. The point thus becomes which of the competing conceptions of beauty is to prevail.

• 14 For an Italian overview of the international debate on gentrification, see Semi (2015). Some studie (...)

19On the opposite side – as seen in the previous section – Social Centres read urban change as gentrification14. In San Lorenzo, where they have a much higher influence on the public debate compared with the rest of the metropolis, Social Centres try to construct conflict in the public sphere in favour of low-income residents and against private builders who would try to gentrify the neighbourhood. It might be argued that Social Centres tend to expand the kind of social relations that prevail within the Occupied Spaces, based on «reciprocity» (Polanyi, 1957, 47-48), throughout the whole of San Lorenzo. Thus, when defining the quality of public space, for them the social side prevails over the physical one. Despite their attempts, however, Social Centre activists remain substantially alien to the people who live in public housing. Besides the political side, in which they try to revamp the political radicalism of the 20^th century, Social Centres also try to construct alternatives on the cultural side – lifestyle, self-produced music and other forms of artistic expression – (Famiglietti, 2006). The neighbourhood’s low-income youths do not however appear to be attracted by their lifestyle (Hebdige, 2002).

• 15 The concept of «urban village», intentionally paradoxical vis-à-vis sociological dichotomies, was i (...)

20If we explore the social side of quality public space, we need to resume our analysis of the neighbourhood’s transformation from the first section. San Lorenzo is no longer the «urban village» where the prevailing social relations are «cohesive, based on the family and street-centred, but with relatively few points of connection beyond their […] urban enclave» (Crow, 2009, 101)15. We have already mentioned Roberta. She is 55 and was born in San Lorenzo, her family resident in the neighbourhood for three generations now. She works in the tiny, local market: its decline is an age-old issue that is part of the theme of economic revitalization, according to civic associations. When interviewed she argues that she would never leave San Lorenzo, notwithstanding the changes that have occurred: unlike in the past, in fact, she no longer knows her neighbours. Thus, the actual direction of change is towards what Jane Jacobs called «neighbourliness without intimacy». In the West Village of Manhattan, where she lived in the early 1960s, «neighbours left each other free in the sense that, although recognising one another on the street or chatting about prices in the shops or the latest outrage perpetrated by landlords, yet people kept their distance, seldom getting to know each other very deeply. She thought such relations good» (Sennett, 2018, 99). In this regard Gans (1994, 177) speaks of «quasi-primary […] relationships among neighbours»: «the interaction is more intimate than a secondary contact, but more guarded than a primary one».

• 16 I discussed the difference between Schmitt’s and Touraine’s theories of conflict in Famiglietti (20 (...)

22The approach employed in this research follows the lines of the sociology of action (see Farro, 2012). Other theoretical orientations might be relevant for the subject matter of this piece of work. For instance, the perspective of depoliticization, which deals with the loss of political (equated to «conflictual» in the theorizing of these scholars) relevance of a series of public choices (D’Albergo, Moini, 2019, e.g. 37-38, 226). The approach used here reverses such perspective. It implicitly pre-supposes the tendency of domination to neutralize «the political» – as argued by Schmitt (1976), an author from whom the scholars of depoliticization indirectly (through Mouffe, 2005) borrow arguments for their theorizing – unless subjectivities outside «the political» thematize in the public debate, namely politicize, issues previously considered, for instance, «technical» or «private». One can think of the controversies over the use of nuclear power or women’s demand for free choice on abortion (Touraine et al., 1987; Muller Okin, 1991). Such issues can then be traced back (while fuelling them on their turn) to more comprehensive critical arguments, with the possible formation of collective identities of the «us-and-them» kind, to the extent that they are able in actuality to involve concrete «groupings» in action16 (Strauss, 1976; Schmitt, 1998). Various consequences can be derived from these premises in theorizing conflict: the «central field» of conflict changes in history; or the attempt at constructing it can fail, at least partially, for reasons to be highlighted by the analysis.

• 17 Activists were the object of fourteen interviews conducted in August-October 2022, lasting 45'-60' (...)

23This entails, in terms of social theory, an investigation focussed on agency, rather than on structure and on the practices of the leading actors – like the scholars of depoliticization do – (see also Lapeyronnie, 2006); and, in methodological terms, the choice of an investigation through semi-structured interviews aimed at interpreting the subjective meaning that actors give to their own involvement in collective action; as well as the systemic meaning that their action produces within public debate (for instance a possible polarization between “us and them”)17. In the case-study of San Lorenzo, the activists of the civic camp introduce some issues in the public sphere and intervene on other issues that are, or should be, a matter of political-administrative decision; they do not however interpret their collective action as conflictual, in the sense of being critical towards domination. On the contrary, we saw how the camp of Social Centres is attempting to construct conflict, but with unsuccessful results for reasons that the analysis has tried to highlight.

• 18 The sociological concept of “life spaces” resonates with those of “exodus” and “lines of flight” in (...)

24Moving within the sociological perspective of new social movements, it has been assumed that the conflicts which late-20^th century movements have been attempting to structure have a cultural content, expressing a critique to a kind of domination that primarily concerns ways of life and thinking (Melucci, 1996; Farro, 2000). Farro’s concept of «life spaces» pushes the debate a step forward: these movements construct physical and/or virtual spaces that work according to an alternative logic from that of the dominant world (2006, 30-31). This can be seen, for example, in initiatives of critical consumption (such as Fair Trade networks) and in Social Centres, in this case with an aesthetic emphasis on lifestyles and different arts (Leonini, Sassatelli, 2008; Famiglietti, 2006; Berzano, Genova, 2011)18. However, the different mobilizations do not actually converge into one movement nor do the arguments and proposals put forward by these movements structure the debates within the public sphere, for reasons that the sociology of action has failed to address adequately so far. As Touraine (2021, 180) admits in his latest book, the «formation of new social and political actors» is «the most difficult problem to solve» in what he calls the «communication society». As argued above, the case of San Lorenzo shows that one specific difficulty Social Centres have to address, in their attempt to widen the critique of domination to neo-liberalism, is the inability to involve popular strata in their collective action. This calls for an inquiry with an appropriate methodology concerning the experience of the people living in the public housing estates, as further development of research work on this neighbourhood.