Those with money in Mauritius always devise ways to avoid their less fortunate counterparts. Exclusive clubs where only those of a certain wealth can join is one such example. Even within nightclubs, there are reserved areas for very important persons. Certain activities are termed ‘bourgeois’ precisely because they were pursued by the upper classes. The great debate about public versus private education also involves the big question of segregation between the classes.

However, citizens of a country generally agree that they all have to live together in a community. The city is the perfect example where rich and poor cohabit to some extent. Though there are areas, which become exclusive to the rich, ultimately they have to share the same streets with the rest of the population to attend to some activities. But this is now changing. The phenomenon that is driving the charge is the emergence of gated communities.

From Los Angeles to Rio de Janeiro via Johannesburg, the upper classes and to some extent the middle classes, can go about their business without coming into any contact with the rest of society. They have built estates which are fenced off, guarded 24/7 by private security contractors and accessible only to residents. Through elevated walkways or tunnels, cities like Minneapolis and Toronto have connected office blocks to shopping malls. These privatised walking spaces are designed so that the rich do not have to come into contact with the poorer members of society.

Gated communities can be traced back to the Romans, who began the process of urbanisation. Roman soldiers were given land after retirement and, with their familles, they settled in and around a manor. To guard against insurrection by local villagers, they built protective walls, and this became an effective means of social control to keep an eye on the local tribes. The medieval towns and cities can also be equated to gated communities as walls were also built around them to protect their citizens in times of war.

But the modern equivalent of these secure spaces can be traced back to the United States in the late 19th century. However, these were reserved for the unimaginably rich, such as the Hollywood aristocracies. The ones which share the most common characteristics with the one being planned in Mauritius, are the retirement villages of seventies America. The trend accentuated during the 80s as the population became preoccupied with crime and communities began to build gates and enclose streets to keep themselves safe from harm.

But now that the phenomenon has landed in Mauritius, with such a centre planned in Ebène, it is well worth considering the impact of gated communities on society. Though people have a right to security, we have to ask ourselves, what causes people to retire behind fences and walls, cutting themselves from the rest of society. Is it crime itself that is the cause or the fear of crime? In a world of sensationalised news stories about the levels of crime, the fear factor is the main engine. Studies in the US show that despite an environment of low criminality, people cited crime as the main reason for the barricades.

If it is not crime, then questions have to be asked about the legitimacy of these developments. And they are serious questions. They relate to the idea of citizenship. Enclosed areas create fragmentation, segregation and disconnection from the rest of society. The rich manage their affairs in their bubble and forget any idea of solidarity. This becomes another way for them to quietly resist any idea of redistribution of wealth.

In Brazil, where gated communities have cropped up in all major urban areas, the rich and poor share almost no public space. The rich move within their own enclosures, while the traditional public spaces, such as streets and pavements are left to the poor, the homeless and street kids. The latter are left vulnerable to the abusive and often violent control of various gangs and the security services. Research in Brazil also shows that the barriers created by gated communities have an effect on those outside. Lacking the protection of private security men and the surrounding fences, the feeling of fear, insecurity, and vulnerability increases among those not rich enough to be ‘admitted’ within these 21st century castles.

As has been the case in Brazil and current trends in South Africa point in the same direction, residents of gated communities form homeowners’ associations to run the enclaves. They attend to anything from paying security companies to design and building standards of extensions to houses. Such associations in turn become very powerful lobbying groups. They can then use their influence to demand tax rebates, control decisions of local authorities and resist citywide public spending on services and amenities that they already have, but which are vital to others. Housing for the poor is then confined to the most run-down and crime-ridden areas of the cities.

Gated communities have also become a way to ‘lock’ the value of properties, since they will remain within the same enclosed areas, with no ‘undesirables’ moving in and causing a drop in price. Whether, it is a cousin of Firinga or Hollanda which strikes, there will be no apartment blocks popping up on the doorstep or and no ghettoes mushrooming in the backgarden, with the ‘rabble of the earth’ moving in. Thus, property values remain fixed or rise but they never go down.

Governments usually encourage gated communities or, at best, turn a blind eye to their effects. Their rich residents are, after all, the demographics that matter in a capitalist society. However, this particular type of complexes is the very cause of exclusion and marginalisation. If Mauritius is to avoid extreme inequalities, the government will have to step in and put an end to these aberrations. The rich cannot disengage from their responsibility and a fair distribution of wealth should also be their concern.

<B>Diren VALAYDEN</B>