Iowa City redesigned its pedestrian mall a few years ago. Since the ped mall serves as our agora, that’s no minor task. Among other things, the city planned to replace older, open park benches with new ones. Several groups – most notably the Iowa City Catholic Worker House – claimed the new benches prevented people in a state of homelessness from sleeping on them. They called it ‘hostile architecture.’ Why? The new benches had middle armrests. As it turned out, city council meeting transcripts confirmed city officials already knew this.
And then folks with the Worker House made unreasonable demands. They demanded the city replace all the new benches. And they held a ‘sleep in‘ to draw public attention to the issue and to city officials taking an opposing stance. Why is the demand unreasonable? The city reported it would cost about $150,000, money that probably would’ve come from more important social services.
Ultimately, they reached a deal. Iowa City replaced 14 of the new benches at a lower cost. And it did so without taking money from social services.
Therefore, making unreasonable demands is a strategy that works, right? Well, maybe. Let’s find out.
Activism and Unreasonable Demands
Some activists advocate for an ‘unreasonable demands’ strategy. As I take it, the theory is that it’s a good negotiating tactic. It helps us get things we want.
It works something like this. First, the group puts forward a demand well beyond the capacity of the person or group they’re targeting. Then, the person or group balks at the demand. They state – often correctly – that they can’t do whatever it is activists demand they do. Finally, everyone sits down at the table and they work out a compromise. Since the result is still pretty good, it works out well for both parties. And the unreasonable demands ‘soften up’ the target so that they’re willing to come to a middle ground.
This is, of course, more or less what happened in the case of hostile architecture in Iowa City. And so, we have at least one example where it worked fairly well.
What is an Unreasonable Demand?
What is it that makes a demand unreasonable in the first place? Is there something special or unique about unreasonable demands that should make us prefer them? Is it better to start off with something pie in the sky or…what? Practical? Achievable?
I don’t have anything too technical in mind by ‘unreasonable demands.’ What I mean is that the demand is a bad idea or it’s wildly impractical to implement. Probably both. In the Iowa City hostile architecture case, what pushed the demand in this direction was the high cost combined with limited city funds. Having park benches without middle armrests isn’t necessarily a bad idea, but there are much better methods available for solving issues related to homelessness. We know a ‘Housing First‘ model is the best one.
Replacing some some benches did help, at least as a small, short term measure. But, of course, the root cause of homelessness is that people don’t have homes. Not that they can’t find a good place to sleep in public spaces.
Medicare for All?
When most people think of this strategy, they think about big ideas like Medicare for All. Lots of Medicare for All advocates prefer something like the strategy above: aim as high as possible with, e.g., the Jayapal-Sanders proposals, and then get as far as possible from the present system to that eventual goal. Along the way, they solve various difficulties, both legislative and philosophical.
But it’s a bad example. Why? Medicare for All isn’t an unreasonable demand. It’s a good idea, not a bad one. And, despite constant complaining and concern trolling to the contrary, it’s an entirely practical idea. Many countries have implemented something like a single-payer health insurance system, and we could implement one here. For various reasons, our politicians choose not to.
Does It Work?
It worked in one case, but does it work often?
No. In fact, I think it almost always fails. Unreasonable demands are typically the product of inadequate discussion and policy planning. A good political vision and strategy should produce good demands and the right methods for working toward them. A bad idea is rarely – if ever – better than a good idea.
We should put ambitious demands like Medicare for All on the table, especially if they’re part of a broader political vision like social democracy. And unions often combine ambitious and practical demands to achieve their goals. See, for example, the tips laid on in the Labor Notes book Secrets of a Successful Organizer. In that book, the idea is that a smaller, more practical demand might serve as both a compromise and a bridge to something bigger.
That unreasonable demands sometimes work in places like Iowa City is due more to coincidence than successful strategy. I might complain about Iowa City from time to time. But the fact of the matter is that we’re much more liberal than most places, and people genuinely care about social problems. We’re also a well governed city, to boot. When we present problems to the city, the city often takes them seriously.
Sometimes we can get things done in Iowa City that people can’t get done in many other places.
