ONE
ELEMENTS OF CARE WORK IN GREECE
CareNotes Collective
Understanding how social movements transition from physical or emotional distress to collectivizing around distress is fundamental to autonomous care work. Such a process is not limited to dystopian reactions against Western medicine or individualist narratives inherited from capitalist life. Itâs rooted in a polyvalent desire to socialize around distress, to liberate useful labor from wages, to recuperate our bodies and ecosystems in a moment where the most basic infrastructures supporting our survivalâsuch as housing, healthcare facilities, and clean water supplyâare becoming scarcities. The ability to collectively recuperate our bodies and ecosystems is dependent upon a horizon that is also able to disrupt the very instruments of class and power that reproduce our distress. Below we discuss in further detail how spaces, collectives, and analyses around disease and distress constitute some of the emerging aspects of autonomous care work in Greece and how these have emerged in opposition to, and beyond modern medicine, the state, and capitalist life.
The Crisis of the Biomedical and Electoral Models
The privatization of essential clinical services combined with the increasing demand for care by those suffering from intensifying capitalist life has led to a public health crisis in Greece. Rates of suicide, heroin addiction, HIV, and depression have escalated. These trends expose two fundamental crises at the clinical and societal level which simultaneously open new possibilities in care work.
At the clinical level, there is the inability of the biomedical model (the traditional clinical approach to diagnosis and treatment almost entirely centering biological factors) to observe, articulate, and intervene against the causes leading to the present public health crisisâausterity and migration. This is at first glance, correctly attributed to shortages in staffing and infrastructure following cuts in healthcare and social services. However, these budget cuts only expose more inherent limitations of the biomedical model to respond to larger-scale contradictions of capitalist life that manifest in so many forms of suffering.
A major inherent limitation of the biomedical model is rooted in the workflow of modern healthcareâfrom disease to waiting room, to doctor/patient encounter, to allocation of prescription, to consumption of pills. Commodified modes of Eastern or alternative therapies in the United States also mimic this flowâorganizing suffering around the individual who, as a consumer, exchanges money with an expert healer. There is no encounter between suffering bodies in the architecture of the clinic; the doctor/healer diverts the potentiality of collectivizing around suffering to instead individualize disease with coded complaints and a prescription exchanged for a bill. Suffering = the biological = the commodifiable. There is no time to diverge from this flow or even consider alternatives to larger-scale crises such as austerity and migration.
Such a blind faith in the doctorâprescriptionâstate-run universal healthcare structure forsakes our capacity to collectivize around suffering and reclaim the means to recuperate life as we desire. Alienation from our capacities to heal runs parallel with our inability to farm or feed ourselves due to the commodification of every facet of life. Thus, in the spirit of defending what we have and reclaiming what we need to build community, we defend universal healthcare as that desired by users and care workers, rather than politicians and CEOs; we also seek to reclaim land from mono-agriculture, abandoned buildings for housing and clinics, and so forth with principled acknowledgement of all those dispossessed in the original and ongoing histories of settler colonialism and racial capitalism.
How is the crisis of the biomedical model linked with that of the electoral? In Greece, the decades-long economic and political crisis has been met by some communities and healthcare workers not only reclaiming clinics to offer healthcare, but in the process, inspiring users and care workers to collectivize around economic and political causes of suffering. Such a desire to collectivize and politicize suffering relates to a larger-scale crisis of electoral or representational politics following the election of Syriza. This processâof collectivizing and politicizing sufferingâhas occurred entirely autonomous from capital while also in resistance to a self-proclaimed âprogressiveâ state that has only escalated police violence against anarchist or migrant squats, healthcare workers, and educators resisting closures, tenants facing evictions, among other care workers and users suffering from austerity.
In the Greek context, we see three trends:
1. A revitalization of community and worker-run spaces as being crucial for the reproduction of autonomous life. This includes housing squats, care-work spaces via social clinics and recuperated hospitals, social kitchens, gardens, and
safe spaces.
2. A rupture of care processes from institutionalized healthcare and emergence within spaces traditionally demarcated for noncare functions, such as factories, commercial buildings, and parks. In other words, we see social kitchens entering the plazas, squats turning into community self-defense committees against the police and mafia, or the integration of care work within a recuperated factory.
3. City, regional, and national networks of autonomous and anarchist care spaces and collectives sharing their experiences, pooling knowledge, and coordinating solidarity efforts against the sustained assault of the police, media, and state.
Liberating Care Work from Healthcare
Presently in Greece, care work has already been transferred from a profit-driven model to assemblies of care workers and community members that sustain a horizontal and participatory structure. Such assemblies abandon traditional frameworks that embrace the state, capital, institutions, and experts as mediating the collective ownership of modes of care reproduction, and instead recuperate spaces around need as it is defined emotionally, medically, and politically by care workers and users.
The possibility of shifting from healthcare to care reproduction would not be possible, however, without the transformation of identities among participants in radical care spaces. The potential to provide free healthcare services for an occupied clinic, recuperate clinics at risk of closure as a collective of healthcare workers traditionally separated by hierarchies and salaries, and collaborate with care workers not institutionally trained in care work, are some of the many ruptures of radical care work versus traditional healthcare emerging in Greece. Such outcomes are dependent on two significant and overlapping processes.
The first, and most obvious, of these processes is the deconstruction of biomedical authority and decommodification of care work provided by doctors but also nurses, therapists, social workers, and other workers. Second, the encounters within radical care spaces between healthcare workers and collective members who lack formal training in healthcare yet are indispensable to the growth of the care space. Both processes further liberate the de-institutionalization of care. However, the methodical rupture of institutionalized relations between participants of care collectives is based on broadening the understanding of care work as defined by need, as well as theoretical analysis. For instance, in Haris Malamidisâ description of the Workersâ Medical Center at Vio.Me Self-Managed Factory, three-member teams consisting of a doctor, a mental health specialist, and a third member potentially lacking formal training are together critical in treating âeach human being as psychosomatic-social totality.â This transformation from volunteer healthcare workers to care workers is further shaped with bi-monthly assemblies and a theoretical and practical training for every participant joining the Workersâ Medical Center.
Decommodifying Care: From Waged Healthcare Worker to Volunteer, to Care Worker, to Deterritorialized Care Participant
Assemblies of radical care spaces mostly consist of participants with no formal training in healthcare but were core to the regular functioning of spaces. Assemblies often struggled to involve more doctors, nurses, and traditional healthcare workers with the assemblies or the upkeep of spaces. Nonetheless, the exchanges between traditional healthcare workers, nonprofessionalized participants in care spaces, and individuals receiving care are each crucial in the conception of more radical forms of care work.
The process in which peoplesâ identities transform fromâtoâbetween doctorânurse to healthcare worker to care worker to deterritorialized care participant is not a linear or phasic process. It emerges out of need and articulates itself in singular or overlapping roles. For instance, the radical doctors we spoke with working in a traditional hospital unit could also participate in a social clinic assembly and fully embrace the political potentialities of both spaces. Similarly, while some participants in social clinics were dedicated to expanding access to herbal therapies in the social clinic, they would also join community self-defense collectives to confront police and mafia violence in their neighborhood when needed.
Waged Healthcare Worker
Healthcare workers are often e...