Conflict is good

On the second day we heard about the roots of the idea: the right to the city. The theoretical side of it was based on Henri Lefebvre and David Harvey thoughts. Three models came up: liberal, communitarian and radical or so called rebellist.
The first means that this right is passive, we have it individually. The second one says that the active participation in public affairs creates this right. There is one huge table, we just have to sit there and talk about the problems. It could let us believe that it is an easy going thing but it isn't. There are a lot of tables with different groups and different interests. The last one which is the newest prospective of the right to the city says that the conflict is good it and it is a process. You have to disagree and maybe force what you think, because this is the only way to find conclusion or some result.
It's also important to note that the different groups have different kind of power so there might be sides what need more support (e.g. disabled people or old ones). And don't forget that radicalism doesn't mean violence at all but means that you want to change the status quo. That's how you can bring a change.