In 2016, Apple Senior Vice President of Retail Angela Ahrendts — formerly CEO of high-end fashion house Burberry — announced a new concept for the tech company’s wildly successful retail stores. No longer would be they simply be shopping locations; Apple Stores were to become community gathering spaces, or “town squares.” Eventually, Apple would drop the “Store” moniker altogether in a nod to the new concept.

The plan has some upsides. As part of the reconceptualization, Ahrendts wants to expand the space for classes, improve the Genius Bar area, and add meeting spaces for local businesses and entrepreneurs. These are all within the scope of what we might expect from a company trying to improve its customer relationship.

Apple intends to create privatized public spaces centered around its pseudo-religious glowing white apple.

The issue is with Apple’s plans for the exterior of its stores. The company wants more green space, and more places for people to hang out even if they aren’t shopping. Essentially, Apple intends to create privatized public spaces centered around its pseudo-religious glowing white apple. It hopes these public-private spaces will entice people to indulge their consumerist temptations — to take a bite out of the apple, as it were.

Apple’s obsession with high-traffic locations and recognizable landmarks is nothing new. Its stores hold prime real estate all over the world. What is new, however, is its desire to extend its reach into the space surrounding its stores — and to recenter those public areas around its brand and products. The move is prompting a backlash.

A Neoliberal Tradition of Privatized ‘Public’ Space

As government budgets were slashed through successive waves of tax cuts beginning the 1970s, governments lost the ability to create and maintain exceptional public spaces. Private interests swooped in to create pseudo-public spaces reoriented to suit the purposes of commercial enterprise.

As the new owners of these spaces invested in modernizing and updating them, they also brought new rules. One rule was the use of private security to remove those who did not serve these spaces’ newly commercialized purpose (read: poor and homeless people). Anyone engaging in undesirable activity, including protest, was no longer welcome.

Apple now wants to get into the same game, creating privatized “town squares” which will ultimately serve its commercial purposes rather than those of the surrounding community. Anyone who thinks Apple will tolerate homeless people besmirching its luxury image should think again.

Around the world, consumers are revolting against Apple’s plans. The backlash is strongest in countries where public squares and parks have not already been privatized to the degree they have in the U.S. In many of these countries, Apple presents a new and unfamiliar threat.

Backlash in Australia, Stockholm, and Beyond