What responsibility do designers have beyond the briefs of their clients? Design as activism begins with examining our work in the context of larger “matters of concern” (in the terms of Bruno Latour). In a Latourean framework, we must examine the larger ripple effects of this fence, that Italian marble, this client’s agenda—socially, politically, economically, environmentally. Who is being served by the project, and who is being marginalized? How does a privately owned public park silence political dissent? How does a development impact downstream watersheds or bird migration pathways? Who profits from a new piece of infrastructure, and who is displaced in the process? How do our rendering entourages quietly marginalize certain groups? In a post- Albert Speer, post- AIA Trump letter environment, it is clear that there can be no hard lines around our disciplinary scope. Design is political, and ignoring these larger facets makes us complicit in perpetuating uneven geographies and power structures.

Incorporating activism into everyday design practice means recognizing that the paying client is not the only group who will be impacted by a project. Designers can work to incorporate the needs and dreams of those rendered invisible by uneven (colonial/capitalist/patriarchal) power structures, even within conventional design practice. Breaking the mold of the traditional (paying) client/architect relationship creates potential for more radical activism, be it through working for unconventional clients or using representation to change ways of seeing or reveal hidden injustices. Design activism means leveraging our skills to make sure more ways of knowing are embedded into our constructed world.