Con߸erns have been raised regarding smart ߸ity innovatons leading to, or ߸onsolidatng, te߸hno߸rat߸ urban governan߸e and the tokenizaton of ߸itzens. owever, less resear߸h has explored how we make sense of ongoing appropriaton of the resour߸es, skills, and expertse of ߸orporate smart ߸ites and what this means for future ߸ites. n this paper, we examine the summoning of polit߸al subje߸tvity through the pra߸t߸es of retrofing, repurposing, and reinvigoratng. We ߸onsider them as "߸ivi߸ infrastru߸ture> to sensitze the infrastru߸tural a߸ts and ߸onventons that are assembled for exploring in߸lusive and part߸ipatory ways of shaping urban futures. These pra߸t߸es, illustrated by examples in Adelaide, Dublin, and Boston, fo߸us on ߸apabilites not only to write ߸ode, a߸߸ess data or design prototype, but also to devise diverse so߸iote߸hni߸al arrangements and power relatons to disobey, queston, and dissent from te߸hno߸rat߸ visions and pra߸t߸es. The paper ߸on߸ludes by suggestng further examinaton of the summoning of polit߸al subje߸tvity from within established insttutons to widen dissent and appropriaton of the ߸orporate smart ߸ity.