Brixton news, rumours and general chat: Summer 2019

[discobastard]

You said in post 916:





If I get your clarification right your not criticising or scrutinising Squires for anything.

Your just pointing out that others have.

So you saying that Squires can be criticised or scrutinised for a number of things doesn't mean that you yourself think so. Your just pointing out that others have.

This isn't clear in your post 916. So thanks for clarification.

So the other reading of your post is that their are legitimate criticisms / scrutiny that can be made. But not the post office one.

So in that case what are the legitimate ones?

And Alex put forward the community space issue. Is this one?

Do you think that in hindsight that Squires promises of community space came to nothing?

Clearly the promise of community space has come to nothing. Unless anybody can prove otherwise.

This kind of nano-argument closes down the bigger discussions. Which is the problem on this forum.

 

[Gramsci]

Clearly the promise of community space has come to nothing. Unless anybody can prove otherwise.

This kind of nano-argument closes down the bigger discussions.

I'm not closing down any discussion here. I'm asking for clarifications.

 

[Gramsci]

So it's ok to criticise Squires for the promises of community space that was short-lived? Anyone disagree with this?

 

[editor]

So it's ok to criticise Squires for the promises of community space that was short-lived? Anyone disagree with this?

And for being gentrifying, self-interested cunts.

 

[T & P]

You have absolutely nothing to support your case, yet you choose to defend the multi-million, all-gentrifying, exclusive vetted private bar incomers.

Perhaps you never use the Post Office, but if you had to regularly to walk past the palatial, artfully empty surrounds of Squire's HQ and then pack into the shitty Post Office they themselves built for the community, perhaps you night understand the frustration.

You have even less to support your position, given that post office branch downgrades or closures are the norm not the exception. So in the absence of any evidence the only option left is to look at for circumstantial evidence or known patterns instead, and whether you wish to acknowledge it or not there is a mountain of it suggesting it is very likely the branch postmaster/ management wanted and intended to downsize it, since it is happening all over the country and Post Office Ltd is not even denying it.

And as to ‘defending’ the big bad wolf corporation, do you actually think it is right or fair to accuse any entity of a specific act for which there is no proof simply because they might have behaved questionably on unrelated issues?

Diss them and express your general dislike of them all you like by all means, but if others question a specific claim for which they see little proof, don’t assume they are siding with them or supporting other things they might have done. I can and indeed regularly do question specific accusations against people or entities I profoundly dislike if I believe said accusation to be unfair or based on nothing else than general dislike. I certainly don’t want to live in a society where bad reputation was all the justification needed to make specific accusations without proof, even if the accused was thoroughly unlikable.

 

[discobastard]

So it's ok to criticise Squires for the promises of community space that was short-lived? Anyone disagree with this?

I don't disagree with that. And my point was about the Post Office.

I see Editor like a post you made which quoted mine. Maybe he should take me off ignore as he is maybe technically breaching forum rules? Or is that OK. am not clear.

 

[editor]

You have even less to support your position, given that post office branch downgrades or closures are the norm not the exception.

They built the fucking new Post Office after grabbing all of the the old space for themselves to create their palatial, glossy-mag-friendly showcase HQ, designed, no doubt, to woo their multinational billionaire clients.

It was all part of their design masterplan for the Department Store and I've already [posted up links verifying that.

 

[Gramsci]

Well Im just trying to get clarification on what are legitimate criticisms of Squires / what they can be scrutinised for.

So far post office no but community space yes they can.

 

[discobastard]

You have even less to support your position, given that post office branch downgrades or closures are the norm not the exception. So in the absence of any evidence the only option left is to look at for circumstantial evidence or known patterns instead, and whether you wish to acknowledge it or not there is a mountain of it suggesting it is very likely the branch postmaster/ management wanted and intended to downsize it, since it is happening all over the country and Post Office Ltd is not even denying it.

And as to ‘defending’ the big bad wolf corporation, do you actually think it is right or fair to accuse any entity of a specific act for which there is no proof simply because they might have behaved questionably on unrelated issues?

Diss them and express your general dislike of them all you like by all means, but if others question a specific claim for which they see little proof, don’t assume they are siding with them or supporting other things they might have done. I can and indeed regularly do question specific accusations against people or entities I profoundly dislike if I believe said accusation to be unfair or based on nothing else than general dislike. I certainly don’t want to live in a society where bad reputation was all the justification needed to make specific accusations without proof, even if the accused was thoroughly unlikable.

Whose post are you referring to?

 

[Gramsci]

I don't disagree with that. And my point was about the Post Office.

I see Editor like a post you made which quoted mine. Maybe he should take me off ignore as he is maybe technically breaching forum rules? Or is that OK. am not clear.

I'm not on ignore so you can see what I post with quote as its my post. If you have problem with that take it to feedback forum.

 

[discobastard]

Well Im just trying to get clarification on what are legitimate criticisms of Squires / what they can be scrutinised for.

So far post office no but community space yes they can.

I don't think anybody is in any doubt that S&P are big bad capitalists. I thought that was the issue. The bar downstairs looks awful. And all fuelled by this kind of thing:

 

[discobastard]

I'm not on ignore so you can see what I post with quote as its my post. If you have problem with that take it to feedback forum.

I'm not sure what you mean by that. I didn't mention you regards ignore. I can see everything you post and agree with a lot of it. Just not all of it and sometimes I have a different point of view. That's what these forums are for eh?

ETA: feedback forum is pointless as the moderators are often the ones that get criticised and so won't do anything. I am on mutual (read 'forced') ignore from somebody local and so am effectively edited because they don't like any of what I say even though I aim to make sure it is balanced and factual.

 

[editor]

For reference: when posters are on mutual ignore they are not supposed to message, respond to, or refer to the other poster in any way at all. Mutual ignore is a last desperate measure to stop threads being endlessly ruined by feuding posters and personal beef. Failure to respect this measure results in warnings and bans if they continue. Posters can, however, ask (other) mods to mediate if either party wants the ban lifted.

if anyone wants to discuss this further please take the discussion to the feedback forum, because it is clearly off topic here.

 

[discobastard]

For reference: when posters are on mutual ignore they are not supposed to message, respond to, or refer to the other poster in any way at all. Mutual ignore is a last desperate measure to stop threads being endlessly ruined by feuding posters and personal beef. Failure to respect this measure results in warnings and bans if they continue. Posters can, however, ask (other) mods to mediate if either party wants the ban lifted.

if anyone wants to discuss this further please take the discussion to the feedback forum, because it is clearly off topic here.

They are stupid rules though eh? I don’t need to take it to the feedback forum as that’s a waste of time.

Not fussed that I am on ignore. Just seems daft. I agree with a lot of what you say, just not always how you say it.

And you are responding to my post so surely the same rules apply to you?

 

[Gramsci]

I'm not sure what you mean by that. I didn't mention you regards ignore. I can see everything you post and agree with a lot of it. Just not all of it and sometimes I have a different point of view. That's what these forums are for eh?

ETA: feedback forum is pointless as the moderators are often the ones that get criticised and so won't do anything. I am on mutual (read 'forced') ignore from somebody local and so am effectively edited because they don't like any of what I say even though I aim to make sure it is balanced and factual.

You asked me about being on ignore and the Ed and I tried to explain why you could see what I posted. And if you have problem with how ignore works take it to Feedback forum.

Now you have moved onto whether I think these forums are for different points of view.

As though I have a problem with that that needs to be questioned.

 

[CH1]

Sub-Post Office, Brixton - Hansard

You raise an interesting point.
Is Brixton unique in having a Labour MP who insisted in being addressed as Colonel? I understand that on leaving the forces you were bumped up a rank, so he wasn't even a practising Colonel at the time of leaving the army.

If you ask me Marcus Lipton was bumptious. But I'm sure he was a good guardian of Post Offices and their users.

 

[editor]

Brixton BMX star Top Brixton BMX rider Silvi Vargas looks to inspire a new generation

 

[editor]

Free bike rides on the 22nd! Santander Cycles are free across London (and Brixton!) on Sun 22nd Sept

 

[Angellic]

Block336 | Block336 Gallery, Brixton

Restraint Restrained
Kat Anderson

PV: 27 September, 6-9pm

28 September – 26 October 2019
Thurs – Sat, 12-6 pm

Symposium:
12 October 2019 | 10.30am – 1pm

Restraint Restrained, the first solo exhibition by Bristol artist Kat Anderson, was commissioned by Block 336 in partnership with Black Cultural Archives (BCA). The artist conducted a residency at BCA where she accessed specific materials, developing her ongoing research project: Episodes of Horror which explores the horror of trauma experienced by and projected upon Black bodies in literature and lens-based media. The works draw on the experiences and narratives of the many mentally ill Black people who have met their deaths in police custody or mental health facilities, through excessive restraint holds and other violent and negligent behaviours. Restraint Restrained references the central premise of Frantz Fanon’s essay ‘Concerning Violence’, in which he claims that in order for the decolonisation of indigenous land to happen, a total and violent purging of the colonisers by the indigenous people must occur. Anderson repurposes this idea to consider how the contemporary Black mind and body, as a ‘colonised space’, is processed through public health and police institutions; understanding such authorities as embodiments and enforcers of structural white supremacy.

 

[CH1]

Block336 | Block336 Gallery, Brixton
Restraint Restrained
Kat Anderson
PV: 27 September, 6-9pm
28 September – 26 October 2019
Thurs – Sat, 12-6 pm
Symposium:
12 October 2019 | 10.30am – 1pm
Restraint Restrained, the first solo exhibition by Bristol artist Kat Anderson, was commissioned by Block 336 in partnership with Black Cultural Archives (BCA). The artist conducted a residency at BCA where she accessed specific materials, developing her ongoing research project: Episodes of Horror which explores the horror of trauma experienced by and projected upon Black bodies in literature and lens-based media. The works draw on the experiences and narratives of the many mentally ill Black people who have met their deaths in police custody or mental health facilities, through excessive restraint holds and other violent and negligent behaviours. Restraint Restrained references the central premise of Frantz Fanon’s essay ‘Concerning Violence’, in which he claims that in order for the decolonisation of indigenous land to happen, a total and violent purging of the colonisers by the indigenous people must occur. Anderson repurposes this idea to consider how the contemporary Black mind and body, as a ‘colonised space’, is processed through public health and police institutions; understanding such authorities as embodiments and enforcers of structural white supremacy.

Sounds very interesting, but wasn't there some trouble five years ago with a similar event at Waterloo?
Slavery exhibition featuring black actors chained in cages shut down
Seem to recall Lee Jasper coming on RT to tell us why it had to be shut down.

Maybe as this Block 336 exhibition has cited Frantz Fanon as an intellectual progenitor it will be OK.

Glaring sins of the 2014 "installation" were
a) it was conceived by a white South African - clearly even if he did it out of compassion, the show would be open to criticism as bad taste or abuse
b) the black peope in cages were aspiring actors who had no particular locus in exposing slavery as evil

Let's hope Movement for Justice don't decide that Block 336 has crossed a line.

 

[editor]

The thread now continues into autumn here: Brixton news, rumours and general chat: Autumn 2019