Fuck Gentrification - Join the Fuck Parade...Part 3!

[Pickman's model]

There's no assumption apart from trying to suggest people might see things in a different way people have donated two hundred pounds to you for what are either props for a protest/or/ means for fun-stress relief

My point would be FuckParade make assumptions themselves and it's sticky messy ground

eg this (follow the feed)
"We don't want your fucking hipster pop-ups. Go back to Hertfordshire. You aren't helpless bystanders in the class war - you're the problem."

in response to a pop-up shop in Dalston that has free Hammerschlagen A pop-up bar where you hammer nails into logs is opening in Dalston — dalstonist

And here is that pop-up shop's political figleaf for what's basically stress relief Hammerschlagen x FREE TIBET Supper Club @ DOT Cafe & Bar | Facebook
a fundraiser for a Tibetan orphan village.

Why couldn't someone living by be thinking to themselves 'we don't want a pop-up nightclub in the middle of the street/ railway station'? Is this unfair?
FuckParade thinks some pop-ups bad but its own pop-ups so pure that any question of them is to make assumptions of the working class.

I think we should be aware of the same road as Berlin's antigentrification movt- loads of parties massive turnouts etc but underneath alienation and resentment of the incoming politically minded.

i don't think a demonstration, which is what this is, is really equivalent to a crappy yuppie pop-up in shoreditch or elsewhere. in the latter case the proprietors are making a contribution to the gentrification of an area, frequently in premises formerly housing a business catering to the w/c residents of a neighbourhood.

 

[sihhi]

i don't think a demonstration, which is what this is, is really equivalent to a crappy yuppie pop-up in shoreditch or elsewhere. in the latter case the proprietors are making a contribution to the gentrification of an area, frequently in premises formerly housing a business catering to the w/c residents of a neighbourhood.

If it's a demonstration why does it need donations Pickman's?

 

[Pickman's model]

If it's a demonstration why does it need donations Pickman's?

demonstrations do cost money. fliers need to be produced. banners need to be made. sometimes sound systems need to be built. while people often give freely of their time, the materials and printing are not free.

 

[sihhi]

It looks like a nightclub flyer

Am I seeing this all wrong? It looks like a remake of the same weirdness of Germany's original FuckParade.

 

[Nice one]

What the have you done to fight this social cleansing?

Fuck all I bet.

i've not been middle class, that's what i've done.

 

[Nice one]

i don't think a demonstration, which is what this is, is really equivalent to a crappy yuppie pop-up in shoreditch or elsewhere. in the latter case the proprietors are making a contribution to the gentrification of an area, frequently in premises formerly housing a business catering to the w/c residents of a neighbourhood.

isn't the point the type of person who would go to the pop up is the same type of person who will go to your street party? You're appealing to the same people. You're adding to the "vibrancy" of the area. The self-hating middle class kids who gravitate towards the class war party are the same self-hating middle class kids who drink their posh cocktails out of jam jars. It's a middle class war of moralising oneupmanship played out on the pavement edge of shoreditch high street. As ever the real working class will look on, bemused.

 

[Pickman's model]

isn't the point the type of person who would go to the pop up is the same type of person who will go to your street party? You're appealing to the same people. You're adding to the "vibrancy" of the area. The self-hating middle class kids who gravitate towards the class war party are the same self-hating middle class kids who drink their posh cocktails out of jam jars. It's a middle class war of moralising oneupmanship played out on the pavement edge of shoreditch high street. As ever the real working class will look on, bemused.

i'm not appealing to anyone

 

[Pickman's model]

isn't the point the type of person who would go to the pop up is the same type of person who will go to your street party? You're appealing to the same people. You're adding to the "vibrancy" of the area. The self-hating middle class kids who gravitate towards the class war party are the same self-hating middle class kids who drink their posh cocktails out of jam jars. It's a middle class war of moralising oneupmanship played out on the pavement edge of shoreditch high street. As ever the real working class will look on, bemused.

it"s nice to see you retain your revolutionary purity, albeit at the price of never actually doing anything. and when something is done, eg alarm, it's never what you want it to be.

 

[Nice one]

it"s nice to see you retain your revolutionary purity, albeit at the price of never actually doing anything. and when something is done, eg alarm, it's never what you want it to be.

 

[cesare]

it"s nice to see you retain your revolutionary purity, albeit at the price of never actually doing anything. and when something is done, eg alarm, it's never what you want it to be.

 

[ViolentPanda]

Gentrification is when the middle class supplant the localised working class - gentrification starts with the middle classes wanting to buy in.

Inaccurate. Gentrification most often starts when locales are allowed to dilapidate beyond an "acceptable" standard. This often causes a "crush" on local social housing at the same time as it creates space in the local private housing market. One could somewhat accurately claim that much gentrification is a result of the destruction of most social solidarities between local authorities and their residents. This explains partially why gentrification, which was slllllloooooooooooooowwwwwwwwww in the '60s and '70s, accelerated with Thatcher, and continues to do so, with entire neighbourhoods being socially-cleansed in years, rather than decades. In fact in the last decade we've achieved the obscenity of local authorities openly colluding in social cleansing in order to bring about what they believe will be "beneficial" (to whom?) demographic change.

 

[ViolentPanda]

isn't the point the type of person who would go to the pop up is the same type of person who will go to your street party? You're appealing to the same people. You're adding to the "vibrancy" of the area. The self-hating middle class kids who gravitate towards the class war party are the same self-hating middle class kids who drink their posh cocktails out of jam jars. It's a middle class war of moralising oneupmanship played out on the pavement edge of shoreditch high street. As ever the real working class will look on, bemused.

Not true. Some of us "real working class" have used Class War as a convenient position from which to hurl abuse and rocks at the Old Bill , and most of us have enough wit to discard any moralising, while retaining the core message. I know that working class anarchism may not suit your current set of antipathies, but it exists nonetheless, with or without your (or Class War's) approval.

 

[Pickman's model]

isn't the point the type of person who would go to the pop up is the same type of person who will go to your street party? You're appealing to the same people. You're adding to the "vibrancy" of the area. The self-hating middle class kids who gravitate towards the class war party are the same self-hating middle class kids who drink their posh cocktails out of jam jars. It's a middle class war of moralising oneupmanship played out on the pavement edge of shoreditch high street. As ever the real working class will look on, bemused.

it's very strange how you used to be very happy to hobnob with cw. and it's not like the people in cw now are vastly different from people in cw back in the day.

 

[Nice one]

Inaccurate. Gentrification most often starts when locales are allowed to dilapidate beyond an "acceptable" standard. This often causes a "crush" on local social housing at the same time as it creates space in the local private housing market. One could somewhat accurately claim that much gentrification is a result of the destruction of most social solidarities between local authorities and their residents. This explains partially why gentrification, which was slllllloooooooooooooowwwwwwwwww in the '60s and '70s, accelerated with Thatcher, and continues to do so, with entire neighbourhoods being socially-cleansed in years, rather than decades. In fact in the last decade we've achieved the obscenity of local authorities openly colluding in social cleansing in order to bring about what they believe will be "beneficial" (to whom?) demographic change.

i don't think we are in conflict with each other, just looking at the trajectory at slightly different angles. The point of dilapidation beyond acceptable standard is when the squatters move in. Squatters were the the vanguard of the gentrification process of any area, closely followed by the 'creatives' and students. All these, being transient populations could put up with a lot more 'unacceptable' shit and yes have no need for "social solidarities between local authorities and their residents".

Their role though was to begin to make any area 'safe' for redevelopment. This is the first of the middle class "buying in" to an area - culturally rather than financially.

The "beneficial demographic change" you talk about are the middle class literally buying in to a gentrified area.

 

[Nice one]

it's very strange how you used to be very happy to hobnob with cw. and it's not like the people in cw now are vastly different from people in cw back in the day.

like a dog lying in the corner...

 

[Pickman's model]

like a dog lying in the corner...

perhaps you could expand on what you mean here, because it's by no means clear to me.

e2a: i see it's probably a reference to 'dog lying in the corner, will bite you but never warn you'. yeh, that's kind of how i feel about a lot of your posts. as far as i can see the class composition of cw isn't greatly different to what it used to be but you're now saying - as i don't believe you used to - that it's composed of self-hating middle class kids.

 

[Citizen66]

I was under the impression that CW has no membership.

 

[sihhi]

i don't think a demonstration, which is what this is, is really equivalent to a crappy yuppie pop-up in shoreditch or elsewhere. in the latter case the proprietors are making a contribution to the gentrification of an area, frequently in premises formerly housing a business catering to the w/c residents of a neighbourhood.

As far as I understand pop-up means they are not owners merely retailers hiring a site - for a limited amount of time - from the owner (who has done the dirty by buying up the site from a formerly more w/c product-selling business).

If we're going to down the route of one small business good one small business bad, I don't understand the logic of: "We don't want your fucking hipster pop-ups. Go back to Hertfordshire. You aren't helpless bystanders in the class war - you're the problem"
because those old businesses (that were numerous in the 1980s or 1990s say) that catered to a w/class clientele often willingly sold their businesses to another owner/landlord.
then the w/c have themselves moved on because the area itself became less affordable with other landowners/landlords doing the same thing so that business model (cater to w/c base) is no longer affordable in that area makes no sense any more.

hipster pop-ups make sense in a hipster area that's the local bedrock retail it is, it's like targetting jewellry stores in bond street for not providing 12.99 wedding rings

unless the w/c can get more wages more money + more benefits the spiral will go on... in my opinion the way the w/c can get more wages is clear lines of class struggle which means anyone who sells their labour for a living and doesn't rely on parents' landed or social capital wealth is on our side whether they like hammering nails in their bar or playing darts, prefer free tibet to free insurrectionists in mexico, have fancy beards or are clean-shaven, like techno or like peace and quiet is on one side, went to one sort of university or none, support manchester united from sussex or clapton from clapton... the differences within the w/c can only be overcome by upfront honesty in advance which is what i hope fuckparade will have given to residents in hackney for this party/protest/event.

there's an annual fuckparade in berlin through kreuzberg the majority of residents in the council housing there are (first gen rural-origin conservative, second gen 'apolitical' w/class) turks (small number of arabs) and i'm told it's like parallel worlds when the fuckparade passes through, like i said before i wish this well and hope the effort does good just airing some thoughts - this is a discussion board after all not simply event pinboard

PS I am not anti-Class war I'm not attacking Class war.

 

[ViolentPanda]

i don't think we are in conflict with each other, just looking at the trajectory at slightly different angles. The point of dilapidation beyond acceptable standard is when the squatters move in. Squatters were the the vanguard of the gentrification process of any area, closely followed by the 'creatives' and students. All these, being transient populations could put up with a lot more 'unacceptable' shit and yes have no need for "social solidarities between local authorities and their residents".

Their role though was to begin to make any area 'safe' for redevelopment. This is the first of the middle class "buying in" to an area - culturally rather than financially.

The "beneficial demographic change" you talk about are the middle class literally buying in to a gentrified area.

You're conflating two different types of gentrification, IMO.

Type 1 is "traditional" gentrification - the transition from "slums" to squats to boho "quarter" to "highly desirable to the middle classes" vibrancy to "branch of The Early Learning Centre on the high street" full-on "suburbia in the city". Yes, the middle class buy into it, and in 20-50 years time they'll start filtering back out toward the margins, as has happened before. While working class people are still alienated from their home turf by this form of gentrification, it's not total, and it's contingent on types and patterns of employment.

Type 2 is what some of us have been calling "hyper-gentrification", the commercially-driven accelerated gentrification of areas based on the retailing of the area's cultural history to those with enough money to buy into it, with the concomitant brutally-rapid displacement of locals and local culture for the pastiche version being flogged by the estate agents and style mags. It's not nearly as contingent on employment as type 1, because so much is funded from accumulated capital, rather than from forms of traditional funding such as mortgage borrowing.

Type 1 is bearable - it's a cyclic process that is historically-rooted. I think I've mentioned before that Jerry White, a historian of London, has attempted to map the cycle.
Type 2 isn't bearable, but it is the logical outcome of neoliberal economics - survival of the richest.

 

[Citizen66]

Given the WC can be easily co-opted into the politics of division by playing them off against themselves backed up by media which instructs them who to blame, CW provides an interesting spectacle capable of turning heads in the other direction. I don't see many other left groups doing this.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

Given the WC can be easily co-opted into the politics of division by playing them off against themselves backed up by media which instructs them who to blame, CW provides an interesting spectacle capable of turning heads in the other direction. I don't see many other left groups doing this.

Strange name for a political party though. Given that arguably the most committed and certainly the most effective class warrior of the past 35 years has been, ehrm, Thatcher.

 

[Citizen66]

Strange name for a political party though. Given that arguably the most committed and certainly the most effective class warrior of the past 35 years has been, ehrm, Thatcher.

Which the name evidently illustrates, imo.

 

[Pickman's model]

"...Israeli scumbag property developers…"

Nice swerve there. Do you mean "Israelis" from Tel Aviv or Stamford Hill ?

what about these developers from the zionist entity? Public inquiry ordered after London pub's illegal demolition

btw it would be nice if you acknowledged when you'd cocked up

 

[Nice one]

You're conflating two different types of gentrification, IMO.

Type 1 is "traditional" gentrification - the transition from "slums" to squats to boho "quarter" to "highly desirable to the middle classes" vibrancy to "branch of The Early Learning Centre on the high street" full-on "suburbia in the city". Yes, the middle class buy into it, and in 20-50 years time they'll start filtering back out toward the margins, as has happened before. While working class people are still alienated from their home turf by this form of gentrification, it's not total, and it's contingent on types and patterns of employment.

Type 2 is what some of us have been calling "hyper-gentrification", the commercially-driven accelerated gentrification of areas based on the retailing of the area's cultural history to those with enough money to buy into it, with the concomitant brutally-rapid displacement of locals and local culture for the pastiche version being flogged by the estate agents and style mags. It's not nearly as contingent on employment as type 1, because so much is funded from accumulated capital, rather than from forms of traditional funding such as mortgage borrowing.

Type 1 is bearable - it's a cyclic process that is historically-rooted. I think I've mentioned before that Jerry White, a historian of London, has attempted to map the cycle.
Type 2 isn't bearable, but it is the logical outcome of neoliberal economics - survival of the richest.

but both camden and shoreditch are the very traditional form of gentrification, your type 1. Class war are making a big play on the fact they don't want hipsters in their community. In fact i can't think of an area that has been run down where squatter/students/creatives weren't first in.

Who is going to live in these type 2 gentrified areas?

But really you are arguing against your previous post.

 

[Pickman's model]

but both camden and shoreditch are the very traditional form of gentrification, your type 1. Class war are making a big play on the fact they don't want hipsters in their community. In fact i can't think of an area that has been run down

Who is going to live in these type 2 gentrified areas?

But really you are arguing against your previous post.

i think that by any reasonable standard an area with an infestation of hipsters has been run down. there are fewer shops catering to working class locals. pubs are closed down or turned into playpens for hipsters. any nice new things in the area are aimed at hipsters. unless you like paying through the nose to drink yourself into oblivion, eating overpriced street food or buying shite fashion hipsters have brought nothing to e.g. shoreditch and taken a great deal away.

 

[smokedout]

Type 2 is what some of us have been calling "hyper-gentrification", the commercially-driven accelerated gentrification of areas based on the retailing of the area's cultural history to those with enough money to buy into it, with the concomitant brutally-rapid displacement of locals and local culture for the pastiche version being flogged by the estate agents and style mags. It's not nearly as contingent on employment as type 1, because so much is funded from accumulated capital, rather than from forms of traditional funding such as mortgage borrowing.

This is what's happening round here (Catford/Lewisham). There's been no squatters, no bohemians, its going straight from solidly working class to yuppies, not even anything to do with the area's cultural history, just that there's space and it's 20 mins to London Bridge and 10 to Canary Wharf on the DLR. There's hundreds of posh flats going up in Lewisham Centre right now and not a hipster caf/social centre/gallery etc in sight, not even a Starbucks yet. It's a property developer's coup and very different to what took place in Stoke Newington, Brixton etc.

 

[ViolentPanda]

This is what's happening round here (Catford/Lewisham). There's been no squatters, no bohemians, its going straight from solidly working class to yuppies, not even anything to do with the area's cultural history, just that there's space and it's 20 mins to London Bridge and 10 to Canary Wharf on the DLR. There's hundreds of posh flats going up in Lewisham Centre right now and not a hipster caf/social centre/gallery etc in sight, not even a Starbucks yet. It's a property developer's coup and very different to what took place in Stoke Newington, Brixton etc.

Isn't some of the new-build round Deptford being sold on a wispy connection to the old Naval yard and docks? I'm sure I remember having a good laugh at an SLP article that reckoned all the block names would be "nautically-themed".

Brixton, I'd say, has suffered both forms of gentrification - both the more normal gradual gentrification that's as much to do with rational behaviour by people with small families and limited finances, as it with anything else (and yes that is facilitated by settlement by artists, squatters etc) and this high pressure, high price and exclusionary form of gentrification.

Out of interest, is much of the new-build around your way walled/gated?

 

[Belushi]

There's hundreds of posh flats going up in Lewisham Centre right now and not a hipster caf/social centre/gallery etc in sight, not even a Starbucks yet. It's a property developer's coup and very different to what took place in Stoke Newington, Brixton etc.

Lewisham looks completely different when I pass on the train nowadays to how I remember it when I lived in SE London and there was just that Citi Bank building.

 

[smokedout]

Isn't some of the new-build round Deptford being sold on a wispy connection to the old Naval yard and docks? I'm sure I remember having a good laugh at an SLP article that reckoned all the block names would be "nautically-themed".

Brixton, I'd say, has suffered both forms of gentrification - both the more normal gradual gentrification that's as much to do with rational behaviour by people with small families and limited finances, as it with anything else (and yes that is facilitated by settlement by artists, squatters etc) and this high pressure, high price and exclusionary form of gentrification.

Out of interest, is much of the new-build around your way walled/gated?

yes, and to be fair deptford did have the artist/squatter thing going on but not lewisham or catford. the estate agents came first, and then the posh new builds started going up, along with the rents

not much of it is gated, but parts of it, especially round the back of lewisham station are designed in a way that makes adjoining roads/walkways etc appear to be private property even though its still public right of way, so you feel like your trespassing when you walk through and people don't.

 

[smokedout]

Lewisham looks completely different when I pass on the train nowadays to how I remember it when I lived in SE London and there was just that Citi Bank building.

gonna look even different soon, they're still on phase 1 I think