Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

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

Do you think what's left of working class Shoreditch have turned against Class War because of this? I suspect most of them haven't noticed, and some of the ones who have probably thought it was quite funny. Some of them were there. All I've heard is whining yuppies. Good, fuck them.
I assume that the folk who have whined about the paint on the windows are the sort of people who regard it as desirable to pay someone £4+ to pour a serving of cereal into a bowl for you. (Milk extra)
I cannot imagine what is going through their heads when they do this.
 
Seems to me from reading this thread that if you are outraged by the actions of Class War, that's probably because you are the target of Class War and they want you to be outraged by their actions. To argue with them about their actions is thus to utterly miss the point.

If you think they're fucking idiots, it's best to talk to others about it, not them. There's no point engaging in debate with people that have no interest in debating you.
 
Question for the liberals:

What makes an independent business "better" than a multinational from a worker's point of view?

And we all know that as soon as there's any attempts to increase minimum wage, improve worker conditions (e.g. as we see with maternity/paternity rights), its the small businesses that immediately start moaning to the media and press about how it will 'put them out of business' and 'dent their profits'. I've always been someone historically who favoured independent shops and small businesses over large chains - perhaps still do a bit given the choice within the economic system we have (I'm still wrestling with that one tbh), but my beliefs have certainly shifted over time about this. Whether small business or big, they're both still private and their primary goal is profit for those that own/run them (whether they are also do good for their local community beyond employment is something that both small and big businesses either do well or not as I've found on experience).
 
I assume that the folk who have whined about the paint on the windows are the sort of people who regard it as desirable to pay someone £4+ to pour a serving of cereal into a bowl for you. (Milk extra)
I cannot imagine what is going through their heads when they do this.
or coming out their pockets
 
put a starbucks next to an independent coffee shop / cafe, and Bone's saying he'd target the independent in preference to Starbucks.

It may get more publicity, but wtf is the politics behind it?

or was bone just attempting a defence of the action after the fact / being controversial for the hell of it?
if you have to ask the questions there's little chance you understanding the answers.
 
I assume that the folk who have whined about the paint on the windows are the sort of people who regard it as desirable to pay someone £4+ to pour a serving of cereal into a bowl for you. (Milk extra)
I cannot imagine what is going through their heads when they do this.

It's a question of taste. I struggle with the concept of paying £2 for a cup of coffee, or up to £5 for coffee and and a sandwich. I usually prefer to pack a packed lunch - and save my cash for overpriced ponsey craft ales - or at least strong larger at a pub.

I make no assumptions about those who regard it desirable to spend £2 on a coffee (cake extra!!!). What's going on in their heads is their business.
 
Are individuals who have exercised right to buy fair game for direct action CW protests?
Are all private home owners fair game?

The last couple of gentrification threads here have tended to focus on small vs large business, marx's terminology of the classes and the economics of a bowl of cerial.

Surely the more pressing issue driving gentrification is the direct relationship: private housing vs social housing, not the indirect relationship of: a shop that (supposedly) caters for the "gentrifiers" vs "working class" employee.
 
if you have to ask the questions there's little chance you understanding the answers.

Ridiculous attitude, you're obv involved in politics but you can't be bothered to explain your position? I'll concede there may be some logical rationale behind targeting small retail outlets but I'm yet to find it on this thread or elsewhere.
 
Ridiculous attitude, you're obv involved in politics but you can't be bothered to explain your position? I'll concede there may be some logical rationale behind targeting small retail outlets but I'm yet to find it on this thread or elsewhere.
i thought ian bone was very clear in his explanation: that it attracts the attention which having a pop at a starbucks wouldn't. i don't know how you have failed to understand it.
 
yeah but he missed out the part where large parts of the population view it a senseless, and it's being used to discredit anti-gentrification. Lots and lots of people can live with starbucks getting their window smashed in, but they balk when it comes to a small firm getting done over. Is it just a case of breaking a few eggs to make an omlette?
 
yeah but he missed out the part where large parts of the population view it a senseless, and it's being used to discredit anti-gentrification. Lots and lots of people can live with starbucks getting their window smashed in, but they balk when it comes to a small firm getting done over. Is it just a case of breaking a few eggs to make an omlette?
i don't think you can really say it was done over when all that was done to the property was some paint thrown over it and 'scum' written on the window. i would understand 'done over' to be at least windows broken. you're making a big fuss about fuck all.
 
i'm not making a fuss, I don't give a shit about their windows their huge cereal mark up can cover it I'm sure. The papers have had a field day with it though, turn on lbc of a mornign and listen to the fuckwits going on about it. As far as they're concerned the place was smashed up, you can bury your head and keep saying how it was only a bit of paint but the voice of the sun and lbc is far louder and that's what most people hear. Maybe you can't account for stupidity but it still seems like an own goal to me.
 
If anyone here hasn't already read it, can I recommend Seth Tobocman's War in the Neighborhood?

1999_war.jpg
 
i'm not making a fuss, I don't give a shit about their windows their huge cereal mark up can cover it I'm sure. The papers have had a field day with it though, turn on lbc of a mornign and listen to the fuckwits going on about it. As far as they're concerned the place was smashed up, you can bury your head and keep saying how it was only a bit of paint but the voice of the sun and lbc is far louder and that's what most people hear. Maybe you can't account for stupidity but it still seems like an own goal to me.
what has been interesting is that everyone's agreed starbucks is a fair target, the main criticism has been 'you should have got a multinational', not 'you shouldn't be smashing up shops'.
 
that's true, and very encouraging I suppose and I guess the next hipster might think twice before opening up a gravy bar or whatever next door. (the gravy bar is my idea, keep your hands off)
 
i don't think you can really say it was done over when all that was done to the property was some paint thrown over it and 'scum' written on the window. i would understand 'done over' to be at least windows broken. you're making a big fuss about fuck all.
I saw the London Live interview with one of the owners this morning. He seemed very pleasant and well spoken. When the interviewer asked him how much the damage would cost he looked a bit taken aback, saying that there hadn't been any damage to the inside "as we were able to barricade the entrance to keep them out" and that there was some red paint and the word "scum" written on the glass. He did quite well to indirectly say "nothing".
 
that's true, and very encouraging I suppose and I guess the next hipster might think twice before opening up a gravy bar or whatever next door. (the gravy bar is my idea, keep your hands off)

I'll confess to going to the porridge bar behind Old St, mid morning, earlier in the year. They had no porrige left unfort.

Gone now, sadly, Ish.
 
Precisely, he appears to want publicity for publicity sake. Its odious.

As I said earlier on this thread, if course it's publicity for the sake of publicity! It's the putting on of a spectacle to get people - those people who can think beyond "evil anarchists attacking poor little working class shop-owners" - talking about what motivated the spectacle - gentrification in this case.
 
Back
Top Bottom