Fuck Gentrification - Join the Fuck Parade...Part 3!
- Thread starter ClassWar2015
- Start date
You can fuck off too you whining liberal shitbag.
The Flying Pig
Well-Known Member
If you can't remember ........p.s. a little clue .... the book fair suggested by your good self...and you feel you and your gang are in a position to name call?
pocketscience
Well-Known Member
Touchy!
Do you own your own home? Ex-Council place per chance?
pocketscience
Well-Known Member
Bollocks. Plenty of the working class I know moved into home ownership to make a fucking fortune, and that they did.
Of course, plenty of them winging now that their 18-25yr old kids cant afford to get on the ladder or get a council place, with no hint of irony.
The Flying Pig
Well-Known Member
I have just got Vicor Meldrew
No I will be undercover, anarchists are easily confused by clothing. I will have a dress down day.
If you can't see the connection you're a bigger twerp than you appear, and that's really saying something.
pocketscience
Well-Known Member
Of course it's not. Nobody suggested it was.
But to deny that the former isn't impacted by the latter is the real cunts game
Last edited:
free spirit
more tea vicar?
36% of right to buy housing in London is now private rented, as those who bought the houses chose to take the profits and run, leaving others now to pay far higher rents to private landlords for the same house probably in a worse condition than those still owned by the council.
So while they didn't directly exploit people for that profit, others are now suffering as a result of their profiteering.
8den
No I'm pretty sure that was 8ball...
You're pretty simple Phil, We're spending more time talking about Class Wars actions and tactics than the issue they are protesting
pocketscience
Well-Known Member
This is so hilarious it needs requoting.
The only thing that moved the massive swathes of wc that chose property ownership was pickfords.
Those of us left behind were either the ones who couldn't afford it or making a moral stand. The real wc.
How old are you? You obviously didnt frequent wc areas in the 70s, 80s and 90s and certainly not in London.
The only thing that moved the massive swathes of wc that chose property ownership was pickfords.
Those of us left behind were either the ones who couldn't afford it or making a moral stand. The real wc.
So that's where we should start is it. At the bottom. What happened to why didn't you target Starbucks?
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
"They brought it on themselves"
Oh right. If you'd used capitals the first time I'd have got it.
8den
No I'm pretty sure that was 8ball...
Pats head.....
I'm not in a gang. If you come anywhere near me you'll get a bottle in your mouth.
No I rent a scutty room in London for more than the price of a mortgage in the north. Is that what you're fucking defending?
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
Why get caught up in the race to the bottom/blame the poor for getting themselves displaced shit? Leave them to it.
littlebabyjesus
one of Maxwell's demons
Who's defending that? What do you mean by defending, btw? The whole point, surely, is that many of those identified as gentrifiers by their consumer choices are in exactly that position, and that it stinks.
But the point is also still there - as far as I know, nobody has ever been forced to buy their council flat/house and promptly sell it on for a massive profit. Yet many thousands have. And a grown-up politics would not blame them for doing that - they are using what they can to make their lives better from a position of relative disempowerment and discovering themselves by accident in a position where they can cash in. But they're cashing in from someone. Their cashing in has contributed to the position where others have no choice but to rent scutty rooms for more than the price of a mortgage in the north. It's disingenuous to pretend otherwise - that massive windfall didn't come from nowhere, it is not exploitation-free.
And that's why, as politics, this kind of personification of the problem is rotten. Blaming individuals for choices made within an iniquitous system is a rotten form of politics. Using class analysis, which is only useful to analyse classes (ie groups) of people, to make judgements about individuals is useless politics. But this thread has been chocker-full of it.
So the system is iniquitous, meaning unfair. And you can't see a distinction between people making choices because the odds are stacked against them and people making choices who already benefit from the unfairness and are merely seeking to entrench their position. You're all over the fucking place. What's wrong with Starbucks just making choices in this iniquitous system? Poor Starbucks, no worse than people who bought their council house really.
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
The perspective is skewed, eh. It's not news that RTB has resulted in ex-council properties ending up in the hands of private landlords and Tower Hamlets has suffered a lot from that (there was a report released about 18 months ago called " From Right to Buy to Buy to Let" and it showed that ~50% of TH's RTB homes had ended up that way.) But RTB has been around since the 80s, it's not a sudden phenomena. It's not the fault of the displaced that RTB didn't provide for replacement housing stock - the original wave of those buying their properties didn't even know that at the time. It's not the fault of the displaced that TH didn't have covenants preventing RTB properties to be let through the private sector. It's not the fault of the displaced that TH didn't have a right not to sell if not in the community interest. Etc. I've already provided a link that not only defines gentrification but also sets out the 4 stage gentrification process. No-one's inventing the wheel by describing gentrification, the process has been shown over and over again since the 60s. What's new is the denial of gentrification coupled with not being able to differentiate between regeneration (in the proper sense, not the aka gentrification sense used by local councillors and developers) and actual gentrification.
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
The link I referred to above and posted earlier in the thread in answer to what littlebabyjesus says gentrification is (which I disagree with). The gentrification process is set out in the source (amongst other info) but I'll post some of it up anyway:
3. Gentrification Processes
Gentrification commonly occurs in urban areas where prior disinvestment in the urban infrastructure creates opportunities for profitable redevelopment. It also occurs in those societies where a loss of manufacturing employment and an increase in service employment has led to an expansion in the amount of middle class professionals with a deposition towards central city living and an associated rejection of suburbia (Slater, 2011).
The inhabitants of such urban areas most likely to be displaced by the gentrification process are those living in inexpensive yet architecturally desirable housing near central business districts. They occupy housing which has the potential to be gentrified and, are themselves economically and politically powerless relative to the gentrifiers. Such people live in the area for an array of reasons; cheap rent, nearby employment opportunities or the location may hold historical or emotional significance. Their location may or may not be a matter of choice; however their existence there is a matter of the creation and location of the inner-city poor. The majority affected are on the fringes of the labour market or outside it: the elderly, welfare mothers, the unemployed and many working class households and underemployed individuals near the poverty line (Beauregard, 1986).
Pattison (1977: cited by Clay, 1979) identified four stages through which gentrification neighbourhoods commonly experience.
The initial stage consists of a small group of risk-oblivious pioneer individuals who buy and renovate properties in previously described urban areas for their own personal use. Very little displacement occurs at this stage since the pioneer gentrifiers obtain housing that is vacant or part of the normal market turnover. This group of newcomers consists largely of design professionals and artists who have the skill and time to undertake such renovation projects.
In the second stage of the gentrification process, a similar class of people to the first move in and renovate their new homes. Some quiet and subtle promotional activities often begin at this stage and are driven by estate agents whilst small-scale speculators often renovate a few houses for resale or alternatively, rental. The houses bought at this stage begin to disperse over a greater area and are often vacant and thus relatively easy to acquire. Furthermore, if the neighbourhood was to have its name or boundaries altered, it would happen at this stage of the gentrification process. This often brings forth attention from public agencies.
After the first two stages of gentrification, the media diverts attention onto the neighbourhood and it becomes a hub of interest. Whilst the pioneer individuals continue to influence the area, they often become accompanied by developers and urban renewal begins. As a result of the increasing volume of work undertaken by individual investors and new developers, the physical improvements become increasingly visible at stage three. Consequently, house prices in the area begin to escalate. The displacement process continues therefore, and it may increase to a greater extent if codes are enforced rigidly or if reassessments are made to reflect the increasing value of even the unimproved dwellings. The better maintained properties become part of the middle class market as landlords seek to take advantage of the enhanced reputation of the area – leading to further displacement. The new middle class residents in the third stage turn outward to promote the neighbourhood to other middle class individuals and to make requests for public resources; whilst turning inward to shape community life. As this occurs, tension arises between the pioneer individuals and the new gentry.
Finally, in stage four, a larger number of properties become gentrified and a simultaneous influx of middle class individuals occurs. These middle class individuals are from the business and managerial middle class, rather than from the professional middle class. To accommodate the growing demand for houses in the area, non-residential buildings may be turned into rental or condominium units and buildings that had previously been held for speculation emerge on to the market. As well as this, small and specialised retail and professional services or commercial activities begin to emerge. This all contributes to the ever increasing house and rent prices, adding to more displacement on both the renter and homeowner fronts. Often at this stage, additional neighbourhoods in the city become identified to meet the increasing demand of the middle class.
3. Gentrification Processes - Gentrification
3. Gentrification Processes
Gentrification commonly occurs in urban areas where prior disinvestment in the urban infrastructure creates opportunities for profitable redevelopment. It also occurs in those societies where a loss of manufacturing employment and an increase in service employment has led to an expansion in the amount of middle class professionals with a deposition towards central city living and an associated rejection of suburbia (Slater, 2011).
The inhabitants of such urban areas most likely to be displaced by the gentrification process are those living in inexpensive yet architecturally desirable housing near central business districts. They occupy housing which has the potential to be gentrified and, are themselves economically and politically powerless relative to the gentrifiers. Such people live in the area for an array of reasons; cheap rent, nearby employment opportunities or the location may hold historical or emotional significance. Their location may or may not be a matter of choice; however their existence there is a matter of the creation and location of the inner-city poor. The majority affected are on the fringes of the labour market or outside it: the elderly, welfare mothers, the unemployed and many working class households and underemployed individuals near the poverty line (Beauregard, 1986).
Pattison (1977: cited by Clay, 1979) identified four stages through which gentrification neighbourhoods commonly experience.
The initial stage consists of a small group of risk-oblivious pioneer individuals who buy and renovate properties in previously described urban areas for their own personal use. Very little displacement occurs at this stage since the pioneer gentrifiers obtain housing that is vacant or part of the normal market turnover. This group of newcomers consists largely of design professionals and artists who have the skill and time to undertake such renovation projects.
In the second stage of the gentrification process, a similar class of people to the first move in and renovate their new homes. Some quiet and subtle promotional activities often begin at this stage and are driven by estate agents whilst small-scale speculators often renovate a few houses for resale or alternatively, rental. The houses bought at this stage begin to disperse over a greater area and are often vacant and thus relatively easy to acquire. Furthermore, if the neighbourhood was to have its name or boundaries altered, it would happen at this stage of the gentrification process. This often brings forth attention from public agencies.
After the first two stages of gentrification, the media diverts attention onto the neighbourhood and it becomes a hub of interest. Whilst the pioneer individuals continue to influence the area, they often become accompanied by developers and urban renewal begins. As a result of the increasing volume of work undertaken by individual investors and new developers, the physical improvements become increasingly visible at stage three. Consequently, house prices in the area begin to escalate. The displacement process continues therefore, and it may increase to a greater extent if codes are enforced rigidly or if reassessments are made to reflect the increasing value of even the unimproved dwellings. The better maintained properties become part of the middle class market as landlords seek to take advantage of the enhanced reputation of the area – leading to further displacement. The new middle class residents in the third stage turn outward to promote the neighbourhood to other middle class individuals and to make requests for public resources; whilst turning inward to shape community life. As this occurs, tension arises between the pioneer individuals and the new gentry.
Finally, in stage four, a larger number of properties become gentrified and a simultaneous influx of middle class individuals occurs. These middle class individuals are from the business and managerial middle class, rather than from the professional middle class. To accommodate the growing demand for houses in the area, non-residential buildings may be turned into rental or condominium units and buildings that had previously been held for speculation emerge on to the market. As well as this, small and specialised retail and professional services or commercial activities begin to emerge. This all contributes to the ever increasing house and rent prices, adding to more displacement on both the renter and homeowner fronts. Often at this stage, additional neighbourhoods in the city become identified to meet the increasing demand of the middle class.
3. Gentrification Processes - Gentrification
Last edited:
cesare
shady's dreams ♥
For the reasons set out above I disagree with the arguments repeated over and over in this thread that gentrification is purely a top-down construction led process. The gentrification of the East End has very closely followed the stages of the gentrification process first posited in the late 70s.
In addition, I think it's wrong to conflate the gentrifying movement of the City and middle class eastwards into the East End, with previous waves of working class immigrants into the East End. It's not the same. The reason that it's not the same, is that when each wave of working class immigrants became more prosperous, they moved away from the East End and were replaced by another wave of working class immigrants. The working class nature of the East End stayed the same, but with different types of working class people. In contrast, and this is what we're experiencing now, gentrification displaces the working class with the middle class. I think it's important to acknowledge that this is what is happening, because then the actions/protests of the displaced make more sense and the arguments of the middle class are seen for what they are - protection of their own new interests.
It's also interesting that the posters most vociferously at once both condemning the fight back/resistance to displacement together with repositioning the gentrification process here, are not quite so vociferous in condemning/repositioning on concurrent Brixton gentrification threads. Champagne & Fromage boarded their windows knowing full well that they'd be targeted as a symbol. Cereal Killer weren't quite that astute - or maybe they were and knew full well that they weren't in any particular danger. A bit of paint to clean off the windows, and they were open for business at 9am the next morning. The owner interviewed couldn't even say that the damage had cost them anything. They were a passing minor target and they've made the most of it.
In addition, I think it's wrong to conflate the gentrifying movement of the City and middle class eastwards into the East End, with previous waves of working class immigrants into the East End. It's not the same. The reason that it's not the same, is that when each wave of working class immigrants became more prosperous, they moved away from the East End and were replaced by another wave of working class immigrants. The working class nature of the East End stayed the same, but with different types of working class people. In contrast, and this is what we're experiencing now, gentrification displaces the working class with the middle class. I think it's important to acknowledge that this is what is happening, because then the actions/protests of the displaced make more sense and the arguments of the middle class are seen for what they are - protection of their own new interests.
It's also interesting that the posters most vociferously at once both condemning the fight back/resistance to displacement together with repositioning the gentrification process here, are not quite so vociferous in condemning/repositioning on concurrent Brixton gentrification threads. Champagne & Fromage boarded their windows knowing full well that they'd be targeted as a symbol. Cereal Killer weren't quite that astute - or maybe they were and knew full well that they weren't in any particular danger. A bit of paint to clean off the windows, and they were open for business at 9am the next morning. The owner interviewed couldn't even say that the damage had cost them anything. They were a passing minor target and they've made the most of it.
Last edited:
The Flying Pig
Well-Known Member
From this reply are you suggesting that you no longer want to meet up at the book fair?
I asked you to PM me your phone number if you remember. We didn't get past that point.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
mauvais
on reddit or something
There's more than one way to skin a cat, but even the process you described is heavily dependent on the support and involvement of those with most. So in some cases, fine, it's not led by new construction (still interested in what the defining differences are) but it requires media, estate agents, landlords, speculators, the structural enablement of property speculation, and a whole bunch of other factors like the death of social housing, particularly the original model whereby it was meant to provide to cross-section of society rather than creating isolated ghettos.
Top down, bottom up, not particularly helpful is it. But if you're arguing that it's a bottom up roots movement begun by artist types and later opportunistically embraced by capital, then these artists are a lot more powerful than anyone's ever given them credit for. And that for me is difficult to believe.
Just like right-to-buy is arguably bottom up with people choosing to do so, but it's an obviously foolish argument because it was a top down initiative in which they were handed a button to press that would make them a lot of money, and later beaten over the head (viz Bob Crow's taxpayer subsidised house!) if they didn't. And it's just as it's hard for me to blame individual people for taking part in gentrification via living their own lives (i.e. BtLers excluded)
And as I say, I don't have a handle on the drivers for what decides whether areas are gentrified by slow infiltration or by directed new construction, but a few things are apparent. Construction is cheap. In fact it's usually cheaper to demolish and rebuild than it is to rehabilitate. Property speculation and commoditisation (?) is probably at a level, economically and socially, not seen before, and that changes things significantly. And affordability is heavily depressed too, so how many of your gentrifying artists are now able to buy rather than rent London property? Or anywhere, for that matter? And no one renovates a rented house, so how does any kind of low income driven change work? None of this is to say it universally doesn't, but it has to have changed.
All of this is why to me it feels utterly ridiculous to go after people at the foot of it all, whether WC or MC or even owning a business, when most are similarly blighted by the same structural shit, that could be rapidly dealt with even well within the boundaries of capitalism. But that sure doesn't happen when you're busy fighting your new neighbours.
I bet this post was a waste of time but here's hoping.
Oi what are you quoting me for?
But anyway, I'll be there, again, in the hope of meeting the Pickster. Last time I turned up he remembered a previous engagement, I hope his calendar is more empty this time.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
i already said on i think the bookfair thread i won't be there. this would have been 2 weeks ago.
Similar threads
