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

[pocketscience]

RTB has nothing directly to do with gentrification. It's merely a conduit through which some former social housing becomes a draw (through pricing) into areas, but it's hardly the only conduit.
As for your emotive whine about a rush to buy, there never was one.

In the 80s over 400 council houses were falling into private ownership per day for 10 years! It dropped to 380 per day during the nineties.
200,000 council homes gone in 1982 alone. Over 500 per day
So I don't know what constitutes a "rush" in your book, but I find that a lot of people buying council homes in a short space of time.

By the time people realised that there was money to be made, the tenant discounts had been reduced by half or more - the 80% discounts for tenants with over 35 years' tenure ran for about 5 years in the '80s - and RTB sales have mostly been a slow, steady erosion.

But they gradually opened the criteria up so that virtually any council resident could buy which kept the sales at a steady flow through until the end of the 90s.
Buy that time the property bubble was in full swing. Old council places particularly in inner city London* were vastly undervalued so those discounts were all the more irrelevant.
Any imbecile could see that a dilapidated 3 bedroom council house for 70K in Bermondsey was going to be worth 5-10 times that value in a few years regardless of what % the discount was.

I've been watching RTB since 1980, and social cleansing is a relatively news phenomenon that's currently more tied in with private rental prices than to do with RTB. The true blame lies with Ridley & Jenkins suggesting binning one on one replacement of RTBed homes, and Thatcher biting.

WADR I grew up living it on the front line throughout the 80s. We were bungled from one condemned council estate to the next during the 80s by southwark and lewisham councils.
I was constantly being dragged along to council tenants association meetings as a nipper
When we finally got a decent offer in '85, on an estate in lewisham that wasn't already in the demolition planning phase, it turned out we were the the only council tenants bar an OAP over the road. Everyone (literally hundreds of homes) had bought in. My old man's still there, still pays his rent to the council.

RTB has nothing directly to do with gentrification.

The lack of quality affordable housing is surely the main issue caused by gentrification for residents of an area that's being attacked by it. Abundant council housing, or at least social housing with e.g rent caps, ensures a resistance to gentrification.

It's all the more relevant on this thread as well because it was the "working class" that did the selling out for their own financial gains. That, in the grand scheme of things, puts into context the hate on "owning the means of production" because you're a proud working class lad (I'm picturing a sparky with his very own screwdriver and multi-meter here), and the two twats selling bowls of cereal as being small fish frying.

 

[pocketscience]

Now tell everyone about you.

fairynuff.
tenant (rent-capped social housing)

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I can't agree at all that rtb has nothing directly to do with gentrification. These things take time to feed through. People who bought perhaps 20 years ago may only be selling and moving out now - retiring to the coast, or Spain or Jamaica or wherever. And they are not replaced by people from their economic bracket. Their homes are bought by people who are mostly nothing like their own children, who could never afford to buy the place. That's a simple replacement of one social class by another whose direct cause is rtb. rtb isn't the only cause of this process (many people who bought privately in the 70s and 80s are retiring now and selling up to people who are far richer than they were when they bought) but it has most certainly made it many degrees worse. And unaffordable housing is the driver of gentrification. That's without even factoring in the number of ex-council houses that are now being rented out privately for enormously inflated rents.

 

[cesare]

Here's a link to the report I mentioned "From Right to Buy to Buy to Let" January 2014

http://tomcopley.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/From-Right-to-Buy-to-Buy-to-Let-Jan-2014.pdf

 

[kabbes]

There are plenty of other businesses in that area selling imported vinyl and clothes that are out of the reaches of w/c wages so I don't see why the cereal cafe should be targeted for the price of its goods.

I think the difference between ck and other cafes and shops is that it reeks of irony. Nobody thinks that cereal is actually some kind of treat or object of connoisseurship or epicurean delight. Remove irony from the experience and you're not left with much. But sometimes there is a fine line between irony and taking the piss; I can totally see how people struggling to survive might feel this venture tips into the latter.

 

[8den]

I think the difference between ck and other cafes and shops is that it reeks of irony. Nobody thinks that cereal is actually some kind of treat or object of connoisseurship or epicurean delight. Remove irony from the experience and you're not left with much. But sometimes there is a fine line between irony and taking the piss; I can totally see how people struggling to survive might feel this venture tips into the latter.

Thank you that's just about the only plausible reason I've heard to explain why the cereal cafe was targeted while other businesses were left alone.

However targeting businesses because you don't like then can't be the basis for a political campaign and yet that appears to be Class Wars plan based on the "success" of this action*

*Class War seem to be measuring success on the fact that people are talking about this action and Class War not the issue of gentrification.

 

[butchersapron]

Who had their Windows smashed? Someone did in this single target attack. Lazy people.

 

[kabbes]

Thank you that's just about the only plausible reason I've heard to explain why the cereal cafe was targeted while other businesses were left alone.

However targeting businesses because you don't like then can't be the basis for a political campaign and yet that appears to be Class Wars plan based on the "success" of this action*

*Class War seem to be measuring success on the fact that people are talking about this action and Class War not the issue of gentrification.

It can be the basis of a campaign if your campaign message is "do what we don't like and we will target you".

 

[butchersapron]

It can be the basis of a campaign if your campaign message is "do what we don't like and we will target you".

Like the nazis or jim crow.

 

[kabbes]

Like the nazis or jim crow.

Or the Tory or Labour governments.

 

[butchersapron]

Or the Tory or Labour governments.

Why on earth reduce the richness of responses to the many forms that gentrification takes to "do what we don't like and we will target you" - and why choose to post it in terms that strive to make that ridiculous characterisation appear neutral when it's quite clearly very hostile and condescending?

 

[kabbes]

Why on earth reduce the richness of responses to the many forms that gentrification takes to "do what we don't like and we will target you" - and why choose to post it in terms that strive to make that ridiculous characterisation appear neutral when it's quite clearly very hostile and condescending?

I don't think I was doing that at all. I was merely pointing out that (one reason) targeting things you don't like can be a legitimate strategy is if your message is that you intend to target things you don't like.

Personally, I see things like the Class War demonstration more as an inevitable response to inexorable gentrification. If you push people and push them and push them, eventually that will find a release valve. What we've seen so far is nothing -- a broken estate agent window and some paint. As long as inequality carries on growing, escalation of response is inevitable and there's no point those doing alright out of the system complaining about that fact.

 

[cesare]

It can be the basis of a campaign if your campaign message is "do what we don't like and we will target you".

It was a street party. The response to a broken estate agent's window, and some paint on this cereal bar I.e. just some minor inconvenience, has been utterly disproportionate. More newsworthy than the malnourished kids a few streets away.

 

[butchersapron]

I don't think I was doing that at all. I was merely pointing out that (one reason) targeting things you don't like can be a legitimate strategy is if your message is that you intend to target things you don't like.

Personally, I see things like the Class War demonstration more as an inevitable response to inexorable gentrification. If you push people and push them and push them, eventually that will find a release valve. What we've seen so far is nothing -- a broken estate agent window and some paint. As long as inequality carries on growing, escalation of response is inevitable and there's no point those doing alright out of the system complaining about that fact.

Oh leave off, your only interventions on the thread have been to establish a hierarchy of who is to be taken seriously, whose to be bothered with. And the supporters of the action are right at the bottom - you spell out that other posters are not to bother with them. This is despite those supporters spending page after page outlining the general and specific motivations and tearing down lies and assumptions about both the action and what propelled it. After pages of the most sick-making liberal hand-wringing this sort of pretend neutrality and objectivity is rather annoying. Nothing personal, but...fucking hell.

 

[butchersapron]

I look forward to those proponents of revolution is the only solution - anything short of that is a sell out/ counterproductive arguing this position across the many other threads they contribute to. I'm sure they'll be totally consistent on this.

 

[Pickman's model]

Thank you that's just about the only plausible reason I've heard to explain why the cereal cafe was targeted while other businesses were left alone.

However targeting businesses because you don't like then can't be the basis for a political campaign and yet that appears to be Class Wars plan based on the "success" of this action*

*Class War seem to be measuring success on the fact that people are talking about this action and Class War not the issue of gentrification.

so you missed the estate agent's window getting put through.

 

[Pickman's model]

Thank you that's just about the only plausible reason I've heard to explain why the cereal cafe was targeted while other businesses were left alone.

However targeting businesses because you don't like then can't be the basis for a political campaign and yet that appears to be Class Wars plan based on the "success" of this action*

*Class War seem to be measuring success on the fact that people are talking about this action and Class War not the issue of gentrification.

targeting businesses because you don't like them can be a basis of a political campaign. see eg london greenpeace v mcdonalds. i don't know why you say things which are obviously stupid.

 

[kabbes]

Oh leave off, your only interventions on the thread have been to establish a hierarchy of who is to be taken seriously, whose to be bothered with. And the supporters of the action are right at the bottom - you spell out that other posters are not to bother with them. This is despite those supporters spending page after page outlining the general and specific motivations and tearing down lies and assumptions about both the action and what propelled it. After pages of the most sick-making liberal hand-wringing this sort of pretend neutrality and objectivity is rather annoying. Nothing personal, but...fucking hell.

Then I didn't explain myself properly. Not surprising, I've actually said very little on this thread.

My intention was not to present a hierarchy or suggest that anybody isn't to be taken seriously. Just the reverse, really. I've only been trying to point out that if you are angry with what happened, that's probably an intended part of the point. The medium is the message, as somebody else said earlier.

 

[8den]

targeting businesses because you don't like them can be a basis of a political campaign. see eg london greenpeace v mcdonalds. i don't know why you say things which are obviously stupid.

green peace's reasons for objecting to mc Donald's were slightly more nuanced than disliking mc Donald's.

Idiot.

 

[cesare]

London. London Greenpeace.

 

[Pickman's model]

green peace's reasons for objecting to mc Donald's were slightly more nuanced than disliking mc Donald's.

Idiot.

i've known dave morris for 25 years, i think i know something of the case.

 

[8den]

i've known dave morris for 25 years, i think i know something of the case.

Well if you've known him so long you'd know the mc libel trial was slightly more complex

 

[Pickman's model]

Well if you've known him so long you'd know the mc libel trial was slightly more complex

why bring up the trial? i remember, and i am sure many other posters remember, policd protecting mcds on demos in the 90s and mcds being attacked rather morr forcefully than happened to the ckc eg on j18

 

[The39thStep]

anyone know why it's not fashionable to trash Mcds these days?

 

[cesare]

anyone know why it's not fashionable to trash Mcds these days?

Fashionable?

 

[cesare]

But in answer to the question, I imagine that even though McLibel was a public relations failure for McDonalds the tenacity and intimidation has had a deterrent effect.

 

[Fozzie Bear]

anyone know why it's not fashionable to trash Mcds these days?

The decline of militant animal rights would be my guess.

 

[cesare]

The decline of militant animal rights would be my guess.

They've also cleaned up their act on ethically sourced ingredients etc

 

[8den]

why bring up the trial? i remember, and i am sure many other posters remember, policd protecting mcds on demos in the 90s and mcds being attacked rather morr forcefully than happened to the ckc eg on j18

I brought up the trial because it's the action Morris is connected with.

And you brought your "good mate" Morris

 

[ViolentPanda]

It's possible to be completely unaware of the social deprivation in TH. The brothers can walk from Shoreditch Overground to their café without going anywhere near anything much to jog their attention. Child poverty for half the children living in TH? Not the ones in our café.

Yep, it's possible to be unaware - if you're the sort of person who actively ignores anything that offends your sense of comfort.