[ssf] Don't let em bring in the cleansing machines!

[Dan]

Allo,

I'm hatching a plot... er, hang on, no I'm not, let me re-phrase: I've 
had an idea, which I've mentioned to a few others, which it would be 
nice to follow through on.

It involves tracing the polices, ideas and general political moods that 
lead all the way from the G8 to the knocking down of Fir Vale, Spital 
Hill and other areas around the country.

If you haven't yet, I *really* urge you to listen to the radio 4 prog on 
the Housing Renewal Pathfinder scheme. It's repeated on Sunday at 5, or 
you can listen to it at:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/file_on_4/4327431.stm

(I've also recorded a copy / converted to mp3, if anyone wants a copy.)

It clearly shows that there are three assumptions - more or less hidden 
- that I'd pick on -

1. Most of the money is coming from private developers. - and they won't 
get out of bed unless there's a sizeable plot to redevelopment - or as 
one council regen boss says in the r4 prog, they wouldn't even pick up 
the phone to him for anything less.
2. It's about market renewal. Doesn't actually matter who lives there 
once it's renewed.
3. Notice that there's no way we can build council houses now. No more 
public for us. We need to trace the links to global trade and services 
policies, and show how G8 play their role in this.

Something else I'd *love* to get hold of - there was a lib dem promo 
'newsletter' from the council, in 2001 I think, talking about the Heart 
of the City project. It specifically says it will benefit the rest of 
the city because of the trickle-down effect. Again - who let this kind 
of economic gibberish into the city?

If anyone wants to work on this with me, I'd mucho appreciate it. We 
could pester various experts on things like GATS, and the kind of 
pre-GATS arrangements already in place that mean that public spending on 
housing counts as a trade barrier.

On the right making as much sense as the left - it's a difficult one, 
because political distinctions aren't as sharp any more.

For example, anyone who's fighting 'global capitalism' (which for many 
on the right is merely a euphemism for 'international jewry') uses that 
language. Anyone who fights for localism against evil corporations 
sucking out the heart of communities is close to saying the same thing 
too. (What's the difference between a supermarket coming in to your 
community and taking all the money - and all the dosh that gets sent to 
foreign countries in payments back home?)

We need to think about how close those two things are: being against 
foreign money / corporations and being for all immigration, regardless. 
(No borders.) My own opinion is that neither extreme is particularly 
well thought-out.

But then - why think it out well? Politics is - as much as some of us 
wouldn't want it to be - an emotional, anecdotal affair. For example, I 
keep on hearing, "Weeeelll.... it's all because women started going to 
work, isn't it? That's when things went wrong," Not to decry the role of 
the media in shaping this perception - but even so, we can cite 
statistics about how women going to work has, on the whole, increased 
social capital and made for more vibrant communities (not to mention the 
small matter of the increased freedom and empowerment of just over half 
the population..!). But people, mostly, will trust their own experience 
- and where they don't have any experience, their prejudices - more.

Basically, it's all just a game. A horrible game where some people die, 
some live, some live in misery and some wallow in obscene wealth. Some 
believe in progress through rational argument, others believe our 
instincts are the capital and bank of the ages, to be trusted above all 
else. And whatever happens, we can be sure of one thing only: the 
consequences of our actions will never, ever be what we wanted them to be.

So in the meantime, maybe we should just be nice to each other and smile 
a lot.

What happened to me, I'm ranting! Stop! Stooop!

Dan
----

A Drozd wrote:

>How do we tackle both Global Capitalism while
>simultaneously having to deal with worsening
>antisocial situations taking place directly around us?
>Though inextricably linked, maybe we should just
>concentrate on one issue or the other BUT somehow
>together.
>
>This is the first time I've posted to the social forum
>list because I feel that at present, left-leaning
>political thinkers (perhaps other than here) appear to
>concentrate on globalisation: how we are affected by
>what's happening overseas and the way we, as the
>privileged few, perpetuate it; Meanwhile, the
>reactionary right deliver a two-pronged attack instead
>- dealing their political card upon the poorest and
>uneducated communities (Bee En Pee) while those lucky
>enough to enjoy the privileges of living in the UK(ip)
>and the luxury of hypocrisy they'd have to forfeit,
>fear the nightmare of global equality becoming a
>reality.
>
>Reason I'm writing this is because I'm finding that my
>patience and empathy towards others, important values
>for any human, are being tested a bit too much just
>now, to the point where my problems are making me
>question my beliefs. Whlie i know that poverty is the
>root cause to the daily shit we encounter, i'm often
>left torn between feelings of compassion towards
>people who's social problems impact upon myself and
>cursing the authorities to provide some "social
>cleansing".
>
>Unfortunatley, i think that the rightees end up
>relating to people more than the leftees do. Maybe
>someone can correct me on that. Okay, it's people's
>ignorance thru lack of education, ultimately caused by
>poverty, that finds a connection with right wing
>solutions to society. At the risk of being a little
>negative, I think we need to consider: how come the
>left's ideas don't appeal to working class povs as
>much as the reactionary right does?
>
>Some stuff I've found myself burdened with on a
>domestic level has recently made me think that the
>right sometimes makes as much sense as the left -
>obviously i wouldn't agree with ethnocide or cleansing
>of the handicapped and disabled. But then again I feel
>that the left's obsession with international affairs
>at the expense of local issues affecting people's
>traditions, however backward some may be, is likely to
>create a void presently being filled by quick fix
>"don't tell em the whole truth about yer politcs"
>reactionaries. 
>
>Bringing an experience of my own into play here, I
>have a nuisance neighbour that's bothered me for the
>last 35 months. Despite my complaints to the
>appropriate authorities and efforts I've made to get
>help for her to hopefully resolve the situation, this
>has resulted in nothing but misery for all. She's an
>ex-crack whore, bringing all those problems back home
>above my ceiling and into the wider communal areas of
>the flats, constant activity during the dead of night
>due to her mental health issues, and then, since the
>end of 2003 it's culminated into a full-on aural
>assault where the whole area is being subjected to a
>disturbing display of a 40 year old woman pretty much
>losing it in public and letting everyone else know
>about it. She's not been able to access apropriate
>help and her behaviour has impacted on so many others
>around her.
>
>Apart from moving out ages ago, which has got to be
>the sensible option here, I seem to have chosen the
>non-sensible option of banging my head repeatedly
>against the wall (metaphorically speaking) in an
>attempt to get the social services and any of the
>other agencies to intervene on her behalf, which in
>turn will give the rest of us some peace while
>allowing her to at least be given the chance to live -
>instead of just existing like a member of the living
>dead!
>
>I'm taking a long time to say what i need to say here
>and obviously the above episode is something i can't
>pass by so easily as someone who, say, happens to
>notice it on their way to the office. So, in this
>modern world, I've taken the nonsensible option of
>trying to help (and there are certainly great lessons
>to be learn't in defeat!) a person rather than just
>trying to get her evicted without also exercising my
>social conscience. Mental health services won't help
>someone however much they may need it if that person
>won't accept their help, this leaves the option of
>sectioning her but I feel her mental health team won't
>section her because she is black/mixed ethnicity and
>throughout the decades there has been a
>disproportionate amount of black people put into care.
>Political correctness has ultimately failed this woman
>who's been left to it for so much of her life (long
>before i started living there 5+ years ago). 
>
>Maybe she's just being dealt with in a “care in the
>community” way that affects anyone with such problems,
>black or white. If you can handle yourself, just
>about, you'll be left to it. But she hasn't been
>handling it,  and has now flipped (or least over the
>last year+). Her self-denial towards those who
>supposedly can help her while simultaneously crying
>out for help for her (or for someone to come and
>bludgeon her, one or the other!) is obviously not
>being read by the professionals as “this person needs
>intervention” for reasons I can only think are because
>of the “claimant” litigation culture we've inherited
>from the US. Either that or she's beyond help and
>services see too much risk involved. 
>
>The safety net system is no longer in place in society
>and has been replaced by legal measures involving much
>of public sector worktime being devoted to assessing
>how “sueable” their service is, and how risky (costly)
>a client will be. Litigation society feeds so
>efficiently on the removal of essential services,
>chasing itself round and round distracting everyone by
>how profitable, while ultimately so redundant, such a
>system is. The film Devils Advocate seems to sum up
>quite well where we're at now – that the world belongs
>to the lawyers and crooks (one and the same)!
>
>Meantime, while we're waiting for it all to go belly
>up, how about sorting our own backyard out – something
>we'll have to do sooner or later whether global
>capitalism continues or not. 
>
>I'm trying to get a point across towards the end of
>this email – that if your team wins all its games
>abroad, you may well become champions but in all
>probability, you'll let your homes fans
>down...........
>
>hope this makes some sense,
>Androzdy
>
>Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com 
>_______________________________________________
>ssf mailing list
>ssf at lists.aktivix.org
>http://lists.aktivix.org/mailman/listinfo/ssf
>  
>