While I sympathise with the workers who had to clean up on Sunday, and am deeply sorry that some children were intimidated by the protest, the petty vandalism that occurred pales in comparison to the brutality of the gentrification that is destroying the lives and demolishing the homes of some of London’s most vulnerable people.

Some 49% of the children in the borough live below the poverty line.

Gentrification would reduce that number, surely?

33 thoughts on “Umm, what?”

  1. If they are so poor how can they afford to live in an expensive area? I earn a good wage and I couldn’t afford to live there.

  2. “Class War anarchists, activists, squatters and social housing tenants were joined along the way by local youths and the usual revellers of Shoreditch angry about rising prices or simply looking to join the party.”

    In other words: twats being twats.

  3. No one minds gentrification provided that there are well built council estates for the poor to move into. This is what happened in the seventies when the poor moved out of London and the Middle classes took over the slum properties and renovated them.

    The problem is that the councils are not building new council estates due to lack of funding and planning permission. The last one being an odd one for a council to cite as being a reason not to build new council estates.

  4. From another thread I am apparently elderly and from the elevated heights of my obviously superior worldly experience:

    Never trust a leftie statistic

    49%: Hmmm, yeah, says who(m)
    Below the poverty line: which poverty line?

  5. “I certainly doubt that many of those involved could afford to eat and drink on Brick Lane.”

    Judging by the iPhones and expensive trainers and – yes, let’s say it, plumpness – on display, yes. Yes, they could.

  6. I can’t remember where I saw the stats, but someone on benefits these days has the same disposable income (corrected for inflation) as someone on average earnings in the 70s.

    And let’s not go there with consumptive power once housing benefit is factored in…

  7. From the comments at the ‘Guardian’ article: “…Hackney has, on the whole, improved massively. It’s a lot safer to walk the streets at night and areas that were once no-go zones are now bustling and fun places to hang out. This has been going on since the 90’s.

    The issue isn’t hipsters and their cereal, it’s the total lack of investment in social housing combined with a Mayor of London who wants to turn the City into Singapore; a low tax regime that is friendly to bankers, big business and the wealthy.”

    Get rid of ‘social housing’, and the streets become safe to walk again? No! Say it ain’t so!

  8. There’s sandwich and bagel places within spitting distance of the cereal cafe which are similarly priced. £4.80 for a tasty, but terribly wee, salt beef bagel for instance.

    Why aren’t the Tobys and Jemimas of Class War smashing up those places?

  9. I suspect what this is really about is somewhat rich people, but not rich enough people, being pushed out.

    I’ve been to Shoreditch. Yes, it was to an internet startup. And I wouldn’t describe anything of what I saw as poverty. It’s certainly very different to Oldham.

  10. “@Bloke in wales
    Because you’re paying for them as well.”
    I thought that might be the case, the question is why? If they can’t afford to live there and lots of people travel for long distances to work in the city why not move them somewhere cheaper.
    Ideally Glasgow in case Scotland ever gets independent.

  11. “I certainly doubt that many of those involved could afford to eat and drink on Brick Lane.”

    Given the road is chock full of restaurants in ferocious competition with each other, to the point where you cannot walk down the street without some gentleman imploring you to step in and dine, this statement is clearly bollocks.

    Lefty thugs justifying actual violence and criminal damage by comparing it to their own fantasies about life. I do hope the Met is investigating them and that collars will soon be felt, but I’m not optimistic. Leftist guerrilla warfare like this gets treated by the Met like apple scrumping.

  12. “There have been ridiculous comparisons made between us and Britain First, but many of the people I saw are committed anti-fascists;”

    Bonkers Lefties always make me laugh when they just can’t grasp the fact that they are fascists.

  13. A comment which got 162 votes:

    “Have you ever spent a pound for a cup of tea in a café? What’s the mark up there?”

    Maybe it was rent? Maybe the Lefty council is gouging them for business rates, disposal of rubbish? Perhaps they pay their staff the “living wage” you demand?

    The Left have no concept of cost at all.

  14. CW activists seem like Viz cartoon strip characters. Walking parodies of themselves.

    And another thing, I live in London but am a native of rural Oxfordshire. Not a privately educated mansion dweller btw. Standard rural lower middle class state school kid. It’s not poor but it isn’t half as interesting to grow up in. People move away for educational and employment opportunities growing up. I compare that experience to those living in London, the equivalent of three small countries in one place and think ‘my god you youngsters growing up in s global capital city don’t know how bloody good you’ve got it. The schools are class, sports teams are above national average, loads of arts and cultural opportunities everywhere and do much employment and work experience opportunities. How are you poor!!!

  15. From Mr Harveys piece in The Guardian

    “The protest had a carnival atmosphere provided by portable sound systems, fire spinners, pyrotechnics and people dressed as pigs”

    Oh, what larks!

    “Will Harvey is a squatter, occasional activist, and forklift driver”

    One of these things isn’t true.

  16. Dan,

    “One of these things isn’t true.”

    “Will” sets off my trustafarian radar. If you live in a provincial town, chavvy thugs are called Billy. Working/lower middle-class opt for Bill. Middle class people who are sure of themselves tend to opt for William. “Will” is the name of the upper class kid trying to add some down-with-the-kids low-lites to his character, without actually being a working class person who really drives a forklift.

    What I suspect these people are really pissed off about is that they have been priced out of Shoreditch.

  17. “committed anti-fascists” are just fascists who condescend to themselves that they’re not.

    I mean, smashing up shops and stuff – not like brown-shirted fellows ever engaged in that kind of behaviour. But I bet that’s different because reasons.

  18. “Some 49% of the children in the borough live below the poverty line.

    Gentrification would reduce that number, surely?”

    Presuming the gentrifiers arrived with/had children, that percentage figure would reduce, but not necessarily the number of poor children. Ie those poor now would still be poor.

  19. @ Luke
    Of course you are correct that the poor children would remain poor, but if gentrification has violently pushed them out of their homes they would not remain in Shoreditch so the %age and absolute number of poor children children *in Shoreditch* would decline.
    So either you have mass poverty or you have gentrification pushing the poor out of their homes but only the Grauniad could claim both simultaneously.

  20. There’s a very good point made here: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/Jeremy_Corbyn/11902864/Jeremy-Corbyn-has-no-understanding-of-the-British-people-beyond-Islington.html

    The demographics of the constituencies of London lefties are indeed like something out of Marx – a few really wealthy people, and masses of the downtrodden requiring welfare payments and patting on the head from Grauniadisatas. There is little or no middle class as such in Islington North, or in any other of the similar boroughs.

    And they presume that their experience applies equally to the rest of the country – which it manifestly does not.

    Basically, they don’t and cannot understand Britain as a whole, since they don’t see it. Hence why they can say a lot of the things they do with a straight face.

  21. Good to see “Will” doing his bit for social mobility. We need people to drop down in order to leave room for upward mobility. Thanks, Will.

  22. You have Islington North about right there, abacab. Lived just over the boundary in La Featherstone’s manor, so a spectator. Quite a lot of thrusting, upwardly mobiles from out of town. The rest’s dole bludgers & third-world gutter sweepings. The upwardly mobile move out when breeding time comes, so it’s almost devoid of the solid English working family with kids demographic. Which is, let’s be honest, what most of the rest of the country’s comprised of. Effectively, it’s a foreign country.

  23. @ abacab
    Are yousaying that grinding the face of the poor is now a pastime restricted solely to Guardianistas?

  24. @john77,

    Well a lot of it seems to go on in Graunidaista-run boroughs and constituencies. And they seem to be very good at it.

    Where’s the grinding of the poor into the dirt in red-hot Tory Wokingham, for example?

    The cynic in me thinks that all this BS worry about gentrification and “social cleansing” (which didn’t bother them in the slightest when it was the working- and middle classes moving out in droves) is pure electoral calculus. Move the welfare-dependant (working or not) vote fodder out beyond the M25 into the numerous constituences of leafy Toryville won’t impact the Tory majorities outside London, since the effect is dilute. But what it will do is massively reduce the Labour vote in the currently red-hot Labour constituencies in inner London. Replace large numbers welfare claimants with middle-class professionals, bankers, lawyers and so on in concentration, and suddenly the constituencies flip.

  25. Bloke in Costa Rica

    Gentrification = movement of property assets from lower value to higher value. Therefore the only ‘destruction’ going on there is of the Schumpeterian kind. Sub-marxoid scum like ‘Will’ should be beaten to within an inch of their lives, and then about three inches further. They are hostis humani generis.

  26. I would have assumed that the sort of middle-class twats who go on SWJ protest marches are exactly the same middle-class twats who would go to a trendy cafe to eat cereal.

    This whole thing is confusing me.

  27. There is a difference between having a fork lift licence and working as a fork lift driver, wonder why they weren’t clear about that

  28. This is basically the same as the argument about the 1%. basically it’s not the 99% complaining, it’s the bottom 50% of the top 1% who hate those with (even) more than they have.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *