Discussion in 'Brixton' started by editor, Mar 27, 2014.
Oh, he looks different there. Like a baddie from a film.
He'd be a fucking shite baddie. He'd be doing the bragging speech about how the other baddies failed but you'll never escape from Owen Smith and the hero would already be in the boat shagging over the credits, while his den was falling on his head.
Surely your experience on the bus during which you, based on no more than how you looked whilst simply going about a normal activity, were taken for a gentrifying enemy deserving of attack is enough to make you question whether your own feelings about the "shallow, ignorant and privileged" people you saw drinking pints after work in the sunshine were, truly held as they doubtless are, particularly reliable?
I didn't just judge them on the way they looked to me.
"It was messy and dirty and people were just discarding litter, and generally rude and ignorant. They pushed by us, or through us, to get from place to place, and generally had utter disregard for anything but their own needs."
I judged them on their behaviour too...
I also commented on the lack of people of colour, and how different the demographic inside pop was to that of outside (while I was there). These were observations. My observations.
I didn't see anybody drinking pints after work in the sunshine. It was Saturday and it was raining.
How the young men on the bus saw me is for them to explain. I can't speak for them, but I associated more with them than anyone I saw at Pop.
Maybe if I'd gone a different day, I'd feel a different way, but I didn't and I don't.
I was not referring to his experience at Pop. I was referring to his comment about understanding the attitutde of the two racist abusive bullies he encountered on the street. Nobody is "the enemy" or guilty of anything just because of the colour of their skin, or their looks.
I don't want to get into the whole can black people be racist against white, but I don't think they were racist. They were angry kids with big mouths, who were not that clever, who I encountered on a night bus.
And history has shown time and again that people are deemed 'the enemy' and 'guilty' of all sorts because of the colour of their skin and their looks.
Is that a thing?
Depends who you ask.
You did refer to his experience of Pop in your post.
NP was saying he could understand where the two who abused him on the bus were coming from after his experience of a visit to Pop. He was not condoning there behaviour. He was attempting to understand it. Which is a completely different thing. Its why NP is a "fairly balanced poster".
I sometimes get criticised here for taking a straightforward line on issues. Told that life is not that simple. NP puts up a thoughtful post not taking a simple straightforward line. A post based on his observation of a night in Brixton and reflecting on it. And he is getting criticised here for it.
That's because He Dared Criticise Pop.
It's clear to anyone who's lived in Brixton for more than a month the place is - on the whole - primarily focused at a fairly narrow demographic that is considerably different to the community that surrounds it, both in terms of income, wealth and diversity.
A stroll past the buzzing street life of Brixton Station Road en route to the place makes that abundantly clear. Walking into Pop is like entering a different postcode in a more affluent area. And, as I've said before, that wouldn't be that much of a problem - this kind of thing happens all over London - except for the fact that it was loudly trumpeted as a community-focused project that was gifted a prime slab of land totally rent free.
I could be kinder to it if it actually ended up generating a load of money to give back to the community, but that seems a forlorn hope.
I did like the records shop.
....and the range of food.
There's some decent units in there and some good people work there too - I know quite a few of 'em. But, collectively, it's just a pointless stacked pile of trendy nu-Brixton meh masquerading as some sort of real-world community effort.
No, you've misunderstood my post and I made it very clear from the off that my observation wasn't about his opinion of Pop. Read it again.
Lets be fair, its not exactly "rent free"; it's a 50% profit share.
Never on this thread.
This is not clear from your post:
If its clear your observation was not about his opinion about Pop then the second paragraph is superfluous to your observation. Its an implied criticism of what NP is saying in his original post. I dont see how to read it any other way. You are linking the incident on the bus to Pop.
No. I'm simply suggesting that it is wrong judge people because of their looks and colour of skin, and completely impossible to know whether they are responsbile for anything bad (in this case, gentrification) just by what they are wearing. My comments were in regard to Nanker understanding the attitude of the people who verbally abused him on a bus. There is nothing to understand about their act. They were a couple of bullies who launched an unprovoked verbal attack on a stranger because of the way he looked, and the colour of his skin. They deserve no understanding whatsoever.
Wow. Really? That's so enlightening.
I'm glad you agree with the sentiment.
Do you see everybody as the same.
Yeah.....cos that helps get them back to 'normality'
So can you confirm you were not making a value judgement of NP opinion of one evening at Pop? Here are the critical bits:
Your post was purely about the incident on the bus. That NP should not have been abused. I dont think NP should have been abused on the bus. Neither does NP. He says they were twats.
I am therefore reading to much into your original post. That your post was purely about the abuse NP got on the bus. Nothing to do with his comments on Pop. Which you have not voiced an opinion of here. Am I correct on this?
You , if that is the case, have no opinion either way of NP reporting of his experience of an evening at Pop as this was not what your post was about and I got it wrong.
Am I correct that is your position?
Or are you saying NP was wrong to suggest an understanding where the two lads on the bus were coming from?
In which case you are criticising NP.
The second paragraph is implicity imo critical of NPs observation:
So lets get this straight. You are not implying that NPs observations on one evening at Pop demonstrate "an unhealthy attitude".
Hanging is too good for 'em.
I popped in yesterday. The clientele looked pretty much the same as it always it does (i.e. younger, whiter and more well off than the community drinking and eating in the less trendy cafes and stalls in Station Road outside).
They are all white and happy.
Don't judge their priviledge and desire to be in a safe place away from the savage wastelands outside the fortress of wealth and world foods.
She better watch out that someone who deseves no understanding doesn't nick it.
Christ, you must have been really bored to even contemplate writing that essay late on a Friday night.
I do not particularly wish to engage in a phrase-by-phrase forensic examination of Nanker's post, but as you seem so willing to dissect mine in search of any possible grounds for an attack/ search for inconsistencies, I will have to do so to some degree- much to the joy of the entire forum, no doubt.
My observation that so seems to have angered and confused you is that there should be no understanding towards a blatantly prejudiced and racist unjustified attack on a person. There is absolutely no justification for it- end of. And going from there, there is also little justification for labelling anyone 'the enemy' simply because the way they look. And that includes people who happened to be inside Pop Brixton on the day of Nanker's visit.
It could of course be that the majority of people who Nanker observed were actually gentrifiers, and guilty of the ills affecting Brixton. But I'd be curious to know how he could have possibly known that just by looking at them.
If we are suggesting it is possible to identify 'enemies' of ordinary, decent Brixton residents simply by looking at them, I'd be interested to learn what their identifying characteristics might be. Is it the clothes they wear? Their drink of choice? Their accents? If one of those Pop patrons walked into The Albert on a Friday night, would they still clearly stick out as 'the enemy'?
I do not think a pair of abusive bullies deserve more empathy than a group of people whose only crime is, as far as I can tell from Nanker's narrative, have the wrong look about them- whichever look that might have been. If you believe that consists unfair criticism, fair enough. But it certainly has fuck all to do with Pop Brixton.
Separate names with a comma.