Prisons, who are they really for ?

This has been something which i've toyed with in my head for a while now. Are prisons a thing for good in society in locking up violent and often horrific criminals and this will make society a safer place. or do they do more harm than good. An excellent blog over at http://propertyistheft.wordpress.com/2009/08/31/abolish-the-prison-system/ Details alot of my current thoughts on the matter i quote below. "As with borders, the prison system is an element of state structure deemed to be beyond question. Debate rages on whether it is “too soft” or “too tough,” on whether it needs reform, and on how it can be made to work better. However, the idea of its abolition remains unspeakable, indeed unthinkable. There simply must be a prison system, the argument goes, or society would rapidly descend into chaos. Criminals would run rampant on the streets, anti-social behaviour would spiral out of control, and society would be gripped by a culture of fear and lawlessness." This is the popular thinking to why we need prisons and why we must lock away the bad people in society who those we percieve to be a danger to the stability of everyday life. "In response, I argue that prisons do not serve justice but the dominance of established power. That all the claimed consequences of lacking prisons exist already precisely because of their existence. And that their abolition would pave the way for a system of popular justice that would allow communities to safeguard themselves against crime, violence, and coercion without the institutionalised servility to power that serves only to make victims out of the poor, minorities, and the marginalised." Of course this is not something that can just happen over night or next year its a mentality thing more than anything. We seem to think the best place for those who've sinned is to be locked away out of harms way and out of sight out of mind. Any sort of rehibilitation program is something which we hear very little of and even then is it garunteed to help people reconnect back into society or would the time spent behind bars leave long term mental and sometimes physical scars of their time inside. "Incarceration as a form of punishment and retribution is, in fact, a relatively new and revolutionary idea. Before Jeremy Bentham first developed the idea of the modern penal system in the 19th Century, prisons were usually used to detain criminals until trial or the administration of punishment. However, the idea that – in their modern format – they serve to reform criminals, deter crime, or offer reconciliation to the victims of crime can and must be challenged. The idea that prisons serve to reform criminals is a nonsense. In Anarchism: its Philosophy and Ideal, Peter Kropotkin made the argument that the result was in fact the opposite; And in our every-day relations with our fellow-citizens, do you think that it is really judges, gaolers, and police that hinder anti-social acts from multiplying? The judge, ever ferocious, because he is a maniac of law, the accuser, the informer, the police spy, all those interlopers that live from hand to mouth around the Law Courts, do they not scatter demoralization far and wide into society? Read the trials, glance behind the scenes, push your analysis further than the exterior facade of law courts, and you will come out sickened. Have not prisons-which kill all will and force of character in man, which enclose within their walls more vices than are met with on any other spot of the globe-always been universities of crime? Is not the court of a tribunal a school of ferocity? And so on. When we ask for the abolition of the State and its organs we are always told that we dream of a society composed of men better than they are in reality. But no; a thousand times, no. All we ask is that men should not be made worse than they are, by such institutions! This critique was, of course, written in 1896, when society as a whole was arguably far more brutal than it is today. However, modern statistics do seem to confirm Kropotkin’s analysis from over a century ago. According to the Howard League for Penal Reform, “in the ten years to 2003, the [UK] prison population increased by 66%, in the case of women, 191%” whilst “Home Office data reveals that about 78% of people sentenced to immediate custody in 2003 had committed non-violent offences.” Moreover, in a penal system overwhelmingly populated by perpetrators of non-violent or marginal offences, the brutalisation evident is overwhelming. “During 2004, 95 people killed themselves in prison service care. This included 50 people on remand and 13 women. In addition, a 14 year old boy took his own life in a Secure Training Centre in 2004.” And “data shows that in 2003, 30% of women, 65% of females under 21 and 6% of men in prison harmed themselves.” So, a century after Kropotkin wrote of prisons “which kill all will and force of character in man,” we still see an overwhelming brutalisation of human beings within their walls. And the result? “61% of all prisoners released in 2001 were reconvicted within two years” and “73% of young male offenders released 2001 were reconvicted within 2 years.” The brutal conditions of incarceration offer up one reason why recidivism is so high in Britain, which serves as a typical example of Western justice systems (with the United States as an extreme which magnifies the problems a thousand-fold). The treatment of children is a particularly poignant example of this. Reporting to the UN Committee on the Rights of the Child, the Children’s Commissioner for England found that “the protection of children in custody remains a fundamental concern. There are high incidences of mental health problems, self-harm and bullying with a significant proportion of children feeling unsafe. There are high levels of intimidation, violence and abuse, not only from other prisoners but also from staff.” The Howard League, once again, draws the statistics on children together to paint a shocking picture; Facts and figures on children in prison Since January 2002, 6 children have died in penal custody. This includes 4 children in prison and 2 children in secure training centres. The youngest child to die was 14 years old. One child died following restraint by staff Children in prison are 18 times more likely to commit suicide that their counterparts in the community (The Lancet, 15 Sept 2005) Restraint is widely used in prisons and secure training centres. Between 2004 and 2006, 27% of boys and 19% of girls in prison had been physically restrained by staff (Young People in Custody 2004-2006, HMIP and YJB 2006) The Howard League recently slammed a government decision to allow private security companies running child jails to continue using pain on children. Between January 2005 and October 2006, restraint was used on 676 occassions on boys at Huntercombe prison. On 134 occassions it resulted in injuries to the child (HC deb, Col 416W, 27 Nov 2006) A survey by Her Majesty’s inspectorate of Prisons and the Youth Justice Board found that 31% of the boys in prison had been insulted or assaulted by other young people. 22% had been insulted or assaulted by a member of staff (Young People in Custody 2004-2006, HMIP and YJB 2006) The strip searching of children is routinely carried out on all children in prisons on reception and frequently before and after visits. Between January 2005 and October 2006 a total of 6,832 strip searches were carried out on boys at Huntercombe prison (HC deb, Col 416W-417W, 27 Nov 2006) Between January 2005 and October 2006, 100 boys were forcibly strip searched in 5 prisons. (HL deb, WA56, Jan 8 2007 and HL deb, WA 108, Jan 10 2007) Children in prison are being held for days and even weeks at a time in segregation. Between January 2004 and January 2007, 276 children had been held in the segregation unit for more than 7 days and 21 children had been held there for more than 28 days at the privately run Ashfield prison (HC deb, Col 1684W, 23 Jan 2007) And, as the Howard League states, “the treatment of children experienced by children in prisons would in any other setting, be considered abusive and trigger a child protection investigation.” Clearly, such a system is nothing short of barbaric, and still “it is ineffective in terms of reducing offending.” This makes a nonsense of the argument, often found shrouded in overly-emotive language in tabloid newspapers, that the reason crime and anti-social behaviour is so high is because we are “too soft.” An approach that favours violent coercion over rehabilitation isn’t the only reason for high recidivism, however. Another important one is that what is on offer to convicts once they leave prison, even after brutalisation, can often be much worse. An overwhelming amount of prisoners, upon release, face homelessness, illiteracy and lacking education, mental health problems, and addiction." Clearly, then, the prison system does nothing to reduce recidivism in ex-offenders and in fact "exacerbates matters in most cases. Further to which, I would argue, prison as an institution is part of a much wider societal malady which increases and encourages crime overall – the state-corporate structure. As the Anarchist Black Cross, a major anarchist abolition movement, explain; We live in a society where a tiny minority own the wealth, the land, run the big companies and live in luxury on the backs of the working people who produce everything. They try to control our lives and keep us in line by every means possible – schools, the media, the DSS, drugs, Disneyland. If we obey orders, work hard, don’t answer back, we can live a reasonable life – until the next recession. We can help our bosses keep others down, like the police or bailiffs do, and get our rewards: power, wealth, security. But for those of us not willing to work to keep our rulers in luxury, or those who try to take back any of the wealth that we have made, there is the justice system. Strike for a decent wage, steal to stay alive, resist the control and abuse in our lives, or break the bosses’ laws in any way and we face police, courts, prison. Prison is the bottom line in control – their ultimate weapon. Prison means isolation, bloody punishments, divided families. It drives people to despair and suicide. The whole system is to split us up and isolate people who could set an example to the rest of our class. Likewise, if we step outside so-called normal behaviour, such as women who refuse to accept the role of wife and mother, anyone whose sexuality is so-called deviant, we may be stigmatised, tranquillised and ultimately imprisoned. On the outside, fear of prison is built up to stop us from fighting back against the injustice in our lives and myths are created about prisoners to divide us from them. Most people are inside for trying to survive. In Britain, 94% of recorded crimes are against property. About one third are inside for non-payment of fines or taxes. Thousands are on remand. Many others are guilty of nothing more than being working class, irish, black, framed by the police. Full prisons give us the impression that the police are ‘cracking crime’ and reminds us who is in control. Most prisoners are working class people, just like the rest of us. They are not all the mad beasts the papers would have us believe." "The press hype up stories of ‘violent crime’ to give the existence of prison some justification and to divide us from prisoners. But the fact is that only a tiny percentage of crimes are violent or anti-social. It is also true that such crime is not prevented by prisons. The system we live in encourages competition, power relationships and self-interest. This system is also anti-social; while it remains intact there will always be violence. Calling the shoplifter, the person on the picket line and the rapist all criminals as if there were no difference between them, uses most people’s horror of anti-social violence against the vast majority whose offences are to do with property and resistance." "We live in a system of entrenched privilege and injustice fostered by the marriage of state and private power and the insitutions of private property. Immense wealth and immense poverty often exist side by side, further illustrating the divide that exists in our society. Within such a system, crime is almost inevitable as a result, as Emma Goldman noted in Anarchism: What it really stands for; The most absurd apology for authority and law is that they serve to diminish crime. Aside from the fact that the State is itself the greatest criminal, breaking every written and natural law, stealing in the form of taxes, killing in the form of war and capital punishment, it has come to an absolute standstill in coping with crime. It has failed utterly to destroy or even minimize the horrible scourge of its own creation. Crime is naught but misdirected energy. So long as every institution of today, economic, political, social, and moral, conspires to misdirect human energy into wrong channels; so long as most people are out of place doing the things they hate to do, living a life they loathe to live, crime will be inevitable, and all the laws on the statutes can only increase, but never do away with, crime. What does society, as it exists today, know of the process of despair, the poverty, the horrors, the fearful struggle the human soul must pass on its way to crime and degradation. Who that knows this terrible process can fail to see the truth in these words of Peter Kropotkin: “Those who will hold the balance between the benefits thus attributed to law and punishment and the degrading effect of the latter on humanity; those who will estimate the torrent of depravity poured abroad in human society by the informer, favored by the Judge even, and paid for in clinking cash by governments, under the pretext of aiding to unmask crime; those who will go within prison walls and there see what human beings become when deprived of liberty, when subjected to the care of brutal keepers, to coarse, cruel words, to a thousand stinging, piercing humiliations, will agree with us that the entire apparatus of prison and punishment is an abomination which ought to be brought to an end.” "The link between poverty and crime should be no mystery to anyone who has witnessed the increase of crime in this or any prior recession. The Thatcher era in Britain also saw this link demonstrated beyond doubt. As the number of jobless rose to 3.6 million by 1983, and homelessness increased from around 57,000 households in 1979 to around 127,000 in 1989, crime rose by about 124%. The connection between poverty and crime is even more stark when you consider the fact that we live in a society that perpetuates and entrenches both extreme poverty and extreme wealth. A report by the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE) tells us that “intergenerational income mobility” saw a “sharp decline” for “for children born in 1970″ and reaching employment age under Margaret Thatcher “compared with those born in 1958″ which has “stabilised,” or remained constant, “for children born in the period 1970-2000.” The birth of the neo-liberal economics that today dominate the globe, then, saw social mobility grind to a halt." There are a multitude of reasons for this. One is education. The Ofsted report, Educational inequality: mapping race, class, and gender shows that “there is a strong direct association between social class background and success in education: put simply, the higher a child’s social class, the greater are their attainments on average.” Moreover, “there is evidence that the inequality of attainment between social classes has grown since the late 1980s. For example, in relation to the five higher grade benchmark, between 1988 and 1997, the gap between children from ‘managerial/professional’ backgrounds and ‘unskilled manual’ groups grew from 40 to 49 percentage points.” At the same time, educational inequalities also exist on an ethnic basis whereby “inequalities of attainment in GCSE examinations place African- Caribbean, Pakistani and Bangladeshi pupils in a disadvantaged position in the youth education, labour, and training markets, and increase the likelihood of social and economic exclusion in later life.” And there is no evidence whatever to suggest that ethnic minorities or poorer people are naturally less intelligent or capable. Rather, the imbalance is systemic; Research in both the United States and Britain overwhelmingly concludes that Black pupils and their working class white peers are likely to be over-represented in lower-ranked teaching groups, for example, where schools adopt ‘setting by ability’ or other forms of selective grouping. Their disproportionate concentration can be mapped by tracing the process of selection inside schools. Research has documented how these processes are significantly influenced by differential teacher expectations, which tend to be markedly lower for these groups of pupils. The pupils’ subsequent placement in lower ranked teaching groups, in both primary and secondary schools, institutionalises these differences and can create additional barriers to achievement. Even in schools that do not embrace setting, some form of selection is increasingly common. The structure of the GCSE examination itself now requires most subject areas to enter pupils for one of two different ‘tiers’ of exam, where the highest grades are only available to pupils in the top tier." It is no surprise that this group of people are more likely to fall into povety and into a trap of struggle which they will find it hard to get out of. "If we accept, then, that prisons are merely another facet of the state-corporate system and serve not to punish or diminish crime but to remove those who do not serve the interests of power from society, what do we put in its place? So in place of prisons what should we we look to be an alternative and how could we get t here this is brilliantly summed up by Phil Dickens again over at Propety is theft "In a world of anarchy, where poverty and inequality are removed through the abolition of private property and the control of capital by labour, crime will be greatly reduced. People will not be forced to turn to theft, prostitution, or racketeering in order to make ends meet. Local communities organised on the basis of mutual aid will resist organised crime as readily as the domination and coercion of the state or capital. Such as drug use will be seen, properly, as a social problem rather than a crime, with addicts treated and rehabilitated, and farmers free and organised so that they do not have to grow illicit crops in order to make a living. Dissent and independence will be encouraged rather than criminalised, and the crimes of war and state will be eradicated. But there will still be crime. Anarchists do not envision a utopia. We do not imagine human beings more perfect than they are, merely recognise the dramatic negative effects of violence, coercion, and hierarchy upon society and the increase in disorder that results from our atomisation in the name of profit. No, though it will be greatly reduced, there will still be crime in anarchy. The question is, if the prison system is such a brutalising instrument of state, how do we deal with it? The answer to this question – as well as useful summation of the argument for the abolition of the prison and state-justice system – is offered up by the authors of An Anarchist FAQ. As such, it is worth quoting at length; We are not saying, however, that anarchists reject the concept of individual responsibility. While recognising that rape, for example, is the result of a social system which represses sexuality and is based on patriarchy (i.e. rape has more to do with power than sex), anarchists do not “sit back” and say “it’s society’s fault.” Individuals have to take responsibility for their own actions and recognise that consequences of those actions. Part of the current problem with “law codes” is that individuals have been deprived of the responsibility for developing their own ethical code, and so are less likely to develop “civilised” social standards (see section I.7.3). Therefore, while anarchists reject the ideas of law and a specialised justice system, they are not blind to the fact that anti-social action may not totally disappear in a free society. Therefore, some sort of “court” system would still be necessary to deal with the remaining crimes and to adjudicate disputes between citizens. These courts would function in one of two ways. One possibility is that the parties involved agree to hand their case to a third party. Then the “court” in question would be the arrangements made by those parties. The second possibility is when the parties cannot not agree (or if the victim was dead). Then the issue could be raised at a communal assembly and a “court” appointed to look into the issue. These “courts” would be independent from the commune, their independence strengthened by popular election instead of executive appointment of judges, by protecting the jury system of selection of random citizens by lot, and by informing jurors of their right to judge the law itself, according to their conscience, as well as the facts of a case. As Malatesta pointed out, “when differences were to arise between men [sic!], would not arbitration voluntarily accepted, or pressure of public opinion, be perhaps more likely to establish where the right lies than through an irresponsible magistrate which has the right to adjudicate on everything and everybody and is inevitably incompetent and therefore unjust?” [Anarchy, p. 43] In the case of a “police force,” this would not exist either as a public or private specialised body or company. If a local community did consider that public safety required a body of people who could be called upon for help, we imagine that a new system would be created. Such a system would “not be entrusted to, as it is today, to a special, official body: all able-bodied inhabitants [of a commune] will be called upon to take turns in the security measures instituted by the commune.” [James Guillaume, Bakunin on Anarchism, p. 371] This system would be based around a voluntary militia system, in which all members of the community could serve if they so desired. Those who served would not constitute a professional body; instead the service would be made up of local people who would join for short periods of time and be replaced if they abused their position. Hence the likelihood that a communal militia would become corrupted by power, like the current police force or a private security firm exercising a policing function, would be vastly reduced. Moreover, by accustoming a population to intervene in anti-social as part of the militia, they would be empowered to do so when not an active part of it, so reducing the need for its services even more. Such a body would not have a monopoly on protecting others, but would simply be on call if others required it. It would no more be a monopoly of defence (i.e. a “police force”) than the current fire service is a monopoly. Individuals are not banned from putting out fires today because the fire service exists, similarly individuals will be free to help stop anti-social crime by themselves, or in association with others, in an anarchist society. Of course there are anti-social acts which occur without witnesses and so the “guilty” party cannot be readily identified. If such acts did occur we can imagine an anarchist community taking two courses of action. The injured party may look into the facts themselves or appoint an agent to do so or, more likely, an ad hoc group would be elected at a community assembly to investigate specific crimes of this sort. Such a group would be given the necessary “authority” to investigate the crime and be subject to recall by the community if they start trying to abuse whatever authority they had. Once the investigating body thought it had enough evidence it would inform the community as well as the affected parties and then organise a court. Of course, a free society will produce different solutions to such problems, solutions no-one has considered yet and so these suggestions are just that, suggestions. As is often stated, prevention is better than cure. This is as true of crime as of disease. In other words, crime is best fought by rooting out its causes as opposed to punishing those who act in response to these causes. For example, it is hardly surprising that a culture that promotes individual profit and consumerism would produce individuals who do not respect other people (or themselves) and see them as purely means to an end (usually increased consumption). And, like everything else in a capitalist system, such as honour and pride, conscience is also available at the right price — hardly an environment which encourages consideration for others, or even for oneself. …Therefore, by reorganising society so that it empowers everyone and actively encourages the use of all our intellectual, emotional and sensuous abilities, crime would soon cease to be the huge problem that it is now. As for the anti-social behaviour or clashes between individuals that might still exist in such a society, it would be dealt with in a system based on respect for the individual and a recognition of the social roots of the problem. Restraint would be kept to a minimum. Anarchists think that public opinion and social pressure would be the main means of preventing anti-social acts in an anarchist society, with such actions as boycotting and ostracising used as powerful sanctions to convince those attempting them of the errors of their way. Extensive non-co-operation by neighbours, friends and work mates would be the best means of stopping acts which harmed others. An anarchist system of justice, we should note, would have a lot to learn from aboriginal societies simply because they are examples of social order without the state. Indeed many of the ideas we consider as essential to justice today can be found in such societies. As Kropotkin argued, “when we imagine that we have made great advances in introducing, for instance, the jury, all we have done is to return to the institutions of the so-called ‘barbarians’ after having changed it to the advantage of the ruling classes.” [The State: Its Historic Role, p. 18] …However, there are psychopaths and other people in any society who are too dangerous to be allowed to walk freely. Restraint in this case would be the only option and such people may have to be isolated from others for their own, and others, safety. Perhaps mental hospitals would be used, or an area quarantined for their use created (perhaps an island, for example). However, such cases (we hope) would be rare. So instead of prisons and a legal code based on the concept of punishment and revenge, anarchists support the use of public opinion and pressure to stop anti-social acts and the need to therapeutically rehabilitate those who commit anti-social acts. As Kropotkin argued, “liberty, equality, and practical human sympathy are the most effective barriers we can oppose to the anti-social instinct of certain among us” and not a parasitic legal system. [The Anarchist Reader, p. 117] with quotes and extracts taken from the excellent blog at propety is theft you can read more at http://propertyistheft.wordpress.com/2009/08/31/abolish-the-prison-system/

Bandaid 30 and questions on charities attitudes to disability

Bandaid 30 and questions on charities attitudes to disability Inspired by a excellent piece I read over at disability now by Ian Macrae http://www.disabilitynow.org.uk/blog/bandaid-30-and-lessons-disability The piece makes some excellent points and draws some interesting comparisons between the roles of charity with helping those in Africa and those who are disabled in this country and the attitudes present in each. I can identify with allot of what he writes in terms of how charity can make us who are on the receiving end feel as a result of their work. Allot of charity relies on portraying the objects of a charity as poor things and need to be pitied I get this allot with blind charities like the RNIB and similar ones who will often make out blind people are incapable of living independent lives and do nothing to challenge the popular idea of disabled people needing help for even the smallest of daily tasks and that life is a existence. While for some it may be pretty depressing but many blind people I know live very fulfilling lives. I republish the disability now piece by Ian below "As the charity single hits No 1 on the UK chart, the thoughts of a British/African musician raise some questions on charity of Ian Macrae Let’s get the obvious stuff out of the way first. I’m writing this blog post sitting in the headquarters of one of Britain’s biggest disability charities. Scope funds the Disability Now website and also pays my wages. But that doesn’t mean that I can’t ask and address difficult questions relating to charity and disability. Indeed the fact that I am sitting where I am empowers me to do so. So I was fired up to read a recent piece by Fuse ODG a British musician who comes from the Ghanaian diaspora. In it he explained why he had felt unable to accept Bob Geldof’s no doubt strongly persuasive invitation to join the Bandaid 30 project. Not only did he object to the re-written lyrics, he also recognised the irony of Africa, which he described as a resource rich continent constantly being portrayed by those outside it as death-ridden and poverty stricken. Acknowledging that the starry line-up, striking though negative images and charitable sentiment associated with the song might deliver short term benefits, he also said that the long term damage would be more difficult to undo. The question central to this point of view is to what extent do initiatives like Bandaid happen and exist to promote themselves and sustain their existence> ? As a service user of one of the big old impairment charities, I have previously come to a similar realisation. As blind people we were always suspicious about the fact that we were often portrayed and presented as worthy, even deserving of public pity. It was clearly in the charities interest to present us in this way because that’s what persuaded the public to put their hands in their pockets and donate. But what was not in question was whether such imagery was of benefit to us or whether it served instead to perpetuate the charities’ existence. Our suspicion was that they were serving their own ends and agenda. While charities may think that this disabled point of view is all well and good, they also argue that without fund raising they would not be able to go on providing the sorts of products and services we needed. But we disabled people go on to ask more questions. What’s the trade off? Is it worth the price? And to what extent should we sell or be sold out? Could Bandaid 30 have done things differently? Almost certainly as a bunch of African musicians, including Amadu et Marianne, the Blind Couple of Mali halve demonstrated. But the other thing the single has brought about is a commonality between a twenty-something British/African musician and a blind journalist who is getting on a bit. Neither of us like being portrayed as objects of charity."

Spikes to keep the homeless out, where is society going ?

A worrying report over the weekend in the papers confirmed that many expensive propeties in and around the capital are installing spikes to keep out the homeless. "A new development in London has installed metal spikes in an alcove – such 'defensive architecture' helps us to pretend real poverty doesn't exist For more than a decade "defensive architecture" has increasingly been creeping into urban life. From narrow, slanted bus shelter seats – not even suitable for sitting on, let alone sleeping on – to park benches with peculiar armrests designed to make it impossible to recline; from angular metal studs on central London ledges to surreal forests of pyramid bollards under bridges and flyovers. Hard property jutting out against soft homeless bodies, saying: how dare you be poor in plain sight? Step by selfish step we have arrived at the latest item causing outrage: a bed of metal spikes inside an alcove of a fancy new development on Southwark Bridge Road in London. "I think it's a good idea," one resident said. Speaking of "beggars and homeless people sleeping there", she added: "It completely affects the way the building seems, the appearance, and it's just not very nice." An Englishman's home is his castle, and that castle now includes a moat to keep the peasants out. These "anti-homeless" measures are designed to move the destitute on to somewhere else. This for me stems directly from Margret Thatchers idea of there is no such thing as society and to turn us all into selfish poor hating individuals with only a care for ourselves. At the root of this cruelty, which treats the dispossessed like a pigeon infestation – fed crumbs by the kindly misguided, shooed away by the thoughtlessly indifferent and spiked by the inhumanly practical – are wilful misconceptions about homelessness: that it is a lifestyle choice, which oddly becomes more popular during periods of nationwide economic ruin; that poverty is down to personal failure; that kindness perpetuates it; and, more than any misconception, that good shelter is readily available. And this damaging dissociation of the destitute from the rest of the world, this dehumanising effect, is precisely the aspect that such offensive "defensive architecture" feeds. It makes the city hostile to those who exist in this parallel reality. It breaks their psyche down further, making recovery less likely. It consigns them further out of sight so that the rest may continue to pretend that real poverty doesn't exist. It doesn't just deny someone who has absolutely nothing, a place to rest; it is a sign which reads, "Not even this bit of earth. Not even for the night." This turns my stomach that we are going down this route. The medias demonisatin of the poor one of the few remaining acceptable catagories of people to bash repeatably for simply being poor has lead to this selfish mentality. The lack of affordable housing and decent levels of support is hugely lacking with benifit cuts and tightening of the welfare budget year on year it is no wonder homelessness is shooting up in and outside of London for that matter. To pretend povety doesnt exist in our own country which is stll one of the wealthiest on the planet is woeful and hugely embarrassing toa country who likes to make out it is a civil society to the rest of the world whilst turning a blind eye to its own povety at home. with quotes and extracts from comment is free http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/09/spikes-homeless-london-metal-alcove-defensive-architecture-poverty

The working poor

“There are more working families living in poverty in the UK than non-working families for the first time since the birth of the welfare state, according to a new study. A recent report by a development charity attributes the figures to a sustained and “unprecedented” fall in living standards that has hit UK households, in which average incomes have fallen by 8% since a peak in 2008. As a result, around 2 million people have an income that would have been considered below the poverty line in 2008. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation (JRF) found that according to the current definition, the figure is increasing as 500,000 more working families live below the poverty line than last year. 6.7 million families with adults in employment meet the worrying criteria compared with a combined 6.3 million of retired and unemployed families. There is also a smaller but growing number of people living on incomes below the value of out-of-work benefits in very deep poverty. The JRF said 400,000 families have suffered from a combination of benefit cuts from the bedroom tax, and council tax benefit. Two thirds of these families were already classified as living in poverty. The JRF also found positive changes, including an improvement in the labour market with falling unemployment and underemployment and, improvements in health and education outcomes forecast for the future. There have also been major shifts in which groups are experiencing poverty, with the number of pensioners in poverty at a 30-year low. Julia Unwin, chief executive of the charity, said efforts to reduce poverty must be “strengthen[ed]” and that for the poorest families “improving pay and prospects remain a mirage”. She added:"Recent economic improvements do not outweigh the damage inflicted during the downturn to the incomes of the poorest people across the country. "Our report demonstrates there has been progress in some areas and the tide has turned on employment, but this not been matched by improvements in wages. The largest group in poverty are working age adults without dependent children - 4.7 million people are in this situation, the highest on record. Half of working families in poverty have an adult paid below the living wage. It also found that job insecurity is increasingly common, with one in six members of the workforce claiming Jobseekers' Allowance at some point in the last two years. Median incomes in the UK recorded in the 2011 tax year are now, in real terms, just below what they were in 2001 - £367 a week compared with £368 - the Monitoring Poverty and Social Exclusion report showed. Plummeting incomes over the last two years has wiped out all the gains of the previous decade, the JRF said. Families living in poverty are defined as those with income below 60% of median income for that year. Peter Kenway, director at NPI and an author of the report, said: "Poorer members of society are under more pressure than at any time since the birth of the welfare state. "The value of the safety net for working age adults is now sinking steadily. The support on offer to people who fall on hard times is increasingly threadbare, with benefit levels on a downward spiral. "A strong safety net to catch those who fall is vital for social mobility - millions are saved by it every year even now - yet no leading politician will defend it."” This all comes in the same week MP’s are due to vote on plans to increase their salaries by 11%. All in this together are we ??? With extracts from http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/millions-of-families-living-in-poverty-despite-being-in-employment-says-new-study-8991403.html

Disabled people feeling the pain from workfare, the misery must end !

The number of claimants on sickness and disability benefits facing sanctions looks set to have doubled since December last year. 11,400 claims were slashed for failure to participate in work related activity or missing a meeting with the Jobcentre in the seven months between December 2012 and June 2013. This compares to 10,130 sanctions inflicted on claimant's of sickness or disability benefits in the previous 12 months. Sanctions have also soared for people on the mainstream unemployment benefit Jobseeker's Allowance, with the DWP boasting today that over half a million claims have been sanctioned between November 2012 and June 2013. Benefit sanctions lead to desperate poverty and are often handed out for the most trivial of reasons. A recent report by Citizens Advice warned that sanctions have led to people to attempting suicide, becoming homeless or resorting to begging or going through bins for food. This is all wonderful news according to Employment Minister Esther McVey who today proclaimed: "We always make the rules very clear – it’s only right that there is a penalty if people fail to play by them." The trouble is many do play by the rules as they are known but still find themselves sanctioned and in deprivation as a result including many disabled people. There are many reports of people being sanctioned for some incredible reasons and many are quite farcicle if we are honest. At the fantastic Johnny Void blog who i follow closely now on a recent post Johnny writes "Astonishingly many of those who have faced sanctions will have been plunged into poverty by charities who have been only too happy to sell out their service users for free workers and lucrative Work Programme contracts. Household names including the Salvation Army (@salvationarmyuk), YMCA (@YMCA_England) and The Conservation Volunteers (@tcvtweets) have all defended these vicious measures whilst employing countless unpaid workers under threat of sanctions on mandatory workfare schemes. Members of the Disability Works coalition have also got their snouts in the trough. Some of those on sickness or disability benefits who were sanctioned will have had benefits slashed due to 'compliance doubts' raised by charities such as SCOPE (@scope), Mencap (@mencap_charity) and MIND (@mindcharity). These so-called charities are Work Programme sub-contractors and have agreed to report back to the Jobcentre if a claimant misses a meeting or fails to attend 'work related activity'. Charities claiming to support disabled people are now complicit in destroying people's lives by snitching to the DWP that they aren't trying hard enough to find a job. This is despite these claimants having undergone a notorious Atos assessment which has agreed that they are unable to work at present. Appalling however sick and disabled claimants can still be sent to work unpaid on the Work Programme or face sanctions. They may be unfit for work, but they are fit for workfare in the eyes of the DWP. With yet more workfare planned, alongside ludicrous new 'conditionality' for unemployment benefits which expects people to spend 35 hours a week looking for non-existent jobs, the number of sanctions is likely to rise even further. The poverty now being socially engineered by the DWP is unprecedented in living memory in the UK. In one of the richest countries in the world people are now being left to go hungry or homeless with the collusion of charities - whilst the Labour Party boasts they will be even tougher on unemployed or disabled claimants than the Tories. It is down to claimants themselves - and all those who support a welfare state that does not abandon people to destitution for any reason - to fight back against this callous war on the poor. A good place to start is the Week of Action Against Workfare beginning on 2nd December, please spread the word, tweet and share: http://www.boycottworkfare.org/?p=3060 There is also a petition (I know) on 38 Degrees calling for all sanctions to be scrapped. Please sign/share etc: http://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/benefit-sanctions-must-be-stopped-without-exceptions-in-uk (It's not all doom and gloom. Disabled people fighting the closure of the Independent Living Fund today had a major victory in the courts.) Above pic via the Benefit Claimants Fightback group on facebook. Follow me on twitter @johnnyvoid For quotes and extracts with thanks to Johnny over at http://johnnyvoid.wordpress.com/2013/11/06/benefit-sanction-rate-doubles-for-sick-and-disabled-claimantss/

Cuts kill, con-dems must be stopped in their tracks

Steven Bottrill, whose disabled mum Stephanie killed herself because of the bedroom tax, said: "Hopefully now someone will listen. Someone will realise what has gone on and change things." Studies by charities, as well as the NHS and the DWP, have shown that suicides and suicidal thoughts have increased among disabled people due to benefit cuts With the governments so called work programme it is failing people badly especially the disabled. According to charities for the blind, not a single blind or visually-impaired person has found sustained employment through the Work Programme. Capitalism always blames its victims. Now, more than ever, claiming benefits is portrayed as scrounging rather than being a right. This adds psychological despair to the harsh reality of scraping by on a pittance. Threatened and attempted suicides, as well as actual deaths, have doubled among 24-35 year old men in the UK since 2008. Last year there were deaths among sick and disabled people who had been subjected to the profit-driven bullying of Atos. Figures published in the Lancet showed UK suicides jumping 8% in the immediate aftermath of the financial crisis. Suicide rates have risen nearly everywhere except Sweden and Finland. In Algeria, Portugal, Greece, Tunisia and Italy suicide is a growing problem, with deaths three times higher among men than women. Few of these deaths make headline news but the government has the evidence. Richard Colwill, from mental health charity Sane, said: "No one should be surprised that factors such as unemployment and job insecurity can push people who may be already vulnerable to take their own lives. Life events like redundancy, bankruptcy and the relationship breakdowns that often follow can cause bouts of mental illness." Claimants slashing their wrists in jobcentres or setting themselves on fire is not deemed as newsworthy by the right-wing media as sensational headlines about benefits fraud. But government figures state only 0.5% of Disability Living Allowance claims are fraudulent. Before the crisis, Greece had the lowest suicide rate in Europe: 2.8 per 100,000 inhabitants. Suicides have since doubled and attempted suicides have also increased. Debts, joblessness, job insecurity are the key reasons given, but it is also the sense that the future holds nothing better. In the US, suicide rates rose dramatically in high unemployment areas. Macomb County, Michigan, with 13.7% unemployment, reported almost 40% more suicides compared to before the recession. Researchers at University of Chicago found that mass layoffs in America caused an immediate rise in suicides, followed by a bigger spike six months later when unemployment insurance ran out. In Ireland, suicide rates increased by 25%, while in Japan, a 2008 study found one in five members of the population admitted contemplating suicide as the recession began to bite. Many people are finding themselves in a place where nothing seems certain anymore, as if the world around them has gone mad. Economic crisis is turning into a mental health crisis. The absence of a generalised struggle is a contributing factor that reinforces the idea that 'there is no alternative'. This despair is a product of capitalism - a system that is sick and rotten to the core. It must be replaced, by socialism, through mass struggle, to give people a purpose and sense of worth that this society cannot. The number of US deaths from suicide surpassed the number of deaths from car crashes in 2009 Over five million Americans lost access to health care due to losing their jobs in the recession. 750,000 have turned to binge drinking, while the number of anti-depressant prescriptions have soared Suicides and bad health have increased far more in countries that have slashed health and welfare budgets A University of Cambridge study found that for every 1% increase in unemployment, there is a 0.8% increase in suicides by under-65s With extracts from http://www.socialistparty.org.uk/issue/766/16715/22-05-2013/cuts-kill-con-dem-benefit-reforms-mental-health-and-suicide

Thatcher is dead! Now bury her legacy of cuts, poverty and unemployment.

A breaking news story broke on my twitter feed earlier just before lunch today. The news that former prime minister and enemy of the working class Margret Thatcher had passed away in the early hours of the morning from a stroke. She passed away peaceful. I am not celebrating her death but I can fully understand the feeling many have towards her. I grew up after she left office so never knew what it was like but I can fully appreciate the anger, the hate and division her reign created. I knew this day was coming and the outpouring of emotion from many I know is huge a sense of anger relief, jubilation even and a lot of Tories pouring praise on her legacy of course. The BBC has gone into over drive giving anyone who was anyone around her a platform to tell us how great she was despite ruining British industry, driving many into poverty and dividing people long before this current con-dem government were around. I don’t ever celebrate anyone’s death as a rule but I c can understand the sheer detesting people affected by her policies ex miners, mining families and all those affected I feel total solidarity with today. The feeling from many in the media will be a sense of sadness as one of their own passes away but I am sure hoping she doesn’t get a state funeral it just would be an insult to many I feel. We must be aware that the liberals will be out in force too crowing about we should respect her legacy yet I also think we must appreciate the level of emotion wrapped up in her passing. She divided us beyond imagination. Yet we face a similar government today determined to go further than Thatcher ever dared. This must be on our minds while thinking of her demise. The 8th of April will be remembered for the day the iron lady was no more. From the poll tax to the miners strikes to the riots to the destruction of British industry her legacy won’t be forgotten in fact the current crop of Tories and new labor are carrying on her ideas today. The woman is dead yet her ideology lives on. We must not celebrate too much but redouble our efforts to eradicating her ideas of individualist ion and fight for socialist change for a society which can benefit the many not just the few wealthy individuals.

Desperation crime on the rise in austerity Britain

As the economic crisis deepens for many people desperate times call for desperate measures. I’ve blogged about this before but it’s becoming more and more common. There are concerns that growing numbers of people, including young mothers, are stealing out of desperation, according to South Yorkshire Police. Its officers say shoplifters increasingly appear to be targeting essential items such as groceries, rather than luxury goods. There were almost 350,000 cases of shoplifting recorded by police in the UK last year and that figure has remained relatively steady over recent years. However South Yorkshire Police and a number of other forces say there have been marked increases in some more deprived areas. In Rotherham crime has increased by 28% in the last 12 months and the town's district commander believes that rise has been fuelled by the economic downturn. Baby food "What we are seeing is a small number of individuals - particularly young mums - who are committing crimes to feed their children," said Ch Supt Jason Harwin. "If you look at powdered milk or baby food it's quite expensive. "These are individuals that have had no dealings with the police in their lives and this is the first offence they've ever committed." Some people are getting so desperate these petty crimes are taking place” This is not people turning to crime for luxury goods or to make money out of these are people simply stealing to survive in society. A society which has abandoned them. No politician cares, no local authority cares, the police don’t care and others down their street may be taken in by the scroungers rhetoric the media and the government have embarked on to demonise those who receive benefits. Despite many who do receive benefits being in work just to make ends meet as their pay is so poor. This is the cruel cold reality of British capitalism making the poorest in society pay for a crisis not of their making. This is not just because we have a bunch of nasty Tories who don’t know what they are doing either. They may well appear to give that impression but believe me this goes far deeper. This is a crisis in capitalism and on a global scale. People who have had to steal to live will be criminalised for being poor. In the same report it mentions that this will have an affect on business and shops profits that is the real agenda here not that poor people are going hungry or can’t feed their babies but that shops are losing money. This is the true face of capitalism right before our very eyes. It’s time to end this system once and for all. 2013 will be a hell of a lot worse for many we could see a explosion of anger we don’t know at this stage which way that will manifest itself but I’m not ruling out anything. The anger is growing it is bubbling beneath the surface waiting just waiting. We as socialists feel that the best way to fight back is to join the labour movement and the organised working class to exert its power to stop austerity by starting with a 24 hour general strike with the threat of more if the go don’t back off. Quite simply a change is needed not just in government because labour who would likely come to power in the event of the government falling would be no better it would slow the cuts down but would not end the pain or misery at all. It’s time to fight for a workers government, a socialist government who will reverse the cuts and help people back to work using the 800 billion stored in the banks of big business sitting idle as they refuse to invest as do not see a profitable outlet. A 50% levee on this putting people into public works building new truly affordable council homes collecting the lost 120 billion in evaded tax would go some way to help. Of course this would just be the start, a very small start but a crucial one. We live in what is one of the wealthiest nations on the planet why do things have to be this way? They don’t. Let’s fight for change, socialist change today.

American school shooting more questions for society

With the tragic gunning down of 27 odd people many children in America last Friday the media has gone into over drive looking to blame the gunman for being unhinged unstable or worse. Yet the facts many commentators are missing and the elephant in the room is the figure of 300 million Americans own a fire arm in the United States this is a huge market for profit making and any laws or tighter controls on gun laws will be met with resistance by gun manufactures. Charlie Wolf an out spoken right wing journalist from America but now working over here and regularly appears on BBC 5 live on the paper review session in the evenings was quick to get his voice out saying this massacre was nothing to do with Americas gun culture and the right to bear arms. I beg to differ I’d point towards the untold social situation the system which drives people to mental illness and desperation the system of capitalism which mess’s with your mind day in day out the constant drive to conform to be a wage labourer and sell your labour power just to exist. It puts lots of untold pressures on individuals. I don’t know much about the gun man he may well have had under lying issues Just like with the poor nurse who took her life last week at the hospital who was looking after the Duchess of Cambridge who apparently took her life after taking a prank call from two Australian DJ’s we don’t know if she had underlying issues either whether that be down to stress of work family life or social issues including poor pay and Christmas coming up all could have lead to a breaking point. Capitalism is a system which looks to drive down workers wages force you to crave work just to live and yet it greets you with poor pay and awful working conditions more often than not. Gun laws are something I have always thought are dangerous allowing mass’s to own guns always means they could end up in the wrong hands. Gun shootings although rare when do happen are tragic and we must as Marxists understand the under currents of what drives situations such as these to appear. It is not as simple as capitalist commentators would have you believe it is just down to one sick minded individual or someone who has just lost it. They may well have but we have to ask ourselves why this is and what society is failing them on. SO let’s not jump to conclusions blame individuals but look at their social circumstances and look to rehabilitate people who do have genuine troubles not just lock them up and forget about them. For me prison does not work. Locking people up then hoping they’ll behave and not reoffend are hopeful at best stupid at worst. I believe in fully funding rehabilitation projects are introducing people who have committed crimes to the community. But we also have to think why crime exists and who it benefits. Crime can pay as much as we don’t like to think so drug money can be lucrative for those who own the means of production yet those n the sharp end get punished for falling into a trap of poverty and desperation. It’s time to end this ill system of capitalism and plan a future to meet people needs so crime and gun crime is no longer an issue.

Guest post : Nancy Taaffe why i'm against food banks

This post below is a republishing of a fantastic post written by my comrade Nancy Taaffe who lives in London, a really well put piece highlighting the hypocrisy of Labur Mp's and those who think they are doing good but are not tackling povety at al. “When I feed the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor are hungry, they call me a communist” Helder Camara, Liberation Theologian Nancy Taaffe speaking out Every Saturday the Anti-Cuts Union has a stall in Walthamstow campaigning against cuts. The Labour Council passed a budget that has taken £65 million away from local services. I lost my job in a library, a job which I had for over 10 years. Children and young peoples’ services have been decimated by cuts, with some services, such as careers, being cut by almost a third. The three main political parties say it wasn’t their fault, that there isn’t any money but… …THAT’S A LIE. A report in The Guardian last year stated that there is currently £750 billion locked away in banks by the rich who see no immediate way to make a profit and so they just sit on the money and let it collect interest, £120 billion is squirrelled away through tax evasion and one thousand of the riches people in this country increased their wealth by £155 billion last year, enough to wipe out the nation’s deficit overnight. Meanwhile my local foodbank runs a stall in a market on a Saturday next to the Anti-Cuts Union stall where they ask the poor of Walthamstow to donate tins and toiletries to the destitute of Walthamstow. Food banks need to get political My annoyance at foodbanks is that we are not in debt, there is money to feed everyone, and we, the poor, shouldn’t pay for a crisis we didn’t create. I understand that foodbanks are often set up by well intentioned people who want to help, but I would question whether a foodbank without politics does actually help. Poverty is not like a hurricane or a flood, it’s man made and it can be man solved. I stood on the Town Hall steps for over a year asking Labour Councillors to set a needs budget and reject cuts but, to a man and woman they all voted for them. I stopped my local MP Stella Creasy (a big proponent of foodbanks) in the street (as I was losing my job) and asked her to make a public statement condemning cuts to libraries and children’s services but she just wouldn’t. Why? Because getting behind the consequence of cuts is far easier than fighting a preemptive battle….. if you are a career politician. When 3 million public sector workers took industrial action last November for decent pensions to prevent poverty in old age the same MP who stands behind the foodbank stall and campaigns against poverty wouldn’t support them. Strikes me, if your simpering and crushed by poverty then you get patronised and pitied but if you stand with a straight back and lean look and assert yourself through your trade union then you get condemned. I suppose it’s the hypocrisy I can’t stand, the Councillors who voted to sack me all support foodbanks. The smell of fresh tar My Liverpool Grandmother would tell me stories of the poverty her family endured in the 30′s, of picking up orange peel by the side of the road to gnaw on to alleviate hunger pains or sniffing the air when fresh tar was laid on the road because it smelt like food. But she also described the humiliation that many mothers had to endure at the hands of “charitable organisations”, how it was common to have to stand in a cold church hall with children clawing at your skirts and put your case to the parish fathers as to why you should have money to survive. Often these “parish fathers” were local businessmen and factory owners who paid poverty wages to their workers and were vicious if the workers went on strike for decent pay and decent working conditions. Rebellion against charity The rebellion that took place in the working class after the Second World War was not just a reaction to the horror of war but was a revolution against the humiliation of poor relief and welfare administration built on “charity”. I suppose if foodbanks get political and mobilised those they feed to get organised, then I could support them. If, like the unemployed movements of the 30s, they not only fed people but stirred them up to fight for revolutionary change, then I would get right behind them. If I could sum up my opposition to charity without politics I would have to do it with the help of the inimitable Oscar Wilde who said: “We are often told that the poor are grateful for charity. Some of them are, no doubt, but the best amongst the poor are never grateful. They are ungrateful, discontented, disobedient, and rebellious. They are quite right to be so. Charity they feel to be a ridiculously inadequate mode of partial restitution, or a sentimental dole, usually accompanied by some impertinent attempt on the part of the sentimentalist to tyrannise over their private lives. …Disobedience, in the eyes of anyone who has read history, is man’s original virtue” …Long live disobedience! with thanks to http://thefoodbankers.wordpress.com/2012/11/30/guest-post-nancy-taaffe-explains-why-shes-against-foodbanks/

Why minimum alcohol pricing is not the answer

I am firmly against the idea of a minimum pricing strategy for alcohol. This is for various reasons which I shall explain I do not think raising the price of drinks in pubs and in the super markets will bring down binge drinking one bit people who enjoy drinking and drink to get drunk will not be deterred by this in fact it will give them added incentive I feel as they will turn to shoplifting or worse to get alcohol. We may see the return of home brewing and some even stronger alcohol being imported from abroad which is even more dangerous than what we have currently. I think there is also the adanger of this turning into a nanny state question again. Where we are told what we can and cant do once more. I am a drinker of alcohol I’ll admit that but not excessively that often I am more a social drinker with friends and comrades at weekends and after meetings. This minimum price will hit me who am not a troublemaker in the pocket and guess where the extra tax will go? The government who already make huge amounts of cash in tax through alcohol and breweries will be hit as a result. The pub trade is an industry close to my heart and with the introduction of this plan this will put even more pubs out of business than there already is. Already there is roughly 1 pub closing every week in this country and this will only increase this further. It’s a barmy idea which will only benefit big business and capitalism this won’t solve peoples drinking habits or improve the pub trade. This is a cynical ploy by health charities who claim to want the best for us while not even stopping to think of the social reasons why people often young people end up drinking vast quantities of drink a lot. Do they stop to think could it be the lack of an education, lack of a good well paid job? Poor housing conditions or lack of housing at all that turn ordinary working class people to drink every day. I lay the blame squarely at the feet of capitalism who while drives people to drink literally through driving them into the ground through the wage slave system also makes millions of pounds out of peoples misery in the process. Nice this capitalism ay? The solution, a democratic planned socialist economy based on peoples needs, breweries which are run for peoples needs not for the profits of th boss’s a fair cheap affordable drink structure with good affordable housing with good well paid jobs. All possible when big business sits on 800 billion and refuses to invest, time to tax the rich!

The poor and the hungry turning to crime to eat

In a shocking thing I’ve just read it tells a story of old people turning to crime and stealing just to feed themselves. This in one of the poorest areas of Britain which is still the 7th richest nation on earth. It’s an absolute disgrace that people in this country have to feed themselves via food banks. Shockingly many labour councillors cry crocodiel tears at the opening up of new food banks and even campaign for them as Stellar creasy MP for Walthamstow does but this is liberal moralising she has the influence and ability to oppose all the cuts condemn her local labour councilmaking more cuts and fight for a better system, but she doesn’t and this shows one exampl of the bankrupcy of the labour party today. I heard the other day that even in my town of Ware, in Hertfordshire a food bank has opened in the Salvation Army building serving roughly 200 people a week. This in a so called affluent area of the country austerity really is starting to bite and bite hard as winter sets in. This was the piece I found. It’s set in Glasgow but this could be anywhere in our towns and cities now as the rich get richer the poor getting poorer under this rotten capitalist system. We must get organised and oppose all cuts now. Glasgow shoplifters are being referred to food banks after a police chief confirmed more people are stealing groceries because they are hungry. But police said some of the thieves – including a pensioner caught trying to take three tins of salmon – needed help from charities rather than trouble from the courts. The revelation came after the Evening Times revealed shoplifting figures had jumped 14% in the city in 2011-12 as the recession bites. Chief Inspector Ann Hughes, of Maryhill police, said the demographic of shoplifters had changed “significantly” in the past two years. She said: “The profile of shoplifters is not consistent with what you would expect. Part of the change is the austerity we are experiencing. “We had an old man who had taken three tins of salmon. He could not afford to feed himself. “People are finding it really, really difficult. “It’s about making sure they are linked to the right agencies, food banks, etc. It’s very, very sad.” Police refer such vulnerable and starving thieves to social services, which can put them in touch with food banks. Chief Inspector Hughes is responsible for one of the poorest places in Scotland; her patch has seen significant increases in shoplifting since the recession. Despite this, and the ‘tip-of-the-iceberg’ TICGate arrests last week, the PM insisted again during PMQs that crime is down, side-stepped a question about police morale and reminded everyone how special and important we are, except of course when it comes to pay & conditions.

The growing polarisation in Britain today

We are currently seeing a growing polarisation of opinion, wealth, opportunity and pay i'm afraid to say. It really does feel like we are being taken back in time to a earlier time in history.

I was borin in the late 80's did not experience Thatcher and her horrors but am quickly becoming acustom in what it must have been like today in 2011. As we see our living standards stagnate or fall in many cases there is a growing feeling that the poor aare getting poorer and the rich are getting richer. This is being helped through by yet another tory government headed by a cabinet of millionaires .


The government's measures amount to the biggest single attack on the living standards of the British working class for 80 years.

The Independent, basing itself upon the figures of the Institute of Fiscal Studies, claims they are the deepest cuts since the 1970s.

But this is not true. In 1976, to receive an IMF loan of £2.3 billion, the then Labour government cut £2.5 billion from public expenditure, equivalent to no more than £20 billion today.

Osborne wants to impose an £81 billion slash and burn programme over four years. Indicating his determination to push through his brutal measures Osborne has let it be known that there is no 'plan B' to fall back on if his proposals are not accepted.

This is bravado on his and the government's part. But the British ruling class has a tried and tested policy of bending with the wind. Whenever they have confronted a determined mass movement which is prepared to go to the end of the struggle against them they have often retreated.

Sometimes, they throw overboard the 'general' whose plans have been thwarted. This was the fate of Margaret Thatcher in the mighty poll-tax battle which she lost and as a result was subsequently ejected from office.

Such an outcome in this battle is not to be excluded. This is a government of liars, who have no mandate - the Liberal Democrats are doing exactly the opposite of what they promised before the general election - and deserves to be driven from office.

But on the other hand this is only possible on the basis of determined policies matched by bold leadership.

We cannot rely on a labour party traditionally known as defenders of the poor. New labour have transformed themselves into apologists of the city and big business
We cannot rely on Labour to oppose the cuts and austerity to the poor and workers.
Moreover, Alistair Darling, previously New Labour's chancellor, has admitted that the cuts that would have been inflicted if New Labour had been re-elected would have been more severe than Margaret Thatcher's when she was in power.

From the outset, this government has pursued a policy of 'shock and awe'. There are many who naively believe that these are always 'somebody else's cuts', in a situation like this.


A recent survey of top 100 FTSE chief executives has shown that in the last year these bosses have received, on average, 50% pay rises. Top company boss Martin Sorrell had the brass neck to complain that his £1 million basic salary was "very low"!

This at a time when many workers have had to endure pay freezes especially in the public sector. In some cases, such as Southampton City and Hampshire county council, workers face pay cuts. Most of these workers are already some of the lowest paid. In the private sector as well, those who have received any pay rises have seen them more than wiped out by price inflation.

It's a disgrace that the parasites at the top can award themselves such huge rises while at the same time calling for further cuts in public spending, leading to more job losses and attacks on workers' terms and conditions.

The fat cats have tried to defend themselves by claiming that their salaries and bonuses are set by independent pay review boards. But the bosses sit on each others' review boards where they recommend huge pay increases for each other!

They have even claimed that their massive pay rises are down to 'performance', yet the system they head is in crisis. If their pay is linked to performance they should be paying us for the mess they've created!

Cameron and Clegg have expressed 'concern' over pay inequalities but working class people won't be fooled by this. The Con-Dems are determined to make the poorest people in society pay for the bankers' greed and the failures of capitalism.

The growing polarisation in society really is starting to grow now. With peoples opinions eitehr falling in the have's or have nots. There is a growing feeling that we are not all in this together as the tories would have us believe . The poor will not take this laying down and will fight back.
I was listening to a programme on BBC 5 live last night and a debate in a church in Birmingham with Edwina Currie claiming taht she doesnt beleive we have real povety in Britain today she thinks its all down to peoples choices and lazy attitudes to not work. Well if there were the jobs there in the first place Edwina maybe we could all find jobs. But jobs that pay a decent living wage should be our aim not just jobs for jobs sake.

capitalist Britain, food package handouts on the rise

Figures from a charity suggest a sharp rise in demand on charities for food.

Fareshare, which redirects food trade surpluses to those in need, said its donations were reaching 35,000 people a day, up from 29,000 a day last year.

The organisation said it had seen the largest annual increase in the number of charities asking for handouts.

Fareshare said low-income families were struggling with rising food prices, and one in three charities it surveyed was facing government funding cuts.

Unprecedented demand

The charity has 17 locations around the UK and passes on good quality supplies from the British food industry to a wide network of organisations such as homeless hostels, women's refuges, day centres and after-school clubs.

It said that in the year to April it provided 8.6 million meals to 600 groups, and this year it was facing unprecedented demand from some 700 organisations.

The organisation, which works with more than 100 companies in the food and drink industry, said 42% of the charities it surveyed reported an increase in demand for food in the past year.

Some 65% of the charities were slashing food budgets in an effort to stay afloat, it found, according to responses from 150 community members from organisations Fareshare supplies.

Fareshare said there has been an "increase in people and the types of people" seeking food from the charities.

In the past, its donations commonly went to homeless people and refugee charities but more "destitute families" were now among its recipients.

Fareshare chief executive Lindsay Boswell said: "At a time of unprecedented demand we want the food industry and the general public to increase their support."

He added: "This research supports the growing anecdotal evidence we've seen in recent months - more people are getting in touch with Fareshare asking for help to access food.




This news comes as no surprise to myself and many other socialists who have been reporting this sort of story for months. This sort of story twill get more air time now as it is starting to affect lower middle class families too and only then do the media like the BBC sit up and take note. But the factis that big food producing companies will give little of the surplus to food charities and would rather put it in landfill as there is no profit to be made in excess food they feel. Homesless people and working class families who need food wont be able to pay anything towards this so they dont feel its worth them investing in such projects.

Like any capitalist they will only invest and do something if there is a profit thre to be made.

Isnt it outrageous that in Britain one of the so called richest nations in the world has some of its poorest people living off food handouts and cant afford to feed themselves. What a devastating blow to capitalism that it cannot even feed its own countries people let alone the worlds population.

I can only predict sadly that this story will keep coming back and coming back untill something is done to rid us of this profit driven greedy society based on explitation.

This news story touch's on people who do work who cannot afford to feed themselves not just the homeless. Doesnt this tell you that wages are far too low for people to live on with labours minimum wage now looking a pittance for people to live on with food prices rocketing it is no wonder peoploe are struggling at the bottom of society.

A quote from peter Taaffe i read over the weekend that austerity what we are going through right now should be given its proper name "planned povety". i think peter sums it up pretty well there as that is exactly what it is. When a capitalist cant make a profit it will not spend and could not care less who suffers because of it. Harsh but true this is the system we live under and the system i want to see ended.

There is more than enough food produced every day for the whole world to eat if we had a system based on peoples needs before profits benifiting the many not just the few we'd be much better off. The system i'm talking about is socialism. A planned economy run by the workers, for the workers where peoples needs come first. No one more equal than anyone else.

Broken Britain ? only thing broken in Britain is capitalism

After the UK riots last week we will now be entertained bhy polititian after polititian telling us what we need to do and what we shouldnt do to solve the crisis as they put it.

But if we have learnt anything it is that we havent learnt from our mistakes of the 80's. When there was mass riots in Brixton and Broad water farm in Tottenham. Although on a much bigger scale the same old rhetoric is being churned out by out of touch polititians who have not got the first idea why the people have started rioting. They think to solve this we need better, stronger and more policing to solve this and prevent it happening again.

This is completely missing the point. Looking at the causes and the reasons for the riots is not by any means condoning them at all it is taking time to understand the rioters motives and reasons behind what they did. This is not simply down to criminality although their actions were we must look deeper.

When David Cameron famously said Britain is Broken refering to the country being fragmented and families being disjointed he was not thinking this would come to the fore so quickly into his tenure.

But we did . There has been mass inequality for years in this country gone largely unnoticed by many and the media too. But areas like Tottenham which have not really progressed much at all since the 80's are feeling the force of brutal savage austerity cuts which are making a difficult situation worse still.

It is no coincidence all the areas where rioting took place there is deprevation and povety and a lack of jobs and services for the youth.

So i would say it is not Britain that is broken it is this rotten capitalist system which requires a surplus of workers at any one time when it cant make a profit with something it is not viable to a capitalist despite its social need.

We must highlight to others that Britain is not broken at all but the greed and the nature of the system we live under has failed and failed the people as a whole. Many people in these areas cannot find work and even when they can the pay is poor and not enough for them to live a decent life on.

We must highlight that the root cause of all this is capitalism not a benifit scrounging culture of the lazy and unemployed as many would work if they could find a decent job.

But this goes back years back through previous governments including Labour i'm afraid to say who have let communities such as Tottenham down by providing poor housing, jobs and education in affect ghettoising areas and failing to bring areas up to a good standard for all not just the few.

It is the nature of capitalism that a class based society comes about and one class oppress's another by using the state. We have seen this again with the role and the use of the police by the government.

David Cameron in his wisdom has been talking of bringing in a police chief who has helped solve gang culture in New York and Los Angeles in America. Having not lived there i cant say for sure but i imagine even in those areas there is not a total end to povety and deprevation it is just hidden better no doubt. Just like with next years Olympics in London the poorer run down areas will be kept well away from the tourists and visitors to the games to portray a clean safe image of our capital but yet we all know the issues still remain. Sweeping a problem under the carpet does not make it go away Mr Cameron and you will do well to remember this.

Britain itself is not broken the people are alive and well and starting to wake up to the nightmares of austerity and cuts to their living standards. Be they backdoor inflation or a rise in VAT or a cut to your local youth service we will all before long feel the cuts and austerity bite. It is not time to get depressed and turn to riots but to organise and fightback as a organised collective power of the working class.

As inner cities erupt a mass workers movement is required to defeat the government

this excellent article posted on the socialist party's websitea nd due to be in this weeks socialist newspaper by Hannah Sell, the deputy General secretary of the socialist party. More great articles are available to read online at
www.socialistparty.org.uk

Hannah Sell, Socialist Party deputy general secretary
"The scenes of despair and explosions of anger like those of 1981 will be back on our streets.

"Deprived areas of major cities - if not the central areas, then the 'banlieus' or outskirts as in France - will be the scene of new conflagrations."

This is the warning that the Socialist Party gave just four months ago, in our article on the anniversary of the Brixton riots. This morning thousands of people have woken up to the devastation of their communities.

Today is a tragedy for the small shopkeepers whose businesses have been looted or set alight, the workers whose cars have been burnt out, and perhaps worst of all for those who have seen their homes go up in smoke.

Firefighters have faced horrendous problems trying to fight the fires in the midst of the riots.

The current outbursts of street anger are the biggest Britain has seen since the mid-1980s. Belatedly government ministers have dragged themselves back from their holidays in order to try and 'restore order'.

Parliament has been recalled for Thursday, but so far the only response of the capitalist politicians has been to shriek about "the mob", "criminals" and "mindless violence".

Workers living in the communities affected are inevitably angry at the destruction that has taken place, but will also be enraged by the government's attempts to absolve itself of responsibility for the situation.

Unfortunately, New Labour's response has been essentially the same as that of the Tories. Ed Miliband has simply called the riots "disgraceful criminal behaviour" and has demanded that David Cameron orders "the strongest possible police response".

Diane Abbot, MP for Hackney North and historically on the left of the Labour Party, has called for a curfew to be considered.

The leadership of New Labour has done nothing to point out the reasons why young people are rioting. This is not surprising.

Mass unemployment, cuts in public services and police harassment and stop and search all grew when New Labour was in power. Despite all the capitalist politicians' attempts to ignore reality, it is no coincidence that Britain is burning in August 2011 - it flows from the social conditions faced by a generation of young people in the inner cities.

During the 1980s disturbances, the then Tory government decried those on the streets as "hooligans". Now that those riots are a distant memory, Edwina Currie and other Tories are willing to recognise that the rioters had the legitimate grievances of mass unemployment and police prejudice, but claim everything is different today.

In reality nothing fundamental has changed for youth in inner city areas.

The present events are a cry of rage and despair by members of a generation that has been thrown on the scrapheap. They are not race riots, but involve poor young people, living in the inner-cities, from every ethnic background.


Angry and deprived
The motives of those involved vary, but they centre on a single theme, summed up by one woman interviewed on the Today radio four programme: "I am not a thief but I am angry.

"What have we got? - nothing." Unlike her, others had taken part in order to loot shops. Electrical goods and sportswear shops were targeted in many areas, but so were supermarkets.

In Tottenham, Aldi was emptied, in Lewisham, Morrisons. It was not only 'luxury' goods, but the most basic necessities of life that people were queuing up to take.

What does it say about Britain, an 'advanced' capitalist country, that so many people are desperate enough, and unconcerned enough about the consequences, to take part in mass looting of shops? Young people with a job worth having, and prospects for a future, do not generally take part in such actions.

But in Britain today there are almost a million unemployed young people who have been effectively told they have no prospects for the future. As the world's stock markets tumble, the feeling that capitalism offers no prospects for the 'lost generation' is inevitably growing.

Already, across London youth unemployment is 23%, in inner city areas it is far higher.

Hackney and Tower Hamlets have the highest youth unemployment in the country, with Tottenham not far behind. These young people live a very few miles from the millionaires and billionaires of the City of London, yet have little prospect of earning the minimum wage, never mind getting a decent job.

The real looters are the city financiers who have made billions from gambling on the world's stock markets and looting the economy of whole countries, driving entire populations - as in Greece - into dire poverty.

Is it any wonder, in a society that encourages private entrepreneurs to make a profit by any means necessary, that unemployed youth decide to try and obtain a few goods by whatever means they can?


Ethnic minorities
While the riots are not 'race riots', and involve young people from all ethnic groups, it is true that many are black. The capitalist politicians try to dismiss the idea that racism still exists in Britain today, but that is simply not true.

All ethnic minorities in Britain still earn less, on average, than white people, with differences amongst men ranging from earning an average of 10% less for Chinese men, to 27% less for Bangladeshi men.

Even those ethnic minority communities with very high levels of higher education qualifications still suffer worse pay. All ethnic minorities have higher than average rates of poverty.

Rates of poverty are highest for Bangladeshis, Pakistanis and black Africans, reaching nearly two thirds for Bangladeshis.

At the same time ethnic minorities are barely represented as the managers and employers of big companies. None of the 98 high court judges come from ethnic minorities, and only four of the 563 circuit judges.

Less than 1% of the army come from ethnic minorities. There are pathetically few black and Asian MPs.

British capitalism has proved itself incapable of qualitatively improving the living conditions of all but a tiny minority of black and Asian people.

Anger at police harassment is a major factor in the explosion that has taken place. In Tottenham the spark was anger at the police shooting of Mark Duggan.

The Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) has already had to admit that, despite police claims that Mark Duggan had fired at them first, the bullet embedded in a police radio was actually police issue.

People in Tottenham are right to have no faith in the IPCC to carry out an independent investigation. The trade union movement must demand a genuinely independent inquiry, made up of elected representatives from the local trade unions, community organisations and especially the youth.

A similar enquiry is needed into the riots that have taken place and their causes. Many of those interviewed taking part in the riots across the country express fury at the endless police stop and searches that they face.

From 2005 to 2009 police searches of Asian people increased 84% and black people by 51%. Now the state wants to go even further using 'Section 60' to extend their powers to stop and search without grounds for suspicion.

Peaceful protests have taken place on these issues, but nothing has changed, leading to a feeling that 'more' is needed. In Tottenham the family and friends of Mark Duggan had marched to the police station and waited in vain for hours for a senior officer to address them.

This was not an isolated occurrence. One young man in Tottenham told NBC: "You wouldn't be talking to me now if we didn't riot, would you? Two months ago we marched to Scotland Yard, more than 2,000 of us, all blacks, and it was peaceful and calm and you know what? Not a word in the press.

"Last night a bit of rioting and looting and look around you."


Riot police in Hackney, 8.8.11, photo Paul Mattsson (Click to enlarge)
Cuts in services
Mass unemployment and police harassment have created an explosive situation. For many, the final straw has been the taking away of the few crumbs which were designed to at least ameliorate the effects of mass youth unemployment.

The government has abolished the EMA grant, despite mass protests, which had at least made it possible for working class young people to attend college.

Despite endless demands on young people to 'better themselves' and 'get an education' the one concrete measure that made it possible to get an education has now been taken away.

In addition, the raising of university tuition fees to £9,000 a year has deterred many working class youth from considering the avenue of higher education.

Other government cuts in already overstretched public services, implemented by Labour as well as Tory and Liberal councils, have also contributed to the situation.

Rather than defend their local communities and refuse to implement the cuts, as the Socialist Party demands and Liverpool City Council did in the 1980s - every single Labour council has slashed public services.

In Tottenham the youth service has been cut by 75%. Nationally, Connexions, the service that provided careers and benefits advice for young people, has been destroyed.

Many local authorities now provide no advice service at all for young people. Yet this is only the first year of cuts; councils plan to implement far more in the coming years.

The government is now trying to dismiss any link between cuts and the riots, yet just weeks before the general election, Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg warned that Tory cuts would lead to riots.

It is a sign of the extreme short-sightedness of the current government that it has encouraged cuts in the services which provided an element of 'social control' by the government over young people.

The relatively small sums saved by the cuts will now have to spent ten times over in dealing with the consequences of the riots. In the wake of the riots, community campaigns to demand immediate reopening of all closed youth facilities and of Connexions, funded by central government, could force the government to reverse these cuts.


Hackney, 8.8.11, photo Paul Mattsson (Click to enlarge)
Rioting- no solution
However, rioting is not the means to defeat the government, but, on the contrary, only damages the communities in which working-class people live, and gives the capitalist class an excuse to increase the repressive apparatus of the state.

The Socialist Party does not agree with those on the left who condone the riots, such as the Socialist Workers Party, whose posters in the areas affected by riots declare them to be a step from 'riot to revolution'.

The present disturbances are an indication of blind rage against the system. Undoubtedly, some of the young people involved will have taken inspiration from the revolutions that have overthrown dictatorships in the Middle East, and the movement of the squares in Greece and Spain.

However, these movements were of a very different character to the riots. While each country has had different characteristics, all the occupations of the squares - from Spain to Egypt - were relatively disciplined mass protests which both opposed and largely prevented acts of violence against local shops etc.

This is one reason that, while all the movements largely began with young people, they were able to reach out to, and win the support of the wider population.

By contrast, while the riots have received huge media coverage, they are allowing the capitalist media and the government to further demonise young people, and to potentially divide the struggle against the government.

However, the government can only be defeated by building a mass, united movement of all those under attack from it. The organised working class in the trade unions have the key role to play.

In Egypt it was when the working class organised general strike action that Mubarak was finally defeated. Historically in Britain, Thatcher's poll tax was not defeated, as some on the left claim, as a result of the March 1990 riot, but because of an organised mass campaign of non payment, involving 18 million people.

Trade union action
This year in Britain, the day that has frightened the government most was 30 June, when 750,000 public sector workers took strike action. Unfortunately, however, on 30 June it was only around one fifth of public sector workers who were called out by the trade union leaders to take strike action.

The leaders of the biggest public sector unions argued against participating, despite widespread demands for action from their members. The failure of the leadership of the trade union movement in Britain to lead a serious struggle to defeat all the cuts is a central reason why the riots have erupted.


Riot police in Hackney, 8.8.11, photo Paul Mattsson (Click to enlarge)
Brendan Barber, general secretary of the TUC, warned that the cuts would lead to riots, but has not been prepared to take the action that could have prevented them.

If, as we demanded, the TUC had conducted a serious battle to defeat the government, mobilising its seven million members, the government could have been forced from office by now.

If the TUC had called a national demonstration against cuts in October last year, mobilised for joint action with the students in November, and called a one-day public sector strike, it would have mobilised huge popular support, and would have been able to act as a pole of attraction for the most oppressed sections of young people.

Having delayed, the TUC needs to act decisively now. It should immediately call a national trade union demonstration to oppose all cuts and demand a future for young people.

This should be a step towards the next day of coordinated strike action in the autumn, which this time should involve all 4 million public sector workers, and be combined with a one-day strike of school, college and university students.

A trade union demonstration needs to show clearly that the trade unions stand together with young people. The widespread trade union support for Youth Fight for Jobs (YFJ), and its Jarrow March against youth unemployment in the autumn, is one important means to demonstrate this.

However, it is also important the demonstration is called around clear demands. These should include the immediate reinstatement of EMA and abolition of university tuition fees.

It should also oppose any attempts by the government to use the riots in order to increase harassment of young people.

On the contrary it should demand the withdrawal of the stop and search laws being used to harass young people, and clearly oppose any attempts to increase the repressive apparatus of the state; Teresa May previously made clear she would like to bring water cannon and teargas to Britain, and the immediate use of rubber bullets is being considered.

If this is done it will be used in the future against workers and student demonstrations, just as police brutality was used against the students last year.

The trade union movement should also call for control of the police to be placed under the auspices of democratically elected local police committees.

The explosion of anger on Britain's streets is above all a condemnation of capitalism, and its inability to offer the next generation even the measly standard of living that workers have had in the last twenty years.

The trade union movement needs to act to show it is on the side of young people, but to be fully effective this needs to be linked to the struggle to develop a new mass party for workers and youth which stands for a socialist society.

Only by taking the big corporations that dominate Britain's economy into democratic public ownership would it be possible to begin to provide a real future for young people.

Capitalism is incapable of providing even the basics - a decent job, a home, an education - to the next generation. Democratic socialism would mean production could be planned to meet the needs of all and not for profits of a few.

The Socialist Party demands:
An independent trade union-led inquiry into the death of Mark Duggan and into the causes of and policing of the riots. Scrap the IPCC. We need police accountability through democratic control by local people.
End stop and search. No to section 60.
For control of the police to be placed under the auspices of democratically elected local committees involving representatives from trade unions, councils, tenants associations, and community organisations.
For the government to immediately cover the uninsured losses and repairs of all small businesses and homeowners affected by the riots.
For councils to immediately re-house those who lost their homes in the riots. For investment in social house building and renovation, creating jobs and improving health.
For the immediate reversal of the closure of local youth and Connexions services. Funding from central government to pay for it.
No to all cuts in jobs and public services. Free education and training for all. Reinstate EMA and abolish tuition fees. We demand huge public investment in job creation and services.
Build a mass campaign to fight for these demands but also to fight for socialist change in the way society is run, with democratic planning of how we use the wealth and resources of society - under working class control and management, not that of the millionaires.