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."

Is britain becoming more racist ?

I certainly think so and new evidence out today would back this up. I myself have noticed a sharp spike in the racist comments i'm hearing about the place with casual comments on other nationalities and races especially eastern europeans at the moment is getting worse and worse. The proportion of Britons who admit to being racially prejudiced has risen since the start of the millennium, raising concerns that growing hostility to immigrants and widespread Islamophobia are setting community relations back 20 years. New data from NatCen’s authoritative British Social Attitudes (BSA) survey, obtained by the Guardian, shows that after years of increasing tolerance, the percentage of people who describe themselves as prejudiced against those of other races has risen overall since 2001. The findings come as political leaders struggle to deal with the rise of the UK Independence party, which campaigned on an anti-immigrant, anti-EU platform and has sent shockwaves through the political establishment and put pressure on mainstream parties All we have seen so far is the major political parties reacting with further lurch's to the right with even the labour party conceeding it was wrong on imigration and we let too many in. This does nothing to curtail the UKIP rise and in fact boosts their arguement that we are over crowded and there is not enough jobs or houses to go around which is partially true. In an echo of the voting patterns of Ukip supporters in last week’s European elections, the figures paint a pattern of a nation geographically divided – with London reporting the lowest levels of racial prejudice. Older men in economically deprived areas are most likely to admit to racial prejudice. The data is in stark contrast to other indicators of social change such as attitudes to same-sex relationships and sex before marriage. By those measures, the UK has become a more accepting, liberal country. The shadow justice minister, Sadiq Khan, said the findings should come as a wake-up call. “This is clear evidence that we cannot be complacent about racial prejudice. Where it manifests itself, it blights our society. Those in positions of authority must take their responsibilities seriously. It also falls to us to address the underlying causes.” causes ?? sounds all a bit sinister. The data was taken from the BSA survey carried out by NatCen Social Research and includes exclusive figures from the 2013 survey due to be published next month. It shows a broad decline in the proportion of people who said they were either “very or a little prejudiced” against people of other races – from a high of 38% in 1987 to an all-time low of 25% in 2001. However, in 2002, following the 9/11 attacks in New York and the invasion of Afghanistan, there was a sharp rise in self-reported racial prejudice. Over the next 12 years that upward trend continued to a high of 38% in 2011. The following year it fell to 26% – which experts say could be due to the positive impact of the London Olympics. a little simplistic perhaps but certainly worrying that even official evidence is backing up the idea that we are becoming a more racist, divided country and in fact going backwards in many ways. Omar Khan, acting director of the Runnymede Trust – Britain’s leading independent race equality thinktank – said the data should be noted by all the main parties. “This nails the lie that the problem of racism has been overcome in Britain or that somehow when Jeremy Clarkson said the things he did it is some sort of anomaly that does not tap into a wider problem. “Politicians became too relaxed and thought that all they had to do was let things continue unhindered and that generational change would take over. But this should act as a warning shot to politicians and the public about how we see ourselves.” The BSA survey data shows different levels of prejudice stemming from age, class and gender, with older men in manual jobs most ready to admit to racial prejudice. Dr Grace Lordan, from the London School of Economics, said her own research based on BSA data going back to 1983 showed a clear correlation between recession and the numbers who self-described as prejudiced. Her research found that the group that recorded the biggest rise was white, professional men between the ages of 35 and 64, highly educated and earning a lot of money. Their attitudes may directly affect others as many will have managerial responsibilities. All age groups experienced a spike in their racial prejudice after 2002, but those born since 1980 – generation Y – and the baby boomers born between 1940 and 1959 have seen prejudice levels fall since then. By contrast, people born between 1960 and 79 – generation X – and those born before 1939 increasingly identify as prejudiced. A fascinating picture also emerges in the self-evaluation of men and women. As with almost all indicators of prejudice, this data finds that men are more likely to describe themselves as racially prejudiced than women. However, that gap has closed significantly over the past decade with the number of men admitting prejudice falling from 37% in 2002 to 32% in 2013. Over the same period, the figure for women has risen from 25% to 29%. "We do know that the factors that predict the likelihood of a man or a woman admitting prejudice differ so we should not expect trends over time to be similar,” said Lordan. “For men, the usual socio-economic variables matter more – income, education and being full-time employed. For females the factors that can predict their attitudes are less obvious. We know that females who are in part-time employment are more likely to admit to being prejudiced – perhaps because part-time jobs in the UK have pretty poor conditions.” Party allegiance also appears to have a bearing on racial prejudice. Conservative supporters have consistently been the most likely to describe themselves as prejudiced against people of other races. However, since 2002, when 42% of Tory supporters said they were very or a little prejudiced (compared with 27% for Labour and 24% for Lib Dems), they have been overtaken by the category classified as “other”. This appears to coincide with the rise of the far-right British National party and then Ukip. So what has driven the apparent growth in prejudice? Prof Tariq Modood, from Bristol University, said the findings suggested many people were conflating anti-Muslim sentiment and racial animus. “I don’t think there is any doubt that hostility to Muslims and suspicion of Muslims has increased since 9/11, and that is having a knock-on effect on race and levels of racial prejudice.” Prof Bhikhu Parekh, the Labour peer who in 1998 chaired the groundbreaking Commission on the Future of Multi-Ethnic Britain, said the data revealed a country increasingly ill at ease with itself. “The last few years have been marked by fear of loss of identity,” he said. “There have been new people coming in and new mores. People feel uncomfortable. They lose their bearings. What should they say or do to not be classed as racist? “People have a feeling that we are losing control of our own society in terms of the EU and the liberal establishment and that they are not in charge of their destiny. They feel they can’t do anything about it.” But he also argues that the language around race has changed. “The term racism has undergone a change of meaning. It has lost its moral force. We use it today too freely. After the war if you said someone was racist, you had images of Hitler. A racist was someone who hated people. Now it is applied to someone who might say: ‘I love my people and want to keep others at a distance.'” The BSA survey data shows wide variance in levels of prejudice throughout the UK. In combined figures for 2012-13, 16% of people questioned in inner London admitted to racial prejudice. Outer London and Scotland emerged as the next most tolerant areas, at 26% and 25% respectively. Other regions – including Wales – hovered around the 30% mark. The West Midlands emerged as the place with the highest level of self-reported prejudice at 35% – a difference deemed statistically significant. It echoes the geographical split demonstrated in last week’s elections, when fewer voters in London supported Ukip. In London, one obvious explanation would be the churning population. Those with shallow roots are least likely to mourn change. Tony Travers of the London School of Economics said: “There is a self-defining image of London as a place that celebrates difference. It wasn’t created by Ken Livingstone but he did build upon it – in the same way as New York self-defined itself – and that approach has been carried on by his successor, Boris Johnson.” Travers identifies two migratory tribes in the capital – those who come from abroad and those from other parts of the country. Both choose to live in London and thus buy into the narrative. Strong roots are unnecessary. “The word Londoner is an entirely inclusive concept.” http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/may/27/-sp-racism-on-rise-in-britain

solidarity with disabled people protesting at the BBC today

Disabled activists from grassroots campaigns Disabled People Against Cuts (DPAC), Black Triangle and Mental Health Resistance Network have occupied the BBC building in London to protest against the role the media are playing in worsening attitudes towards disabled people and a complete failure to give space to the realities of what this government are doing to disabled people. Ironically just last week the BBC reported on a research report by Scope which highlighted how things have got worse for disabled people since the Paralympics, but the BBC themselves have contributed to this situation by a lack of balanced or accurate reporting. In fact their coverage of the research angered disabled people by spectacularly failing to draw any links between the worsening conditions disabled people are facing and government policy. Despite the fact that Iain Duncan Smith has been pulled up before the Work and Pensions Select Committee for misrepresentation and manipulation of figures and statistics, the BBC continues to report information released by the DWP as fact. This resulted in a situation over Easter weekend where disabled people, about to face an austerity armageddon with benefits and income essential for their survival brutally slashed away, also had to contend with national media coverage that encouraged a view of us as benefit scroungers and cheats. It has since been proven that information released by the DWP ahead of the changes in April such as the figures for all of those who had supposedly stopped ineligible claims for incapacity benefit due to the tightening up of the benefit system, were misrepresentations with no basis in evidence. Just the smallest amount of research would have revealed to the BBC that they were about to report lies as objective fact. In addition to the misrepresented figures and statistics which the BBC promoted, further weight was given to the government’s propaganda by the succession of government ministers who were then given air time to continue to peddle their falsheoods. Where people were invited on to present an alternative view, they were non-disabled people from national charities. Firstly these people do not represent us, and secondly there are many more informed disabled campaigners who could have exposed the lies and misrepresentations. Time and again the government and front bench Ministers have lied to justify policies which are causing the deaths of disabled people. Only last week the Disability News Service has had to raise formal complaints against the DWP press office for deliberately presenting false information about the level of spending on disability in the UK. Meanwhile the situation in the UK has gained international notoriety. The UN are currently in the UK to investigate and report on what the UK is doing through its housing policies. Solidarity protests outside the British Embassy have been organised by supporters in Canada. Yet time and again the BBC have not only failed to report on what is happening but to contribute to public ignorance of what is going and to inflame hostility with questions such as “Why can’t disabled people take their fair share?” It is well evidenced that disabled people are bearing the brunt of austerity measures with those with the highest level of support need being hit nineteen times harder than the average citizen. To even put the question why can’t we take our fair share is damaging and in contempt of disabled people’s basic rights to be treated with respect and free from hostility. For more information please contact Rosa Wilkinson on 07505144371. Notes for editors: 1) Disabled People Against Cuts was set up in October 2010 to oppose the government attacks on disabled people. Our week of action last year highlighted the hypocrisy of Atos’ sponsorship of the Paralympic Games and culminated in a protest of 700 people outside Atos headquarters and the occupation of the DWP building by disabled activists and a guide dog for 2 1/2 hours. We are now in the middle of our week of action for 2013: Reclaiming Our Futures, which is focused on the wide range of attacks that are pushing back disabled people’s rights be decades. 2) DPAC report on DWP abuse of statistics: http://www.scribd.com/doc/149776210/DPAC-Report-on-DWP-Abuse-of-Statistics-Final-22-June-2013 3) http://disabilitynewsservice.com/2013/08/ministers-silent-after-being-caught-pulling-lies-out-of-thin-air/ 4) Campaign for a Fair Society: how the cuts are targeting disabled people revealed the extent to which austerity is disproportionately impacting on disabled people with thanks to DPAC for the press release

Is society moving to the right?

This is a dangerous trap to fall into I’ve noticed. Given the recent anti immigrant rhetoric coming from all of the 3 major political parties and also the rise of UKIP in the polls and especially the last county council elections some on the left have drawn the conclusion society is moving sharply to the right. I don’t think this is the case and is a mistake to think so and follow the right ward shift of the mainstream political parties. The Tories, Labour and the lib dems think that to take on UKIP they must come out with even more policies that shift them to the right. Even New labour have come out in the last few weeks in support of a benefit cap and announcing further cuts they would make. Of course it is far easier ground for the labour party of today to move to the right than it would be to the left. A recent poll out in the guardian showed that labours supporters attitudes towards the poor have hardened in recent times this is no surprise given all they pump out is about strivers and skivers, how they made a mistake letting immigrants in to the country and failing to put any sort of alternative across tot e working class. But this mustn’t be mistaken for a shift in society to the right. I do still believe there are many people out there who are looking for an alternative, a genuine alterative from cuts, austerity and the misery of privatisation. Before the recent attack in Woolwich the likes of the EDL and the BNP were in all honesty on their knees struggling for support. It was a shot in their arm the attacks in Woolwich but the overall trend does not show that the EDL and the BNP are gaining support in fact quite the opposite. Falling into the media’s trap that the working class are mostly racists and work shy and lazy is something the left and more importantly socialists should look to avoid. We as Marxist have a long term perspective about the current system of capitalism we live under. The fact that it is in eternal decline in Brittan will produce those to look for an alterative and find the easiest way to blame something or more often than not someone. SO far the media and politicians have been very good in directing the anger and blame at other workers, the unemployed, the disabled, the elderly and other minorities in society in order to deflect blame from their own failing system which is now becoming a drag on society itself. What is missing though in my view is a mass workers party who have a media presence as they would be so big they couldn’t be ignored putting that alternative a socialist alternative for the working class and middle class as they are affected too. That this is a system based on the blind pursuit of profit and only that. Divide and rule is one of the oldest and most effective tactics in the ruling class book of tricks and up to now is working very ell. If we had a mass workers party putting forward the counter arguments to cuts, privatisation and racism in the media all the time in the newspapers and beyond we could start to see some of these lies that are pumped out on a daily basis start to be found out. Of course a new mass workers party would have to fight tooth and nail for airspace but with support of the trade unions this could be possible with funds to for campaigns to make people aware of the true extent of the crisis and how we need to change society. SO far this looks a pipe dream for many as most trade unions still fund a capitalist pro cuts labour party and any media opportunities for any sort of alternative like TUSC fin it incredibly hard to get any airtime at all. But things will change and as the crisis deepens workers will look for an alternative they will have no choice but to. We must guard against division, racism and any other sort of way of dividing us. We are workers first and foremost. If we look at things in terms of class every time things makeup more sense. Society isn’t turning to the right. Whilst it could do evidence wouldn’t suggest that the right is in the ascendancy. The Tories are falling in the polls and struggled to get near a majority in the last general election. UKIP are being carefully used by the media and the ruling class to tap the growing anger at the cuts down a blind alley of nationalism and racism. This will not wash once UKIP are found out. There is clearly a protest vote element in UKIP’s vote right now and we must not write off those who do vote UKIP for this reason. Instead we must patiently explain why UKIP are no alternative for workers and that a new mass workers party is still necessary as ever.

Voter’s attitudes towards the poor turning harder socialist alt needed

It is not a surprise to me really that the more scrounger, shirker, and benefit scrounging scum rhetoric that is pumped out that the more our social attitudes harden. It is now the case that56% of us now think unemployed people could find a job if they wanted one (up from 27% in 1993)” This sort of figure shows the entrenched ideas now that many people have. As the left has failed to give any real alternative and the labour party has to take much of the blame for this moving further and further to the right to in the last period in government it is no wonder people are hardening their attitudes to the poor. It is not uncommon now for someone struggling by receiving benefits be it in or out of work now detests those on benefits even though they themselves are on benefits too. It’s a mad set of ideas when you feel no empathy for someone in the same boat as yourselves now. Labour party supporters increasingly believe that welfare recipients are undeserving and that the welfare state encourages dependence, with a noticeable share saying that poverty is caused by a personal failing rather than a problem with society, a landmark study reveals. A report for the Joseph Rowntree Foundation examined the links between public attitudes to poverty, welfare and the state of the economy using data collected as part of the British Social Attitudes survey. It found that the traditional view that the poor were seen sympathetically during recessions has disappeared, with support for welfare "largely confined (to) recipients of unemployment benefits". The report says there is a "general trend" where the public accepts that individual characteristics rather than societal issues cause poverty. Most striking was that this change over the past 30 years can be put down to the shifting opinions of Labour voters. Just 27% of the country's leading left-wing party voters cite social injustice as the main cause of poverty, down from 41% during the height of Thatcherism back in 1986. During the same time Labour supporters blaming the individual rose from 13% to 22%. What the foundation seems to pinpoint is a major cultural shift. Almost half of Labour supporters – 47% – surveyed in 2011 said if benefits were not as generous, people would learn to stand on their own feet, up from 17% in 1987. Labour supporters also increasingly think that welfare recipients are undeserving – from 21% in 1987 to 31% in 2011. While the debates around welfare have shifted to the right, Labour supporters moved in greater numbers than those in other parties – with left-wing voters stressing personal agency and individual responsibility. However, there was marked public support for tackling child poverty – a key issue identified by the last Labour administration. In 2009, 82% viewed reducing child poverty as "very important", with almost three-quarters (74%) saying this is a task for government. Julia Unwind, Chief Executive of the foundation, said: "The stark findings of this report highlight the increasingly tough stance people are taking against people in poverty. We appear to be tough on those experiencing poverty, but not tough on its causes. "Reductions in pensioner and child poverty over the past 20 years show hardship is not inevitable. But the debate must go beyond a fixation with welfare and benefits tinkering – without jobs with proper wages and affordable housing and childcare, progress will hit the buffers. Charities demanded that policymakers must take into account the effect of a stagnating economy on the poor, rather than just following poll data. Will Higham, Save the Children UK Director, said: "Despite public attitudes seeming to harden in the past few years towards welfare the public are very clear that they want to see the government cut child poverty. Sixty percent of children growing up in poverty have at least one parent working. "Despite this, many families still struggle to afford basics with many children going without decent food, clothes and a warm home. Times are very tough right now for the poorest families and they need real tangible solutions such as a living wage if they are to escape poverty and the stigma that comes with it." For me this makes the need for a new works party on a mass scale being able to challenge this perception work to change the direction of the political debate. As socialists we may disagree with these polls but I’ve witnessed it with my own ears in local pubs and bars. It’s everywhere we look this sort of attitude. It is a direct legacy of Thatcher who told us we were all individuals and there was no such thing as society. Where in the past more would care these days we’re drummed into our heads to only think of ourselves and some quite frankly do unfortunately. We are starting from a long way back with attitudes like this but change can come and events will shift opinions. We must be there to challenge the right’s ideas wherever we can look to provide a socialist alternative to the problems we face today.