When and why did ED become so poncey?

[James]

I think that Peckham does have a great energy to it which comes from its multicultural mix. Compare it with a similarly poor predominantly white area like e.g. Downham and I know where I'd rather live!

What does worry me is the notion that all those churches are a good thing. One of them - the UCKG - is a particularly dubious organisation whose creator and self-appointed head is a millionaire South American businessman. These churches profit from the poor, peddling a cocktail of superstitions and virulent homophobia. They are fiercely judgmental, encouraging belief in both demons and miracles. Rather than binding communities, I think they are dividing us all even further.

[ghostlymaiden]

No offence James but the working class white community which has now flooded out of Peckham in vast numbers over recent years, would not agree with your sentiments on the multicultural mix of Peckham. There was no referendum on whether the local community wanted the vast changes brought about by immigration, and I notice a poorer part of town was picked to supply the social housing for the new communities wishing to settle in London. The slightly wealthier folk living in the more affluent parts of the country do not have vast areas of social housing near them and therefore do not experience the dramatic changes we have to experience in poorer areas, which in turn leads to working class white people being accused of Racism. Downham may well be a boring place, but at least it does not have major issues with guns drugs and knives, and equally isnt flooded with Chrstian extremism in the form of evangelical African churches. I know where i'd rather be if I had a choice!

[Louisa]

Sean i've never been inside 72 but i've looked in from the outside and i'd say the long beards and scruffy appearance of most of the student types who venture in would make it almost impossible to do racial profiling :)

[pk]

ghostlymaiden Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> There was no referendum on whether the

> local community wanted the vast changes brought

> about by immigration

so you want a right to vote on who your neighbours are?

(presumbaly will vote against them if they're are foreign)

[dungdag]

I've lived in and around East Dulwich for 20 years since I came to study at Goldsmiths' College. In that time I've seen East Dulwich, Peckham and Camberwell go up, down and up again.

I don't really think East Dulwich is any more poncey than is was in 1987 - I lived on Upland Road just round the corner from a fabulous deli that later closed down and became something like Premiere Plant Hire. Marks and Spensers had a store on Rye Lane in those days and now we've begging for a Simply Food to come to LL.

We used to hang out in the Magdala and the Palmerston before they became very run down and then gentrified once again. The only significant changes I've noticed are house prices (I could have bought a flat in Peckham for ?30k in 1987), traffic which is now almost unbearable, but on a more positive note Sainsburys and that North Peckham has changed massively for the better due to huge amounts of government regeneration.

[Michael Palaeologus]

I dont see an influx of Africans as a bad thing. If there was an outflux of the working class white-people it was because they didnt want to live in Peckham, if they had satyed then the new populations would have gone elsewhere. The outflow of the white working class left empty and cheap housing that the immigrant population could afford.

These "dirty" shops are just different, they are not Sainsbury's or Tescos admittedly, but then why should they be? There is no need to be sniffy about difference and diversity.

The British isles has always been subject to immigration and every wave of immigrants has generared a moral panic amongst the indigenous population that have forgotten that they were at some point immigrants themselves (whether Vikings, Angles, Saxons, Romans (of all colours), Huguenots, Jews, West Indians, Ugandan Asians, Asians, Vietnamese, Africans, etc).

I am quite happy in my nice middle class flat in middle class East Dulwich. I have no wish to live in Peckham. I am an atheist and have no wish to go to evangelical churches. BUT I dont resent the presence of the new populations of Peckham and the fact that demographic has changed is simply a sign of the times. In 50 years time it will have changed again.

[Keef]

pk, I don't think that's fair to Ghostlymaiden. As far as I can see, she (?) has made no comment to suggest that she's a racist, or that she doesn't like anyone from other countries.

For my part, I think Peckham has turned in to a complete sh!t hole, Rye Lane does stink, and North Peckham has always been somewhere you didn't want to be on a Friday night! This is a real shame, because I remember it being really nice when I was a kid.

[Keef]

Michael Palaeologus Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I am quite happy in my nice middle class flat in

> middle class East Dulwich. I have no wish to live

> in Peckham.

Then your opinion is obviously going to differ slightly from that of someone from Peckham.

[pk]

Keef Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> pk, I don't think that's fair to Ghostlymaiden. As

> far as I can see, she (?) has made no comment to

> suggest that she's a racist, or that she doesn't

> like anyone from other countries.

>

> For my part, I think Peckham has turned in to a

> complete sh!t hole, Rye Lane does stink, and North

> Peckham has always been somewhere you didn't want

> to be on a Friday night! This is a real shame,

> because I remember it being really nice when I was

> a kid.

it's not fair to ask a question (when i really don't understand the reference to any referundum, it seems ridiculous)?

and i think that it's certainly implied that some of the white residents are not happy about the 'multicultural mix'(and i think a suggestion that she might agree)

[Brendan]

I think she was referring more to the fact that already crowded inner city working class areas were earmarked for more social housing rather than more affluent areas where there was possibly more space available.

[SeanMacGabhann]

I would say that ghostlymaiden (love the name btw!) 's comment

"There was no referendum on whether the local community wanted the vast changes brought about by immigration, and I notice a poorer part of town was picked to supply the social housing for the new communities wishing to settle in London. "

is slightly odd in that at no point ever, anywhere, has a referendum been held about immigration. And quite rightly so. If UK residents stop emigrating then they can have a genuine claim to oppose immigration. Until the however...

And poorer places in town is always where economic immigrants land - that's the nature of the beast. Would it be cheaper for them or government to house them in Chelsea?

Like many people living in a middle-class bubble I can be accused of turning a blind eye to various things but I really do not like the thought of people "upping sticks" just because some "others" have arrived. As an arrivee (not a real word.. I know) in this country within months of "No Blacks No Dogs No Irish" signs still visible in windows I have a real gut-level distaste for any kind of prejudice.

The hostel at the top of Barry Rd houses immigrants from many different countrys and they are often to be found outside shooting the breeze, having a smoke etc. They always seem shocked when I bother to nod and say hi so heaven knows what kind of response they usually get.

As for Downham v Peckham as a place to live - Peckham every time. It's near ED innit... ;-)

[TimJM]

To suggest that 'ghostlymaiden's arguments are not racist is ridiculous.

Immigration, according to some of the comments on this board, has supposedly resulted in crime, filth, smelly shops, an exodus of the white community and an inability of health inspectors to curb infringements because of timidity in the face of accusations of racism.

If you want fear from crime look at some of the poor white class communities. And if you want referendums should other countries in other parts of the world (Spain for instance) be balloted about the hordes of drunken English tourists? Then we should move on to whether generations of UK troops were welcomed with 'ballots' around the world.

The arguments about immigrant communities is repeated for every successive generation of Londoners.

Frankly the exodus of people like 'ghostlymaiden' is something I greatly rejoice in (unfortunately you all seem to end up in far more dangerous suburbs with ominous numbers of English flags and swastikas). Personally if I can encourage more Africans to East Dulwich to encourage the racists to flee then I will.

[Keef]

See I disagree... I agree whole heatedly with Sean's post. However, I also believe that "timidity in the face of accusations of racism" is something that does exist... I guess it's a question of what you call racist.

Areas like Peckham were traditionally inhabited by a lot of people that would live in council housing, and then move out of their family house in to a council place of their own. This isn't the case anymore because there aren't enough houses. Someone feeling bitter about that and commenting at all the houses go to immigrants... A racist? I'm not so sure.

I work for a local authority, and have dealings with asylum teams, and housing teams, and there is a huge demand for housing from asylum seekers, and there is a great deal of bitterness about it (not just from white people I hasten to add).

Now, I can see why Ghostlymaidens post would raise some eyebrows, but frankly, to assume that this person is the type to hang up and England flag and a swastika is the most inappropriate prejudiced generalisation I have seen in this thread!

If they are that type, I take all that back, and would be the first to throw things at them!

[SeanMacGabhann]

to be clear I am not accusing Ghostlymaiden of racism - just the paragraph in question didn't quite fit

If someone is bitter about the lack of housing then I would understand that - but to then make the leap and claim "they are all going to immigrants" - well if it's not racist, it's neither factually correct nor suggestive of warm relations

I have listened to too many London phone-ins (I know I know) where people bitterly resent the fact that instead of getting another council property, their son/daughter was "forced" into the private market. Not proud of the fact that finally one of the family was doing well enough to afford the ridiculous cost of property but resentful. I don't understand that mentality I'm afraid. Getting your own place, even if it's a tiny bedsit which takes a disproportionate amount of your wage should be part of an adult's make-up. Hasn't this always been the case? People are reluctant to even house-share these days, citing expensive market conditions but ignoring the fact that most of us had to do it for years

[Michael Palaeologus]

Plough through Peter Ackroyds' book "London the Biography" - this debate has been going on for 2000 years or more.

[SeanMacGabhann]

"Plough" through??? I skipped through it - tis a wonderful book

[Keef]

Sean, that's a bloody good point, there is far too much of an "I deserve a council house" mentality, and I know people that have told me proudly about how they plan to scam the council in to giving them a house... I tend to smile politely because I don't like getting my head kicked in, but I have to admit I do think to myself "why don't you just pay proper rent like the ret of us".

"If someone is bitter about the lack of housing then I would understand that - but to then make the leap and claim "they are all going to immigrants" - well if it's not racist, it's neither factually correct nor suggestive of warm relations"

Again, agree completely, and don't agree with this type of feeling, I just don't think it's racist as such.

[citizenED]

The "being-accused-of-Racism" debate is always such a sensitive one. You can tell by some of the comments on this reasonably well balanced thread that people are overly concerned of such an accusation being levelled at them. Obviously it is a matter of degree but racism can be overt or covert. I always felt that the covert type was what McPherson talked about in the Lawrence enquiry when he said that the police force was institutionally racist. When a white person moves from an area because changes are occuring, it might not simply be that they see a black family move in a few doors down and therefore pack their bags. It might be because one of their friends had passed away, a neighbour moved out (to live nearer their family), the local pub was given a make-over and now had a loud jukebox and gradually there were more folks on the street in the evenings. In time there was less to stay around for. White flight. It is surely unfair to say that everyone who moved was a racist. If it is understandable for immigrant populations to group together then it is almost equally understandable for the "host" communities to do likewise.

citizen

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

Damn, where do I start??

Immigration is fuelled by poverty and lack of choice in the area the immigrant comes from. I was told the same "taking our jobs/housing" stuff when I came to London from Merseyside in the 80's.

Capital is allowed to flow freely from poor countries to the west when multinational corporations exploit the ever-cheaper labour of unregulated labour markets and raw commodities then sell their goods in the west at a premium.

Although capital and goods are allowed to flow freely around the globe, people are not. When western corporations exploit a countries resources there is a net loss in that country and a net gain in the west, leaving poor countries poorer.

When the people of these poor countries try to fight to install leaders who might represent their interests, western armed forces, especially the USA's, implement regime change to ensure continued access to the poor countries resources for the corporations.

The special problems Africa faces above and beyond this, go back to the days of slavery, when the west stole millions of their healthy young men and left many areas under-populated, hugely setting back development, while the west benefited from free labour and was able to out compete all other areas for a long time.

This is without going into all the western produced civil wars, that make our arms dealers rich.

If I was living in abject poverty, with no chance of changing things politically in my home country, and knowing the west had got fat at my expense, I might be tempted to risk death to try to get to the 'promised land' but I'd probably want to go back home if it ended up being Peckham!

[mockney piers]

CWALD I hate to go off topic, but paragraph 5 was somewhat inaccurate, and I'm a terribly annoying pedant, especially when it comes to history.

Research has shown (though obviously much is based on extrapolation as there were hardly censuses taken) that the population of Africa during the 200+ years of slavery remained more or less static during this period. There were certainly some localised examples of depopulation in some parts of west Africa, but by and large slavery didn't have a dramatic effect on the overall demographics of the continent.

Europe's population exploded during the same period, but mostly post enlightenment and particularly with industrialisation, neither of which were a facet of the African experience.

This isn't to belittle the desperately immoral slave trade, it's effects on individuals, families and tribes, but it is not the root of Africa's problems.

These aren't even necessarily the consequences of colonialism, which could in many ways be as constructive as it was rapacious. Your first two paragraphs are much closer to the money. It's about the west ensuring that the ruling classes maintain a complete open door policy through any means possible. For the most part endemic corruption fostered by bribes and slush funds from western corporations and governments, and when this fails encouraging instability in order to install a more pliable regime. Of course the leaders don't *have* to do this (we just make it oh so easy for them), so they [the leaders] really have to take some of the responsibility themselves.

Direct intervention has occurred in S. America and Asia, but there's not been a whole lot of it in Africa; I think the euphemism for what we (mainly Britain and France, particularly France) does there is gunboat diplomacy.

[Brendan]

As someone who comes from Africa I?m pretty certain that the current problems Sub-Saharan Africa has are more as a result of it being used a political chess board during the cold war.

The current western exploitation of mineral wealth doesn?t help much either. Although the jury is still out over whether the relative benefits and employment this brings are worth it.

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

Mockney - My sources

Hakim Adi, ?200 Years: The Fight Against Slavery?, Amnesty Magazine, March/April 2007, Amnesty International, London

Kofi Mawuli Klu, ?Reparation: is this Payback Time??, Amnesty Magazine, March/April 2007, Amnesty International, London

They might be online here - http://amnesty.winonaesolutions.net/content.asp?CategoryID=10768

[mockney piers]

I shall have a read. I can't for the life of me remember my sources. I was even terrible at that in my degree!!

Brendan, yes and no. The cold war was essentially a dangerous framework/backdrop for a struggle for control of resources, so you're spot on and not quite there at the same time.

Mind you absolutely right for poor old Angola.

[*Bob*]

Of course, Amnesty is a pressure group, not a historical periodical..

[ChavWivaLawDegree]

But their research is highly regarded and is accepted as evidence in the Immigration law courts and the Court of Appeal.

Hakim Adi is a senior lecturer at Middlesex University

and Kofi Mawuli Klu is a visiting lecturer