Too poor to play: UK children in social housing blocked from communal playground - Sensationalist Headlines

https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2019/mar/25/too-poor-to-play-children-in-social-housing-blocked-from-communal-playground At least one multimillion-pound housing development in London is segregating the children of less well-off tenants from those of wealthier homebuyers by blocking them from some communal play areas. Guardian Cities has discovered that developer Henley Homes has blocked social housing residents from using shared play spaces at its Baylis Old School complex on Lollard Street, south London. The development was required to include a mix of “affordable” and social rental units in order to gain planning permission. The situation is reminiscent of the ongoing “poor doors” controversy, where social housing residents are forced to use side doors to apartment blocks that also contain private flats. Henley Homes, the developer, said it was only responsible for the private and shared ownership buildings, and that it had handed the freehold of the Wren Mews social housing block to the Guinness Partnership, a social housing company. It said this is a standard practice when there are different tenures on one development.

Can we please just have a revolution or some shit, one like the French do.

But that would dismantle the structure of capital-centric oppression that I *just know* I'm going to be in the upper rungs of one day!

We keep trying, but Britons' unfortunate inability to maintain eye contact with authority figures without suffering an existential crisis is somewhat limiting. In all seriousness though, I don't know how we'd accomplish that. There were riots in London in 2011 and nothing good came of it. If anything, the results of those riots was more oppression and people criticising the poor to a great deal in the media.

How to raise children to be cynical, anarchistic antisocials:

Idk the riots were different to something like the gilets jaunes. The latter serves as much better and more targetted inspiration.

Perhaps, but the vandalism at the Arc De Triomphe [sic] did allow the government to smear them. I think we'd need an issue to rally around. Increased fuel costs is ubiquitous and it makes sense the French have risen up as a result, but poor people being treated badly is nothing new and a lot of people don't care in this country.

People need someone to actually rally around. Someone with genuine socialist ideals that's charismatic and not shit. Corbyn has the ideals but is so uncharismatic and is terrible with PR. The guy always manages to find himself photographed with some bad people or he lets Diane Abbott say or do something.

There's obviously some shady shit going on here to sneak things by planning and zoning and that's inexcusable oversight. However, let's play devil's advocate for a minute here. I don't necessarily see anything wrong with restricting use to people that are paying for accommodations. Playgrounds aren't free, and this is private property. If the town council, or whatever the British nomenclature is, isn't willing to pay whatever dues are required as part of their housing payments, why should those people be entitled to those services? You don't fix this by trying to strongarm developers. They're in it for money. If you make profits otherwise untenable, they'll engage in slumlord behavior. You fix this by actually having useful fucking social services instead of agencies that pay substantially below market rates for housing, while also offering free legal aide to tenants literally running meth labs.

How about we strongarm developers and if they resort to slumpord behavior legally punish them with justifiable reasons? Also your argument about agencies "offering free legal aid to tenants literally running meth labs" shows how much you generalize people who need aid and how little you know about real life.

"Now, this might look bad, but you have to remember: they are poor and can't produce profit. Also, they are probably doing crimes."

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/624/cpsprodpb/F690/production/_106202136_de27.jpg Wow how blatant

I feel like using hedges to physically mark borders between social classes is the most British thing I've seen yet

The 2011 riots was literally just a bunch of chavs who wanted to steal shit, pretty sure it was proven to be orchestrated by gangs. That's why nothing good came of it, there was no real political motive just assholes being assholes.

They took all your guns away in the '80s and '90s, so no.

Can't have a revolution without guns right?

Well it certainly makes it easier. Perhaps if the Brits ask nicely America could spare a few dozen million.

Armed revolt would end in complete and utter slaughter for the populace. This isn't the 1700s, we have armoured vehicles, aircraft, ballistic missiles, drones and countless other terrifying shit that would make mince meat out of any militia. We can only do revolutions the "peaceful" way now.

The government has tanks you say? So then why not buy your own?

Oh yeah I remember how the airplane was invented and immediately put an end to all violent revolutions forever

All the jets in the world didn't win Vietnam for the US. waging a war in an urban environment is far from the sure thing your post implies it would be.

I have no idea why Facepunch is so eager to wheel out the guillotines and charge guns-blazing, literally, at government officials every time anything happens. Government has already said they will look into this, and Henley Homes have apparently already done a u-turn on their decision; pressure by the media & public can do wonders. This is disgraceful, and it's sickening that there is still a (growing) divide between rich and poor in the modern day, but the problem definitely wouldn't be fixed by revolution of any kind.

Guerrilla victories against the US is impressive, no doubt. But we are talking about a completely different ball game when it comes to civil war. The US "lost" in the end because the government decided the war was not worth the cost and decided to leave on its own terms really. The UK government would be battling for it's survival with everything it's got. It wouldn't get bored or decide it's not worth it anymore. The fight would also not be 1000s of miles away, in unfamiliar territory, surrounded by alien cultures or languages with intense jungles that make it impossible to engage properly. The US army also had to hold back for various reasons while any government clinging to survive would be fighting real dirty. Yeah, we'll get our own tanks from Russia or China but we'll never ever be equal in terms of the homeland army. Not to mention NATO would come down on us like a sledge hammer. Guerrilla warfare would make sure the conflict lasts years but in the end the government would win with overwhelming quality on it's side. I mean, the Syrian army is utter shit and it's still winning, think about how one of the top NATO dogs would do, with some of the best training and commanders in the planet with state of the art technology.

This is just tip of the iceberg... Google "poor door" and you'll get tons of similar results.

Sorry mate were not planning to have the revolution in school corridors so we're not gonna need any American guns

You say that like everyone and their dog was running around with guns before the handgun ban. And while guns were more legal at one point, self defence hasn't been a valid reason for ownership since 1937

No clue why people are talking about a revolution, the government didn't approve this design. And while it doesn't explicitly say, it's pretty obvious they wouldn't have approved it if they felt the need to pull this bait and switch. Blame the property developer not the government.

Not really mate, owning a gun in the uk isn't as hard as people make it out to be, there are just much much stricter regulations on who is able to purchase a gun, what kind of gun you can own, how you should keep it secure, and what kind of thing you can actually use them for. Things that wouldn't really be relevant in the case of an armed revolution anyway. Sure we aren't allowed to shoot each other in self defence, but by the time citizens were in open revolt- everyone would be going to jail anyway if they didn't successfully overthrow the government. Honestly, it's less that all the guns got taken away and more that most people don't really seem interested in owning them. As a law abiding citizen, I could probably get hold of a shotgun licence in the next week or so if I really felt the inclination to do so. Shit, I'm tempted to join a shooting club and give it a go when I start making a bit more cash and can move into a place that I can actually install a bolted down safe into.

it is however an abstraction of the policy the conservatives have been pursuing since 2010. since thatcher even. this event is not some shocking out of place incident, it's entirely unsurprising and expected.