Blah blah blah, I had started rambling about capitalism again. It's all a boy can do in these times of excessive control. Once upon a time people were (they weren't) happy to get a good (it wasn't) job and have enough to fund home and hearth.
Those days are gone. Now it's not even enough to aspire to your Dre Beats, your 'sweet kicks', or a coat with a tick on the back. Now you have to become someone else. You have to live a life you couldn't possibly. This is self destruction sold to us with sugar coated profit driven nihilism. The end of the world will be the taste of ice cream, and the sound will be artificial crunch of the Magnum lolly model as she cracks the choco-crust in the advert world. Have you seen the price of those things? The joke's not on the stick, it's on the viewer. The fucking price of those things!
Ahem.
On Saturday the latest directive from the office of Meine Herren McVey, Fuhrer, for now, of the Ministry of Misery we otherwise disingenuously call the DWP. Another work focused interview has been scheduled for yours truly lunchtime on the 6th of July. How kind. Oh what it is to be remembered.
Meanwhile my email of 11 days ago to the useless advisers at Team North Somerset (I name thee!) has merited no response as yet. These are exactly the sort of people the DWP will no doubt recommend as a positive influence. Should I point out that the truth is otherwise? That won't go down well. The failings can't be theirs, they are professionals. They are here to help ergo it must be...YOU (that is, me).
That is how class works. They are the experts, I am not. I am the patient. I am impatient.
We don't have a free and equal society, we have a rigid hierarchy that asserts itself everywhere. In this case I will not be taken seriously, much as I wasn't by the mental health 'experts' I had relied on to offer a diagnosis. An outcome that, whenever I mention it to people like Team North Somerset, I'm told that it would be pointless anyway.
How helpful.
So once again the fear appears. The thought of a journey to the DWP's latest Mountain of Doom (the last one was of course shut by the government), having to be in that place, to sit and wait in some oppressive cloister, is palpable.
Keep the ring Frodo, you'll need it to pawn for food money. Sauron runs a charity shop or a Pound store these days. He doesn't have time for world domination. There's no money in jewellery these days.
It is a unique fear; to others who don't understand they will point to people in worse situations (of which there are sadly many, it's no comfort). They do this because society conditions us to dismiss the problems of others lest they remind us of our own and show us a common cause. That we might work together against them, because that is the only real and lasting solution to this wrecked society.
It is about the loss of control, the loss of self; the curtailment of the right to live through economic force. Numbers are swung like swords, against themselves. Numbers are also the only shield. Whether you would live or die sans food clothing shelter....medicine!...that is of no consequence to the master of coin and digit. Am I a productive little boy? Am I prepared to tug the forelock to the unwise and the unqualified who, by deign of birth, enact a system of oppression and invisible violence. Do I not matter? I'm only good for taking the x7 to Mordor; the ticket might be redeemable at the Black Gate.
If that sounds convoluted then you might just understand the nature of that fear. It is the screaming sound a soul makes when it sees the chains that come for it. The intrinsic ineffable quality of what makes life worthwhile being shackled by so mundane a thing as economics. We have no intrinsic value. How many times do you hear people say: you must pay your way - no such thing as a free lunch - beggars can't be choosers?
These aren't axioms but they are treated as such. They are the norms we take for granted, but they only have power because the working class are divided.
And yet the truth is the bluster of coercion is all this system can offer. Between the implied threats, buried like the dead with a smile under the foundations, is..? They can't manufacture work, never mind anything of value. Their databases open like Russian dolls; fractal job opportunities that unfold into each other to reveal only endless data fishing scams dressed as agencies. A hall of mirrors that reflect the ugliness of the corporate world that demands of you more than you can give. It wants not just your time, but your soul: you must give of yourself willingly in the worst way - you must be a team player. It's almost pornographic.
I can't do this. I can't fit into the shape of that world. If I do not attend I starve. If I do attend I struggle. This is Britain in 2018. It has no room for people with mental health issues. It has no capacity to understand why that dichotomy is true and unacceptable. Help given - forced - on those terms is not help. It is bullying.
Monday, 18 June 2018
Thursday, 24 May 2018
Voluntary?
I feel like I'm probably repeating myself. In fact I'm entirely sure I have anything to talk about, which is, sort of, the problem.
Once again the lack of support is just deafening. Blinding.
In fact this situation is normalised to such an extent that the people who have undertaken (largely for profit) the responsibility to provide support are so ill equipped and so bereft that instead of addressing why, the client is held responsible.
As I've said before: gaslighting. Likely not intentionally, does it matter?
In fact, intent is important because it tells us those committing that behaviour just don't know better. That's a problem.
If they don't know why things are as they are (hint: capitalism) how can they possibly help? That's why gaslighting exists: they know they can't help, they know they have precious little to offer. Consequently their only recourse is to impugn the client. Intransigence: you don't want to be helped, you are resistant, you are "not engaging". You, not them. Never them, no matter how charmingly put.
I could understand if I had refused to take up services (colour therapy for instance), or if my ambitions were hopelessly outlandish - I want to be a premier league footballer or an astronaut!
Last time we spoke, now months ago (I've had just two appointments this year), I told to the adviser I was interested in writing; that I also liked music (which can encompass many things, not just some X Factor fantasy bollocks). She already knew of my interest in social justice/politics and that being involved in a good cause with good people (admittedly hopelessly vague, but important) would be positive. All a waste of time. They have nothing to offer other than a room full of computers.
So far the only thing that they have had to offer was to use the local voluntary work database. But what good is unpaid work? There is such a thing as Permitted Work: Under DWP rules, one can work a certain amount and keep one's earnings while still claiming sickness benefits.
Fat chance. Once you sign that form you surely sabotage any claim for ESA. The DWP will have a record (literally) stating that you are working. How can that square with a claim otherwise? An appeal to people who look for any reason to deny that claim. Another example of the perverse counter-intuitive incentives that exist in this ridiculous system. Who would dare take that chance?
While voluntary work is great and wonderful, people shouldn't be compelled into anything they are not comfortable with - just because it's voluntary. Quite honestly I feel that voluntary work is used as a stick - do it or else. Maybe because it seems 'easier', to find voluntary work - and of course the unemployed (for whatever reason) should be doing something. So by refusing such a 'noble' way to spend your time, you are doubly feckless!
All part of the current neoliberal paradigm: regardless how you actually occupy your time, you are still idling if it's not earning a wage. That is to say, if it isn't producing profit (since that is how profit is created).
Where once voluntary work might have been a genuinely social positive, for those so inclined. It's now another tool to be used against us - and the third sector is far from unprofitable!
They don't care about what you might actually be doing, or about finding something genuinely positive. Just get your arse down to your local charity shop and sort someone's old clobber and castoffs. Then you'd be doing something useful and we can forget about you, ticking the 'support' box.
Is this really good enough? You aren't being paid for it. How then do you live? You are being compelled for the sake of 'idle hands' yet you are no better off in any practical way at least. Sure it may have a more ephemeral benefit, but then it may not. Also, it has to be said, within a capitalist economy, there is no ethical consumerism; working in a charity shop, for example, is going to enable that charity - as a business - to profit. Rightly or wrongly, and regardless of the ethics of the cause, that is what is happening.
That's how capitalism works. A charity shop to can't survive unless it makes a profit. So the only staff getting paid are the managers the rest are volunteers. A whole culture has been built around this - for better or worse - and the danger is that it blinds people to the reality. Why is this a problem: because it distracts from the real problem.... the prevailing economics.
Capitalism.
I've worked in a charity shop before, it wasn't a glamorous job. It shouldn't be romanticised. It was somewhat boring - isn't most retail? Is charity a justification? We shouldn't need charity - we live in a world of plenty.
The staff were good people, including the manager. But the experience was largely meaningless: shopping that around on my CV was worthless. Prospective employers never never seemed to value that kind of experience; not compared to 'genuine' experience held by rival candidates.
Do voluntary work because you care about the cause and want to help out, or for a genuine personal reason.
Don't do it because you fell pressured by systemic propaganda from agents of a system who should know better.
Don't do it because the alternative is to make you feel worthless or even more so. This is wrong.
The agency I'm a client of (a terrible word) should know better. They weren't forced into this role. They set themselves up, with public (EU - ho ho Brexit!) funding. They should have the resources, and - frankly - the talent. That the best they can do is guilt trip you into using a freely available voluntary work website is pretty pathetic I think.
Once again the lack of support is just deafening. Blinding.
In fact this situation is normalised to such an extent that the people who have undertaken (largely for profit) the responsibility to provide support are so ill equipped and so bereft that instead of addressing why, the client is held responsible.
As I've said before: gaslighting. Likely not intentionally, does it matter?
In fact, intent is important because it tells us those committing that behaviour just don't know better. That's a problem.
If they don't know why things are as they are (hint: capitalism) how can they possibly help? That's why gaslighting exists: they know they can't help, they know they have precious little to offer. Consequently their only recourse is to impugn the client. Intransigence: you don't want to be helped, you are resistant, you are "not engaging". You, not them. Never them, no matter how charmingly put.
I could understand if I had refused to take up services (colour therapy for instance), or if my ambitions were hopelessly outlandish - I want to be a premier league footballer or an astronaut!
Last time we spoke, now months ago (I've had just two appointments this year), I told to the adviser I was interested in writing; that I also liked music (which can encompass many things, not just some X Factor fantasy bollocks). She already knew of my interest in social justice/politics and that being involved in a good cause with good people (admittedly hopelessly vague, but important) would be positive. All a waste of time. They have nothing to offer other than a room full of computers.
So far the only thing that they have had to offer was to use the local voluntary work database. But what good is unpaid work? There is such a thing as Permitted Work: Under DWP rules, one can work a certain amount and keep one's earnings while still claiming sickness benefits.
Fat chance. Once you sign that form you surely sabotage any claim for ESA. The DWP will have a record (literally) stating that you are working. How can that square with a claim otherwise? An appeal to people who look for any reason to deny that claim. Another example of the perverse counter-intuitive incentives that exist in this ridiculous system. Who would dare take that chance?
While voluntary work is great and wonderful, people shouldn't be compelled into anything they are not comfortable with - just because it's voluntary. Quite honestly I feel that voluntary work is used as a stick - do it or else. Maybe because it seems 'easier', to find voluntary work - and of course the unemployed (for whatever reason) should be doing something. So by refusing such a 'noble' way to spend your time, you are doubly feckless!
All part of the current neoliberal paradigm: regardless how you actually occupy your time, you are still idling if it's not earning a wage. That is to say, if it isn't producing profit (since that is how profit is created).
Where once voluntary work might have been a genuinely social positive, for those so inclined. It's now another tool to be used against us - and the third sector is far from unprofitable!
They don't care about what you might actually be doing, or about finding something genuinely positive. Just get your arse down to your local charity shop and sort someone's old clobber and castoffs. Then you'd be doing something useful and we can forget about you, ticking the 'support' box.
Is this really good enough? You aren't being paid for it. How then do you live? You are being compelled for the sake of 'idle hands' yet you are no better off in any practical way at least. Sure it may have a more ephemeral benefit, but then it may not. Also, it has to be said, within a capitalist economy, there is no ethical consumerism; working in a charity shop, for example, is going to enable that charity - as a business - to profit. Rightly or wrongly, and regardless of the ethics of the cause, that is what is happening.
That's how capitalism works. A charity shop to can't survive unless it makes a profit. So the only staff getting paid are the managers the rest are volunteers. A whole culture has been built around this - for better or worse - and the danger is that it blinds people to the reality. Why is this a problem: because it distracts from the real problem.... the prevailing economics.
Capitalism.
I've worked in a charity shop before, it wasn't a glamorous job. It shouldn't be romanticised. It was somewhat boring - isn't most retail? Is charity a justification? We shouldn't need charity - we live in a world of plenty.
The staff were good people, including the manager. But the experience was largely meaningless: shopping that around on my CV was worthless. Prospective employers never never seemed to value that kind of experience; not compared to 'genuine' experience held by rival candidates.
Do voluntary work because you care about the cause and want to help out, or for a genuine personal reason.
Don't do it because you fell pressured by systemic propaganda from agents of a system who should know better.
Don't do it because the alternative is to make you feel worthless or even more so. This is wrong.
The agency I'm a client of (a terrible word) should know better. They weren't forced into this role. They set themselves up, with public (EU - ho ho Brexit!) funding. They should have the resources, and - frankly - the talent. That the best they can do is guilt trip you into using a freely available voluntary work website is pretty pathetic I think.
Saturday, 5 May 2018
Saturday Bonus: The Gentleman's Guide To Free Speech and Pug Etiquette
If you say something that is unarguably contentious or provocative you must accept the consequences for that.
If you cannot justify a context for such speech then by default that speech is intended to offend and I question the value of such vacuous speech.
If you are simply out to cause offence then you are sowing division, particularly in the case of a racially motivated call to genocidal violence.
Therefore I assert that a community should have the right to rule on issues of free speech. This authority should come from the community and be directly answerable to the community, and not come from a top down hierarchical structure - i.e. a state.
The notion of free speech, per se, is meaningless. Humans exist socially, cheek by jowl, as communal animals. What we say is broadcast, whether directly or electronically, and thus impacts our neighbours and their neighbours. Thus to argue that speech should be free is no different than arguing I should be able to slap or punch you without consequence.
A case must be made for the speech in question. As communal animals our morals and rights are arrived at continuously through sustained conversation dialogue and agreement. This conversation cannot be maintained in the presence of unjustified hierarchical structures and authorities. If you assert the right to speak freely, I assert the right to impose consequences: to be offended and to impose or impart the consequences thereof (shame, for instance) upon you.
The idea that one cannot ever offend, that offensiveness is only perceived or taken, is arrant nonsense. Clearly I can intend offence with a particular statement: I can make a call for racial genocide to a person of said race and intend that person to be hurt or affected and traduced as a result. In response is he not free to give form to his displeasure? If not then we give up all pretence of rights laws and justice. Words, like actions, have consequences. Words give rise to actions.
"Free Speech" has become a shrill flag waved by a desperate, mainly online, community who wants to be taken seriously in public discourse. They appeal to a reductionist social dynamic that contends everyone is entitled to a seat at the table. What they actually advocate, surreptitiously flown in under the radar of "freeze peach", is enough to disqualify them. Why?
Because fascism - white supremacy, misogyny, homophobia and racism in general - is anathema to a functioning society. This is the paradox of freedom: there is no universal freedom for all. Where we bump shoulders against each other, as a communal beast, we must negotiate what's right. The idea of free speech is important, the reality of granting it to fascists is unreasonable.
They argue that everyone should be heard because they want a seat at the table, all the while advocating views that, are not only repugnant and destructive, but have already been defeated.
The conversation with and about fascists has already been had - including at gunpoint. There is no good argument for white supremacy, misogyny, homophobia and racism in general. We've had this conversation and we must not let those who think these things are acceptable take an inch on this.
But the internet makes this difficult. Now any keyboard warrior can be the equal of Chomsky by learning how and uploading basement invective with the merest nod to facts evidence or understanding. Then they can appeal to the confused bedraggled and misunderstood of this world who will fund their program of easy answers and simple explanations by giving them a monthly stipend in the thousands (if they're lucky) on Patreon. Those who administer that service seem to care little who they are enabling. Fascism is ok if it follows the rules? That's just an appeal to authority.
So when some wingnut from Scotland uploads a 'comedy' video where he repeatedly says "gas the jews" to a dog, we are meant to laugh, not be disgusted that someone thinks reaching for, of all things, that phrase, is acceptable. Because free speech innit. Comedy knows no bounds. Bollocks. Good comedy makes a point.
I refer to the case of Mark "Count Dankula" Meechan and his comedy racist dog.
And when you aren't a million miles away from people who do genuinely hold that view, you can't be surprised when people impugn your character.
It isn't a free speech issue when you seek, however misguidedly, to abuse it, and then claim it was meant as a private joke (uploaded on a private platform then later defended as a deliberate attempt to shock or offend).
There is no positive aspect to the phrase "gas the jews". It has only one connotation and only one, gruesome, historical context. To say it once might be forgivable - I don't think this guy should spend the rest of his days staring through bars - but to repeatedly say it with abandon and then argue, in his defence, that he should be able to say this consequence free is so childish as to be laughable.
But don't worry, gentle reader, those same people, the ones he isn't a million miles away from are happy to pay his legal bill in appealing a fine (a fine that, given what he's accrued thus far from said donors, he could have paid ten times over and just gotten on with his ridiculous life).
What these far right scumbags want isn't free speech, it's legitimisation. This is not a slippery slope fallacy to say: giving them that is the first step in the real curtailment of freedom. Maybe not for you, or me, right now, but in time. But certainly, initially, for a significant number of human beings, targets of their persecution based on ignorance sown by their ability to proliferate their views online.
If you cannot justify a context for such speech then by default that speech is intended to offend and I question the value of such vacuous speech.
If you are simply out to cause offence then you are sowing division, particularly in the case of a racially motivated call to genocidal violence.
Therefore I assert that a community should have the right to rule on issues of free speech. This authority should come from the community and be directly answerable to the community, and not come from a top down hierarchical structure - i.e. a state.
The notion of free speech, per se, is meaningless. Humans exist socially, cheek by jowl, as communal animals. What we say is broadcast, whether directly or electronically, and thus impacts our neighbours and their neighbours. Thus to argue that speech should be free is no different than arguing I should be able to slap or punch you without consequence.
A case must be made for the speech in question. As communal animals our morals and rights are arrived at continuously through sustained conversation dialogue and agreement. This conversation cannot be maintained in the presence of unjustified hierarchical structures and authorities. If you assert the right to speak freely, I assert the right to impose consequences: to be offended and to impose or impart the consequences thereof (shame, for instance) upon you.
The idea that one cannot ever offend, that offensiveness is only perceived or taken, is arrant nonsense. Clearly I can intend offence with a particular statement: I can make a call for racial genocide to a person of said race and intend that person to be hurt or affected and traduced as a result. In response is he not free to give form to his displeasure? If not then we give up all pretence of rights laws and justice. Words, like actions, have consequences. Words give rise to actions.
"Free Speech" has become a shrill flag waved by a desperate, mainly online, community who wants to be taken seriously in public discourse. They appeal to a reductionist social dynamic that contends everyone is entitled to a seat at the table. What they actually advocate, surreptitiously flown in under the radar of "freeze peach", is enough to disqualify them. Why?
Because fascism - white supremacy, misogyny, homophobia and racism in general - is anathema to a functioning society. This is the paradox of freedom: there is no universal freedom for all. Where we bump shoulders against each other, as a communal beast, we must negotiate what's right. The idea of free speech is important, the reality of granting it to fascists is unreasonable.
They argue that everyone should be heard because they want a seat at the table, all the while advocating views that, are not only repugnant and destructive, but have already been defeated.
The conversation with and about fascists has already been had - including at gunpoint. There is no good argument for white supremacy, misogyny, homophobia and racism in general. We've had this conversation and we must not let those who think these things are acceptable take an inch on this.
But the internet makes this difficult. Now any keyboard warrior can be the equal of Chomsky by learning how and uploading basement invective with the merest nod to facts evidence or understanding. Then they can appeal to the confused bedraggled and misunderstood of this world who will fund their program of easy answers and simple explanations by giving them a monthly stipend in the thousands (if they're lucky) on Patreon. Those who administer that service seem to care little who they are enabling. Fascism is ok if it follows the rules? That's just an appeal to authority.
So when some wingnut from Scotland uploads a 'comedy' video where he repeatedly says "gas the jews" to a dog, we are meant to laugh, not be disgusted that someone thinks reaching for, of all things, that phrase, is acceptable. Because free speech innit. Comedy knows no bounds. Bollocks. Good comedy makes a point.
I refer to the case of Mark "Count Dankula" Meechan and his comedy racist dog.
And when you aren't a million miles away from people who do genuinely hold that view, you can't be surprised when people impugn your character.
It isn't a free speech issue when you seek, however misguidedly, to abuse it, and then claim it was meant as a private joke (uploaded on a private platform then later defended as a deliberate attempt to shock or offend).
There is no positive aspect to the phrase "gas the jews". It has only one connotation and only one, gruesome, historical context. To say it once might be forgivable - I don't think this guy should spend the rest of his days staring through bars - but to repeatedly say it with abandon and then argue, in his defence, that he should be able to say this consequence free is so childish as to be laughable.
But don't worry, gentle reader, those same people, the ones he isn't a million miles away from are happy to pay his legal bill in appealing a fine (a fine that, given what he's accrued thus far from said donors, he could have paid ten times over and just gotten on with his ridiculous life).
What these far right scumbags want isn't free speech, it's legitimisation. This is not a slippery slope fallacy to say: giving them that is the first step in the real curtailment of freedom. Maybe not for you, or me, right now, but in time. But certainly, initially, for a significant number of human beings, targets of their persecution based on ignorance sown by their ability to proliferate their views online.
Son of the Return of Everyday Capitalism - Agoraphobia
You'd think food shopping would be one of the most innocuous innocent, perhaps even friendly, experiences in modern life.
You'd be forgiven for thinking that the vast emporia of corporate power that house the supplies we need to live on were any of those things.
Instead they are miniature warzones where we triage ourselves so as to be present for as short a time as possible. A bit like life really.
We subject ourselves to food hidden behind layers of propaganda. We allow, though not by choice, big businesses to push their agenda at the risk of our own health. We are encouraged to want what we don't need and buy more of it.
In fact we are so encouraged that these corporations have to divert their profits into hiring working class sympathisers as security. Think about that: we don't get access to food without the threat of punishment, if we violate the property rights asserted, forcibly, by the owner class. That's food! Meanwhile the need to maximise profit is such that the precariat paid to serve you is replaced by those self service machines. This is called innovation: an artifice of politeness designed to replace people's jobs. Violence clothed in programmed politeness and bagging anomalies.
Capitalism grants power for that ownership class to protect their profits from the threat of force initiated by those that need to eat - the rest of us, in other words! Think about that; that is the world we have wrought.
How does that not traumatise people? What is the effect of this environment on us. I said that shopping should be innocent and friendly. We aren't meant to be agoraphobic; we are meant to be social and communal animals. What then does it say about the agora when it's a high pressure environment guarded by our own used against us if we are impolite enough to need what we cannot pay for? Does survival not trump profits?
How have we allowed supermarkets to own the things we need to live on?
But wait, I say, it gets worse (or just as bad but in different ways!) - those of us on low incomes find that everything costs more. Something innocuous and friendly becomes fraught in different ways: bus fares are such that you need to remember to buy all you need at once or it will cost you more. The poor spend the most as a percentage of their income; in effect they are the drivers of the economy. Yet there is nothing to support them in so doing. Bus fares are the same no matter who you are, forget to buy what you need and you have to make another trip.
Even something as simple as fares for public transport are all part of the system. Ever wonder why it isn't the norm for employers to pay for worker transport costs? They should: it's part of the cost required for them to do the labour you need doing. But that would eat into their profits. Not only that, but workers (especially the unemployed) are given no concessions.
This is why I call this everyday capitalism. We take it all or granted, and yet all of this informs an increasingly hostile environment. Is it any wonder we end up at each other's throats: divide and rule, family break up, etc.
It's the drip drip destructive drip of everyday capitalism.
You'd be forgiven for thinking that the vast emporia of corporate power that house the supplies we need to live on were any of those things.
Instead they are miniature warzones where we triage ourselves so as to be present for as short a time as possible. A bit like life really.
We subject ourselves to food hidden behind layers of propaganda. We allow, though not by choice, big businesses to push their agenda at the risk of our own health. We are encouraged to want what we don't need and buy more of it.
In fact we are so encouraged that these corporations have to divert their profits into hiring working class sympathisers as security. Think about that: we don't get access to food without the threat of punishment, if we violate the property rights asserted, forcibly, by the owner class. That's food! Meanwhile the need to maximise profit is such that the precariat paid to serve you is replaced by those self service machines. This is called innovation: an artifice of politeness designed to replace people's jobs. Violence clothed in programmed politeness and bagging anomalies.
Capitalism grants power for that ownership class to protect their profits from the threat of force initiated by those that need to eat - the rest of us, in other words! Think about that; that is the world we have wrought.
How does that not traumatise people? What is the effect of this environment on us. I said that shopping should be innocent and friendly. We aren't meant to be agoraphobic; we are meant to be social and communal animals. What then does it say about the agora when it's a high pressure environment guarded by our own used against us if we are impolite enough to need what we cannot pay for? Does survival not trump profits?
How have we allowed supermarkets to own the things we need to live on?
But wait, I say, it gets worse (or just as bad but in different ways!) - those of us on low incomes find that everything costs more. Something innocuous and friendly becomes fraught in different ways: bus fares are such that you need to remember to buy all you need at once or it will cost you more. The poor spend the most as a percentage of their income; in effect they are the drivers of the economy. Yet there is nothing to support them in so doing. Bus fares are the same no matter who you are, forget to buy what you need and you have to make another trip.
Even something as simple as fares for public transport are all part of the system. Ever wonder why it isn't the norm for employers to pay for worker transport costs? They should: it's part of the cost required for them to do the labour you need doing. But that would eat into their profits. Not only that, but workers (especially the unemployed) are given no concessions.
This is why I call this everyday capitalism. We take it all or granted, and yet all of this informs an increasingly hostile environment. Is it any wonder we end up at each other's throats: divide and rule, family break up, etc.
It's the drip drip destructive drip of everyday capitalism.
Monday, 9 April 2018
The State of Services
So it appears that 1in4, a mental health support service I used briefly last year and have mentioned (not always favourably), is among the latest victims of austerity, along with Second Step, who are primarily a housing association. They were never very helpful in my experience, but they don't really provide services pertinent to my needs. Emblematic of these destructive decisions (regardless of my opinion of the services) is that neither have updated their websites to report on this turn of events at this time.
It's a pretty sad state of affairs, to say the least. No alternatives seem to be forthcoming. From what I have gleaned, the attitude of the (Tory) council is that they don't want such people as would be service users in this leafy green shire. This is for the posh and the perfect. Nearby Bristol is where we 'should' go, but of course without being a resident that's impossible. Services do not extend beyond the city limits, even though Avon Wiltshire Mental Health Partnership (AWP) are meant to cover this area, the reality is that they prioritise Bristol. We get the scraps, as my experience trying (still) to secure a diagnosis attests. In respect of that, the attitude is still to question why I would need one anyway. How will it help you, they ask; what good will it really do, anyway?
If you have to ask...
Weston super Mare, the main port of call in the area, is bereft. The exorcism of mental health services can only exacerbate its many problems. It has issues with poverty and has a sizable community of people recovering from problems. The high street is a graveyard of yesteryear: where once Woolworths was a fixture (if a pretty rubbish one to be honest) there is now the obligatory Poundland. Diseases like Caffe (caffe?) Nero are common often bringing with them a rash of independent 'fone' shops (fone?) as well as their nastier big brothers in the established market. O2 is within sight of Vodafone (FONE?) is next to Carphone Warehouse is...
You get the picture. Perhaps the best example is the state of that perennial of the retail world, WHSmiths. Once a proud purveyor of books and magazines, as well as 'light entertainment' (ie expensive hit parade based films and music), as well as stationery. It has been pulled every which way by the likes of Waterstones, HMV, and a ton of other specialist shops - not to mention the arrival of online shopping. WHSmiths survives in Weston, but not much more than that; the carpet is shabby, the frontage is tired, and they seem more eager to upsell junkfood than anything else.
And now, sandwiched between the shops and hunkered down on the well-trodden pavement, a growing tide of homeless people at a rate unparalleled in the town's history. The council has no answer other than to put up accusatory signs 'reminding' people that begging is an offence. That is to say, the act of a desperate human being calling for help. Yet because said human is cloaked in the muck of precarious living and sleeps in the detritus of capitalism, they are to be branded as beggars; an unkind term intended to create distance between the reality and the perception. The reality of life under capitalism and the Tory-created perception that these people have only themselves to blame. Of course begging is to be punished; a practise as counter productive as it is desperate. The last gasp of a dead system printed on a bent metal sign fixed to a lamppost. It will, and should be, ignored.
This is the backdrop for the much awaited (by me, and no one else) meeting with my adviser.
There isn't much to say really and no point dragging it out for artistic purposes. There was no mention of the issues raised, no discussion of any of the things that were mentioned before (bus pass, writing opportunity, music). I knew there wouldn't be, so I didn't bother pushing it. It was, essentially, business as usual. In effect a polite waste of time. A couple of telling points:
Firstly she told me that they've had a bit of a staffing restructure. Given that they aren't a huge operation I find this significant. Could this be related to the claim before about funding limits imposed (no confirmation of this either) on service users? Fifty quid won't buy you much support. Amongst these casualties was the colour therapist who has apparently gone to start her own business. Not sure whether that's anything to celebrate but I guess it's her choice.
Secondly in regard to the 'Solutions' service they offered, this seems to have changed, dulled. Prior it was the happy clappy simple simon corporate approach to mental health. I refused this and it seemed to be a problem (although that wasn't mentioned either) for me to do so. I am not interested in that approach, it's the same approach the government is pushing, nudging, people into. It is dangerous because it ignores the societal causes of mental distress in favour of kludging together the idea of work and wellness - under a capitalist system (which itself is that societal cause quite specifically).
Instead it's just become a more perfunctory run of the mill back to work course: CV writing, interview techniques and all that stuff. Again, if people benefit from it - great! My problem is that I don't know these things, it's that my CV is simply going to be barren and my ability to be interviewed (again dependent on societal expectations, not taking the individual into consideration) is affected by my cognitive ability. I can't get away from that, nor can I mask it, nor should I have to.
I declined, and so all that was left was a few threadbare volunteer opportunities only tangentially related to writing that, quite honestly I'm not interested in. What frustrates me is that they can't see this. I have to be seen to be doing something and so, if there are few genuine opportunities, it doesn't matter, I get judged just as if there were hundreds and I'd refused them all. Those are different propositions. I do not want to be compelled, guilt driven, into doing something just because it satisfies the needs of an organisation that cannot or will not understand the reality of the economics and politics that prevail today. I do not think that makes me lazy at all - in fact it is the very definition of laziness to resort to that kind of thinking.
It's a pretty sad state of affairs, to say the least. No alternatives seem to be forthcoming. From what I have gleaned, the attitude of the (Tory) council is that they don't want such people as would be service users in this leafy green shire. This is for the posh and the perfect. Nearby Bristol is where we 'should' go, but of course without being a resident that's impossible. Services do not extend beyond the city limits, even though Avon Wiltshire Mental Health Partnership (AWP) are meant to cover this area, the reality is that they prioritise Bristol. We get the scraps, as my experience trying (still) to secure a diagnosis attests. In respect of that, the attitude is still to question why I would need one anyway. How will it help you, they ask; what good will it really do, anyway?
If you have to ask...
Weston super Mare, the main port of call in the area, is bereft. The exorcism of mental health services can only exacerbate its many problems. It has issues with poverty and has a sizable community of people recovering from problems. The high street is a graveyard of yesteryear: where once Woolworths was a fixture (if a pretty rubbish one to be honest) there is now the obligatory Poundland. Diseases like Caffe (caffe?) Nero are common often bringing with them a rash of independent 'fone' shops (fone?) as well as their nastier big brothers in the established market. O2 is within sight of Vodafone (FONE?) is next to Carphone Warehouse is...
You get the picture. Perhaps the best example is the state of that perennial of the retail world, WHSmiths. Once a proud purveyor of books and magazines, as well as 'light entertainment' (ie expensive hit parade based films and music), as well as stationery. It has been pulled every which way by the likes of Waterstones, HMV, and a ton of other specialist shops - not to mention the arrival of online shopping. WHSmiths survives in Weston, but not much more than that; the carpet is shabby, the frontage is tired, and they seem more eager to upsell junkfood than anything else.
And now, sandwiched between the shops and hunkered down on the well-trodden pavement, a growing tide of homeless people at a rate unparalleled in the town's history. The council has no answer other than to put up accusatory signs 'reminding' people that begging is an offence. That is to say, the act of a desperate human being calling for help. Yet because said human is cloaked in the muck of precarious living and sleeps in the detritus of capitalism, they are to be branded as beggars; an unkind term intended to create distance between the reality and the perception. The reality of life under capitalism and the Tory-created perception that these people have only themselves to blame. Of course begging is to be punished; a practise as counter productive as it is desperate. The last gasp of a dead system printed on a bent metal sign fixed to a lamppost. It will, and should be, ignored.
This is the backdrop for the much awaited (by me, and no one else) meeting with my adviser.
There isn't much to say really and no point dragging it out for artistic purposes. There was no mention of the issues raised, no discussion of any of the things that were mentioned before (bus pass, writing opportunity, music). I knew there wouldn't be, so I didn't bother pushing it. It was, essentially, business as usual. In effect a polite waste of time. A couple of telling points:
Firstly she told me that they've had a bit of a staffing restructure. Given that they aren't a huge operation I find this significant. Could this be related to the claim before about funding limits imposed (no confirmation of this either) on service users? Fifty quid won't buy you much support. Amongst these casualties was the colour therapist who has apparently gone to start her own business. Not sure whether that's anything to celebrate but I guess it's her choice.
Secondly in regard to the 'Solutions' service they offered, this seems to have changed, dulled. Prior it was the happy clappy simple simon corporate approach to mental health. I refused this and it seemed to be a problem (although that wasn't mentioned either) for me to do so. I am not interested in that approach, it's the same approach the government is pushing, nudging, people into. It is dangerous because it ignores the societal causes of mental distress in favour of kludging together the idea of work and wellness - under a capitalist system (which itself is that societal cause quite specifically).
Instead it's just become a more perfunctory run of the mill back to work course: CV writing, interview techniques and all that stuff. Again, if people benefit from it - great! My problem is that I don't know these things, it's that my CV is simply going to be barren and my ability to be interviewed (again dependent on societal expectations, not taking the individual into consideration) is affected by my cognitive ability. I can't get away from that, nor can I mask it, nor should I have to.
I declined, and so all that was left was a few threadbare volunteer opportunities only tangentially related to writing that, quite honestly I'm not interested in. What frustrates me is that they can't see this. I have to be seen to be doing something and so, if there are few genuine opportunities, it doesn't matter, I get judged just as if there were hundreds and I'd refused them all. Those are different propositions. I do not want to be compelled, guilt driven, into doing something just because it satisfies the needs of an organisation that cannot or will not understand the reality of the economics and politics that prevail today. I do not think that makes me lazy at all - in fact it is the very definition of laziness to resort to that kind of thinking.
Wednesday, 28 March 2018
The Return of Everyday Crapitalism - Bus Fares vs reality
It is certainly truth that the poorer you are, in our supposedly technological society, the less flexible life becomes. While the rich spend relatively less in our economy. It is thus the poor that drive it, while receiving less support to be able to survive.
Case in point, and another example of what I amusingly call "everyday capitalism", our local bus service, within the region it operates, offers three tickets for day journeys within certain boundaries. I can go to X with ticket number 1, go to Y with ticket number 2, or I can go to both within the same day with ticket number 3. Each ticket is not so dissimilar that they are easy to tell apart and thus easy to avoid making the mistake I did today by purchasing number 1 and not number 3. As there is no way to rectify this error, for which I accept some responsibility (insert smileyface), I'm stuck.
It's not a big deal, as the journey I was to make later doesn't involve life or death, just the on opportunity I get in the week to socialise. Had this been a hospital appointment, or trip to pay the bills etc (and don't get me started on the increasingly inflexible attitude of banks - I said don't!), things might be very different. Basically if you're poor and you can't make up that shortfall you are fucked.
Is pointing all this out worthy of your time in the blogosphere? Actually I think so; I post this to show you just how difficult life can be in what is alleged, according to the ruling class, a shining example of modern industrial society. We are the 6th richest economy in the world yet we have public transport systems that, according to them, need arcane ticketing structures to turn a profit.
Not only that but have you noticed how tickets get more expensive with age? That is, kids and young adults pay less, adults (as with anything) pay more. We take that for granted; why? Essentially the message is: "you're 'old enough' now, so pay me more!". That is the logic of everyday capitalism.
As for the banks (I told you not to get me started!), I have to pay £6 to Barclays (or rather their collections department) to cover old loans. This pittance is of course a drop in the ocean compared to their daily turnover as a global capitalist financial munitions dealer (that's figurative, don't sue me - I need the £££ for the buses). But again the logic of capitalism takes over: "pay your debts". Another aphorism we take for granted and never question - even when it impoverishes communities and smashes societies. Debt is not a moral principle (the rich certainly aren't troubled by it), it's a weapon.
That said when I make my monthly pilgrimage to the local Barclays cutpurse I find that they make it increasingly difficult to pay this money. I could easily choose not to, but where would that get me. They'd be quicker to point out my indiscretion than to make it easy to pay. I can't use the post office because the PO can't take these kinds of payments, they no longer issue paying in books, I don't live near a branch (hence the PO option), they no longer have counter staff, the machine replacements don't accept these kinds of payments, they no longer have paying in envelopes to pay into those weird deposit boxes. So instead I have to queue up with the only counter staff available who's there to deal with business customers. They are ridiculous.
As is capitalism.
Case in point, and another example of what I amusingly call "everyday capitalism", our local bus service, within the region it operates, offers three tickets for day journeys within certain boundaries. I can go to X with ticket number 1, go to Y with ticket number 2, or I can go to both within the same day with ticket number 3. Each ticket is not so dissimilar that they are easy to tell apart and thus easy to avoid making the mistake I did today by purchasing number 1 and not number 3. As there is no way to rectify this error, for which I accept some responsibility (insert smileyface), I'm stuck.
It's not a big deal, as the journey I was to make later doesn't involve life or death, just the on opportunity I get in the week to socialise. Had this been a hospital appointment, or trip to pay the bills etc (and don't get me started on the increasingly inflexible attitude of banks - I said don't!), things might be very different. Basically if you're poor and you can't make up that shortfall you are fucked.
Is pointing all this out worthy of your time in the blogosphere? Actually I think so; I post this to show you just how difficult life can be in what is alleged, according to the ruling class, a shining example of modern industrial society. We are the 6th richest economy in the world yet we have public transport systems that, according to them, need arcane ticketing structures to turn a profit.
Not only that but have you noticed how tickets get more expensive with age? That is, kids and young adults pay less, adults (as with anything) pay more. We take that for granted; why? Essentially the message is: "you're 'old enough' now, so pay me more!". That is the logic of everyday capitalism.
As for the banks (I told you not to get me started!), I have to pay £6 to Barclays (or rather their collections department) to cover old loans. This pittance is of course a drop in the ocean compared to their daily turnover as a global capitalist financial munitions dealer (that's figurative, don't sue me - I need the £££ for the buses). But again the logic of capitalism takes over: "pay your debts". Another aphorism we take for granted and never question - even when it impoverishes communities and smashes societies. Debt is not a moral principle (the rich certainly aren't troubled by it), it's a weapon.
That said when I make my monthly pilgrimage to the local Barclays cutpurse I find that they make it increasingly difficult to pay this money. I could easily choose not to, but where would that get me. They'd be quicker to point out my indiscretion than to make it easy to pay. I can't use the post office because the PO can't take these kinds of payments, they no longer issue paying in books, I don't live near a branch (hence the PO option), they no longer have counter staff, the machine replacements don't accept these kinds of payments, they no longer have paying in envelopes to pay into those weird deposit boxes. So instead I have to queue up with the only counter staff available who's there to deal with business customers. They are ridiculous.
As is capitalism.
Thursday, 15 March 2018
More of the Same Old Bullshit
The nonsense with the social enterprise continues. I don't know what the correct title for these sorts of agencies is if not social enterprise so that will have to do.
Honestly, it just wears me down. I went to a meeting held by another grassroots mental health group. They are called Clarity and while they seem very nice (if a little standoffish, but I guess we've all got problems to be dealing with :( ). Unfortunately they were less a support group and more a campaign group. What's unfortunate about that is that I need the former more right now. Campaigning is certainly important and what I heard from the representative of the, I suppose, 'social enterprise sector' present was rather depressing. In short, because this is a Tory area, there are massive cuts to services voted for en masse by the local, dominant, Tory rump who reuse to accept mental health is a problem here (and could the local mental health peeps kindly fuck off to Bristol).
For me, right now, I need to build a support network. I need places I can go, easily, with people that I can get on with; specifically people i share a worldview with. This might sound counter intuitive to many. They might, reasonably, conclude that the broader the range of experiences and views I expose myself to, the better. However, I am not convinced: I have a worldview and I believe it to be correct. In short I need the support of the kind of society I want to be in: a non judgemental compassionate society that is aware of the systems of oppression (specifically but not solely capitalism) we are exposed to. I subscribe to the model of mental health that, correctly, identifies a social component to ill health - particularly when it comes to conditions like depression and anxiety. These are not addressed by ignorant social enterprises, nor by associating with just anyone.
Campaigning is very important, though I'm not convinced that just campaigning will achieve much. Seven years of Tory led misery has shown this to be true; they will do what they want, using whatever means, when they want; damn public opinion. After all they couldn't get be less popular while voting to cut school meals for everyone - except those under the DUP (despicable). The problem is that I haven't the energy for it right now. The problem is, locally, I think it will take a hell of a lot to displace said Tory rump; it's ideological. This is a community of people that buys into Tory values. Changing that will be next to impossible. It will take something a lot more radical than appealing to people's democratic values - especially when those values put us in this mess to begin with. Never mind that mental health is still very much a taboo issue.
On a more prosaic and personal level, travelling to and attending this meeting was hard. The latter because, as a campaign discussion I wasn't expecting with people I didn't know, I didn't really have anything to say. I just sat there for an hour in silence. A bit melodramatic to say, but I'm just being honest. That said I will endeavour to attend more, it is once a month, and, while it's not quite what I need, it is interesting hearing about the state of things locally. Even if that state is pretty dire.
Travel on the other hand is becoming increasingly onerous. That might sound ridiculous for a half hour bus journey on a popular route, but the cost alone is too much. It has reached the point where I simply cannot travel often so I have to do more when I'm out. This means doing my shopping, so I come home exhausted from the trauma of dealing with Tesco and lugging heavy bags around. If this was local, I could just pop out without having to pay a small fortune and get there and back easily. It might not sound like a big deal, particularly if your mental health isn't an issue, but even small mundane things can be difficult. That's what it's like to have these kinds of issues.
Finally to report on my progress with the aforementioned social enterprise. Honestly, it's a joke. So I have a meeting booked for the first week of April. In that email I was informed of a "group offering creating writing opportunities". Crucially no details were provided, which infuriated me, especially given everything that's happened. It took me two emails back and forth to press them to actually tell me what it was, rather than wait for my appointment. They seemed to treat it like a kid desperate to know what his Christmas presents are ahead of the day. Why behave like this, it's utterly puerile. Turns out it's not really a creative writing opportunity. It's actually - apparently, because it's not even verified - a rumour that the local museum has a group that researches and writes up local history. So that's not what I'd consider creative writing; it's history. There's a difference as the writing part is ancillary and not the focus. I'm not terribly interested in doing historical research for this tedious little shire, quite honestly. However I did contact the museum who have yet to respond. Even so this is not what I feel I was led to believe; it's effectively a lie by omission. The problem here is that, when I explain all this and turn the opportunity down, I will be giving the social enterprise further ammunition to accuse me of not engaging. This sort of gaslighting shit is just what people have to deal with (I doubt I'm the only one).
It's too easy, when there's a dearth of opportunities, to use what few there are to demand more of the service user. If all you can offer is not what I'm interested in then surely the problem isn't with the service user, me, it's with the lack of opportunities for that which I am interested in. And it isn't as if I'm looking for crazy pie in the sky ideas either.
On it goes.
Honestly, it just wears me down. I went to a meeting held by another grassroots mental health group. They are called Clarity and while they seem very nice (if a little standoffish, but I guess we've all got problems to be dealing with :( ). Unfortunately they were less a support group and more a campaign group. What's unfortunate about that is that I need the former more right now. Campaigning is certainly important and what I heard from the representative of the, I suppose, 'social enterprise sector' present was rather depressing. In short, because this is a Tory area, there are massive cuts to services voted for en masse by the local, dominant, Tory rump who reuse to accept mental health is a problem here (and could the local mental health peeps kindly fuck off to Bristol).
For me, right now, I need to build a support network. I need places I can go, easily, with people that I can get on with; specifically people i share a worldview with. This might sound counter intuitive to many. They might, reasonably, conclude that the broader the range of experiences and views I expose myself to, the better. However, I am not convinced: I have a worldview and I believe it to be correct. In short I need the support of the kind of society I want to be in: a non judgemental compassionate society that is aware of the systems of oppression (specifically but not solely capitalism) we are exposed to. I subscribe to the model of mental health that, correctly, identifies a social component to ill health - particularly when it comes to conditions like depression and anxiety. These are not addressed by ignorant social enterprises, nor by associating with just anyone.
Campaigning is very important, though I'm not convinced that just campaigning will achieve much. Seven years of Tory led misery has shown this to be true; they will do what they want, using whatever means, when they want; damn public opinion. After all they couldn't get be less popular while voting to cut school meals for everyone - except those under the DUP (despicable). The problem is that I haven't the energy for it right now. The problem is, locally, I think it will take a hell of a lot to displace said Tory rump; it's ideological. This is a community of people that buys into Tory values. Changing that will be next to impossible. It will take something a lot more radical than appealing to people's democratic values - especially when those values put us in this mess to begin with. Never mind that mental health is still very much a taboo issue.
On a more prosaic and personal level, travelling to and attending this meeting was hard. The latter because, as a campaign discussion I wasn't expecting with people I didn't know, I didn't really have anything to say. I just sat there for an hour in silence. A bit melodramatic to say, but I'm just being honest. That said I will endeavour to attend more, it is once a month, and, while it's not quite what I need, it is interesting hearing about the state of things locally. Even if that state is pretty dire.
Travel on the other hand is becoming increasingly onerous. That might sound ridiculous for a half hour bus journey on a popular route, but the cost alone is too much. It has reached the point where I simply cannot travel often so I have to do more when I'm out. This means doing my shopping, so I come home exhausted from the trauma of dealing with Tesco and lugging heavy bags around. If this was local, I could just pop out without having to pay a small fortune and get there and back easily. It might not sound like a big deal, particularly if your mental health isn't an issue, but even small mundane things can be difficult. That's what it's like to have these kinds of issues.
Finally to report on my progress with the aforementioned social enterprise. Honestly, it's a joke. So I have a meeting booked for the first week of April. In that email I was informed of a "group offering creating writing opportunities". Crucially no details were provided, which infuriated me, especially given everything that's happened. It took me two emails back and forth to press them to actually tell me what it was, rather than wait for my appointment. They seemed to treat it like a kid desperate to know what his Christmas presents are ahead of the day. Why behave like this, it's utterly puerile. Turns out it's not really a creative writing opportunity. It's actually - apparently, because it's not even verified - a rumour that the local museum has a group that researches and writes up local history. So that's not what I'd consider creative writing; it's history. There's a difference as the writing part is ancillary and not the focus. I'm not terribly interested in doing historical research for this tedious little shire, quite honestly. However I did contact the museum who have yet to respond. Even so this is not what I feel I was led to believe; it's effectively a lie by omission. The problem here is that, when I explain all this and turn the opportunity down, I will be giving the social enterprise further ammunition to accuse me of not engaging. This sort of gaslighting shit is just what people have to deal with (I doubt I'm the only one).
It's too easy, when there's a dearth of opportunities, to use what few there are to demand more of the service user. If all you can offer is not what I'm interested in then surely the problem isn't with the service user, me, it's with the lack of opportunities for that which I am interested in. And it isn't as if I'm looking for crazy pie in the sky ideas either.
On it goes.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)