Is the City of Leicester a dump?

[CornwallFox]

3 hours ago, danny. said:

I don't think that's a right-wing thing to be fair, there are professional victims on all parts of the political spectrum.

That is true Danny, I suppose what I mean is that on the left it tends to be small bands of activists that focus on one issue and make a lot of noise. Probably used to be true of the right, but currently the entire Reform and Tory schtick is how beaten down and put upon ordinary people are, you can't even fly a flag/say you're English/make a joke etc. Sad bunch of life's victims. But TBF this isn't the thread for this conversation, I'm already post limited don't want to get myself in any more trouble! 

[davieG]

Leicester is no multicultural success – it is a stark warning to the rest of Britain
Increasing knife crime in the East Midlands city exposes how failed social cohesion is eroding public space

 

https://archive.ph/94hDS

[CornwallFox]

39 minutes ago, davieG said:

Leicester is no multicultural success – it is a stark warning to the rest of Britain
Increasing knife crime in the East Midlands city exposes how failed social cohesion is eroding public space

 

https://archive.ph/94hDS

Is this not more a function of increased poverty over the last decade or so, rather than ethnicity? 

[Tommy G]

1 minute ago, CornwallFox said:

Is this not more a function of increased poverty over the last decade or so, rather than ethnicity? 

Ethnicity and poverty have both changed dramatically so not sure why you would single out one more than the other. 

[leicsmac]

I would have thought that a correlation between wealth disparity and lack of social cohesion, regardless of demographics, would be obvious, considering the many, many historical examples that demonstrate it. 

[davieG]

I recently lived in Glenfield and often walked through New Parks to a post office.

 

There were some lovely looked after houses which I assumed were privately owned but the state of some of the houses and their gardens looked like a war zone again I assumed these were council owned and rented out so that the residents had no interest in keeping them clean and in a good condition. I also wondered what responsibility the council had in maintaining and ensuring they were looked after. The tenants that I saw were a mixture of white and non-whites.

 

It made me think back to when these estates were built and how proud the tenants were having a house with an indoor toilet and the luxury of a bath after being moved out of the city centre slums with a shared street toilet. Even in those slum areas though the houses were well looked after by the residents and streets were still clean of litter.

 

In my mind it reflects a nationwide attitude that some people have of "I'm alright jack" it's up to the government and council to tidy up and look after me.

 

 

[danny.]

23 minutes ago, davieG said:

I recently lived in Glenfield and often walked through New Parks to a post office.

 

There were some lovely looked after houses which I assumed were privately owned but the state of some of the houses and their gardens looked like a war zone again I assumed these were council owned and rented out so that the residents had no interest in keeping them clean and in a good condition. I also wondered what responsibility the council had in maintaining and ensuring they were looked after. The tenants that I saw were a mixture of white and non-whites.

 

It made me think back to when these estates were built and how proud the tenants were having a house with an indoor toilet and the luxury of a bath after being moved out of the city centre slums with a shared street toilet. Even in those slum areas though the houses were well looked after by the residents and streets were still clean of litter.

 

In my mind it reflects a nationwide attitude that some people have of "I'm alright jack" it's up to the government and council to tidy up and look after me.

One of the many issues with moving from a community based high-trust society to an individualist low-trust society. And society is so much worse for it IMHO.

[danny.]

39 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I would have thought that a correlation between wealth disparity and lack of social cohesion, regardless of demographics, would be obvious, considering the many, many historical examples that demonstrate it. 

Lack of social cohesion and demographics are related. If people don't speak the same language, share the same culture or the same values then social cohesion will, of course, decrease. 

[bovril]

16 minutes ago, davieG said:

I recently lived in Glenfield and often walked through New Parks to a post office.

 

There were some lovely looked after houses which I assumed were privately owned but the state of some of the houses and their gardens looked like a war zone again I assumed these were council owned and rented out so that the residents had no interest in keeping them clean and in a good condition. I also wondered what responsibility the council had in maintaining and ensuring they were looked after. The tenants that I saw were a mixture of white and non-whites.

 

It made me think back to when these estates were built and how proud the tenants were having a house with an indoor toilet and the luxury of a bath after being moved out of the city centre slums with a shared street toilet. Even in those slum areas though the houses were well looked after by the residents and streets were still clean of litter.

 

In my mind it reflects a nationwide attitude that some people have of "I'm alright jack" it's up to the government and council to tidy up and look after me.

 

 

We've definitely developed that culture in England. Perhaps again the rise of social media, where everything is politics, has created this view that anything negative in society (e.g. litter on the street) is the result of a failing system. But also expecting people to behave in a civilised manner has begun to be seen as a reactionary position, and a lot of people are afraid to call out unacceptable behaviour because they think it marks them out as a conservative snob siding with The Man over the oppressed masses. 

[bovril]

2 minutes ago, danny. said:

Lack of social cohesion and demographics are related. If people don't speak the same language, share the same culture or the same values then social cohesion will, of course, decrease. 

I think it's something of a legacy and perhaps a nostalgia for Empire that the English think they'll succeed where many others have failed. Or maybe again just thinking we're America. 

[CornwallFox]

1 hour ago, Tommy G said:

Ethnicity and poverty have both changed dramatically so not sure why you would single out one more than the other. 

Because violence and crime increases when poverty increases, even when there is no change to ethnic make up of an area

[leicsmac]

37 minutes ago, danny. said:

One of the many issues with moving from a community based high-trust society to an individualist low-trust society. And society is so much worse for it IMHO.

Was there ever a time when such high-trust societies existed? Disparity between the haves and have nots have always been a thing and led to the individualism you rightly mention is a problem, it's just these days everyone has more of voice to let other people know about it, IMO.

 

I think folks should beware rose tinted specs.

 

36 minutes ago, danny. said:

Lack of social cohesion and demographics are related. If people don't speak the same language, share the same culture or the same values then social cohesion will, of course, decrease. 

There's no doubt that's true as well. I would however posit that economic inequality is a bigger factor in that regard. Look at the division in the US in spite of a common language, for instance. 

 

Edit: it's a little darkly ironic, as well, when folks rightly bemoan the influence of individualism and then advocate for a political leader who embodies it. Not this particular post, but I have seen examples of it elsewhere.

Edited 10 February by leicsmac

[danny.]

1 hour ago, bovril said:

I think it's something of a legacy and perhaps a nostalgia for Empire that the English think they'll succeed where many others have failed. Or maybe again just thinking we're America. 

I have no idea what the British Empire of old has to do with anything I mentioned? Succeed with what? I don't think anyone thinks we are succeeding at much these days, we are in huge decline in almost every area. Who exactly thinks "we" are the USA?
 

1 hour ago, CornwallFox said:

Because violence and crime increases when poverty increases, even when there is no change to ethnic make up of an area

I have to push right back on that, I am from a very poor council estate and there was an amazing sense of community and camaraderie growing up, people would give you their last penny and food if they had it and vice versa, people would have open door policies and despite having very little it felt like everyone had a lot because people had each other to a degree. I knew people from all over the estate and for the most part people got on very well. I can point to more affluent areas that had, and have now, absolutely none of that.

Not sure if we'd have had that if people on the estate spoke 4-5 different languages and couldn't communicate with each other or relate over basic culture.
 

1 hour ago, leicsmac said:

Was there ever a time when such high-trust societies existed? Disparity between the haves and have nots have always been a thing and led to the individualism you rightly mention is a problem, it's just these days everyone has more of voice to let other people know about it, IMO.

 

I think folks should beware rose tinted specs.

 

There's no doubt that's true as well. I would however posit that economic inequality is a bigger factor in that regard. Look at the division in the US in spite of a common language, for instance. 

 

Edit: it's a little darkly ironic, as well, when folks rightly bemoan the influence of individualism and then advocate for a political leader who embodies it. Not this particular post, but I have seen examples of it elsewhere.

How is economic inequality a big factor in regard to high-trust communities turning into low-trust in cohesive society? I don't follow your reasoning at all there and that hasn't been my experience at all.

[TheGoldenGod]

Disgusting. Hate coming into work on my office days and very grateful when I can work from home!

[kenny]

2 minutes ago, TheGoldenGod said:

Disgusting. Hate coming into work on my office days and very grateful when I can work from home!

I no longer work in the city centre, but I do miss it. I like it there.

[TheGoldenGod]

3 minutes ago, kenny said:

I no longer work in the city centre, but I do miss it. I like it there.

You must avoid the 100s of mutants I bypass every day, I'm envious.

[bovril]

6 minutes ago, danny. said:

I have no idea what the British Empire of old has to do with anything I mentioned? Succeed with what? I don't think anyone thinks we are succeeding at much these days, we are in huge decline in almost every area. Who exactly thinks "we" are the USA?

I think a lot of people in England are wedded to the idea that we can create a very multi ethnic society which is still cohesive and successful, and that is desirable, because having the largest multi ethnic empire ever still influences how we see our country.

[HighPeakFox]

5 minutes ago, TheGoldenGod said:

You must avoid the 100s of mutants I bypass every day, I'm envious.

Mutants? Who on earth are you describing? 

[leicsmac]

22 minutes ago, danny. said:

 

How is economic inequality a big factor in regard to high-trust communities turning into low-trust in cohesive society? I don't follow your reasoning at all there and that hasn't been my experience at all.

I'm sorry, let me clarify. My argument isn't that things have changed, it's that things have always been a low trust society because of that economic inequality and anecdotes looking fondly back at some imagined past are an exception rather than the rule. 

 

That's only a working hypothesis on my part, though, I can't prove it empirically.

[kenny]

20 minutes ago, TheGoldenGod said:

You must avoid the 100s of mutants I bypass every day, I'm envious.

The Great Central Way is grim otherwise I probably don't attention to the issues that others have.

 

Had a nice afternoon on Friday in the quieter bits of the centre.

[danny.]

10 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I'm sorry, let me clarify. My argument isn't that things have changed, it's that things have always been a low trust society because of that economic inequality and anecdotes looking fondly back at some imagined past are an exception rather than the rule. 

 

That's only a working hypothesis on my part, though, I can't prove it empirically.

Imagined past, wow, that's low.

[Tommy G]

21 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I'm sorry, let me clarify. My argument isn't that things have changed, it's that things have always been a low trust society because of that economic inequality and anecdotes looking fondly back at some imagined past are an exception rather than the rule. 

 

That's only a working hypothesis on my part, though, I can't prove it empirically.

Come off it, you're better than this. 

[leicsmac]

18 minutes ago, danny. said:

Imagined past, wow, that's low.

 

6 minutes ago, Tommy G said:

Come off it, you're better than this. 

Clearly the phrasing hit a nerve there. Not my intent and I apologise. 

 

That being said, I don't think it's controversial to say that it's a matter of record that any individual looks at the past and has a positive bias in some respects towards it, therefore it might not be the most reliable indicator. That's just human. 

Edited 10 February by leicsmac

[danny.]

Just now, leicsmac said:

 

Clearly the phrasing hit a nerve there. Not my intent and I apologise. 

 

That being said, I don't think it's controversial to say that it's a matter of record that any individual looks at the past and has a positive bias in some respects towards it, therefore it might not be the most reliable indicator. That's just human. 

I mean I don't really care that much what you think, but calling me a flat out liar is just poor

[leicsmac]

1 minute ago, danny. said:

I mean I don't really care that much what you think, but calling me a flat out liar is just poor

I'm sure that both of us have been called worse during our time on here (I know I have), but for what little it might mean, once again, that was certainly not the intent.