Raison d'être and The War with Gaza

Before Israel was established in 1948, Israel was what we would now describe in this day and age as 'occupied' by The Brits. During this 'occupation', of 28 years or so, there was one goal: To build a viable democratic, liberal and Jewish state. Communities, infrastructure, schools, universities, places of leisure were built and sustained to reach this goal, all whilst being 'occupied' by the Brits. There were indeed organisations like The Stern Gang/Irgun that justified and carried out the murder of innocent civilians in the name of the Jewish people but largely they were shunned and condemned by the majority. Ben Gurion et al, always felt that a viable state of Israel must eventually make peace with 'the other'.

It would be disingenuous to draw exact and direct comparisons of the above with Hamas and a large section of The Palestinian population today. However, there are certainly similarities. It's ludicrous to suggest that Hamas and The Palestinians are not in control of their own agency. Do they live in appalling unimaginable conditions - yes. Is movement and freedom of living restricted - yes. Are they goverened by 'the other' - yes. Were there similarities with the Jews in pre-48? Also yes.

The fundamental difference is raison d'être. The Jewish people then (and mostly now) wanted to build a life that flourished and thrived for its citizens, in so much that it's written in The Declaration of Independence that Israel:

"will foster the development of the country for the benefit of all its inhabitants".

Hamas and many Palestinians have chosen a raison d'être that breeds hatred and destruction. Their constitution reflects it. They are their own agents and we do not choose their raison d'être. There will never be peace until this changes, everything else is noise and smokescreens.

Your raison d'être is what governs your behaviour - it can be changed as we are after all agents of our decisions.

Emancipate Yourselves from Mental Slavery

My time living in Israel is embryonic yet it hasn’t taken long to notice a conspicuous characteristic known here as the ‘friar mentality’.  In Israel, the worst possible insult for one Israeli to enunciate to another is that he or she is “a friar”, roughly translated as “a sucker”.  Although I’ve yet to come across anyone in any country who wants to be referred to as a sucker, in Israel, so much of day-to-day life is determined by the fear of an individual or indeed an organisation being seen as ‘a friar’ that the collective essence of the country is somewhat diminished.  In other words, the friar mentality creates the antithesis of the “the whole is greater than the sum of its parts”.  

To offer an over-used yet veracious example, the driving here is appalling.  No-one pays any due regard to anyone else with each man (and woman) only looking out for himself.  Heaven forbid a driver would let another in-front of them for fear of being ‘a friar’.  The effect: traffic is worse, it takes longer than it should to get anywhere and more worryingly, a stomach-churning 400 deaths on the road in 2010 (compare that to the UK where there were 1857 deaths but with a population 10x that of Israel). 

One further example is Tnuva who were arguably the catalyst for the social protests that took place last summer.  By skyrocketing the price of cottage cheese, Tnuva disregarded their responsibility to the collective i.e. their customers, for bottom line profit.  Of course, it would be naïve to suggest that Tnuva’s mission is to service the collective well-being of the general population but nevertheless, Tnuva demonstrated scant disregard for the population as a whole which in the end, only came back to bite their backside as Israeli’s consequently boycotted  their products which affected their profits and damaged their brand.

Last summer’s demonstrations were, I believe in part, symptomatic of the gradual erosion of some of the roots which bind together the collective essence of what Israel is and stands for as a nation state.  Whatever your political allegiances, one cannot argue that Israel’s development over the last sixty five years is nothing short of a minor miracle and the country is now both certainly a hyper-capitalist and forward thinking state.  Conversely, there is an underlying collective consciousness which exists both as a national and individual identity - which may indeed come from the country’s socialist beginnings - which when threatened becomes a highly visible and powerful force for good. 

Following the demonstrations, there were (and are) a number of accusations levelled at both the organisers and demonstrators themselves – normally from those with most to lose - about what difference the protests would actually make to Israeli society.  “Socialists”, “lefties”, “talk is cheap what’s the point of the marches” to highlight a few.  Personally, I feel this misses the point of the demonstrations.  Paulo Freire  talked about the idea of ‘conscientization’ - developing a consciousness which has the power to transform reality.  The marches were precisely this development of the collective conscientization, the implicit feelings and hopes of a nation made explicit in order to bring about transformative change.  They were a powerful message highlighting the erosion of responsibility to the collective and a message that the whole is in fact greater than the sum of its parts.

The Value of Space

The house is an individual possession, and should be worked for, but the park or the common which a man shares with his neighbours, which descends as a common inheritance from generation to generation, surely this may be given without pauperising. 

 Octavia Hill (1883:) Homes of the London Poor

Much has been written about the value of community or social spaces.  Octavia Hill, one of the key figures in establishing The National Trust, was formidable in advocating the need for social space suggesting that the public need “places to sit in, places to play in, places to stroll in, and places to spend a day in”.  More recently, a report by the Joseph Rowentree Foundation (JRF) highlighted the contribution public spaces make to community life and how people use them.

One (very) early observation about life in Tel Aviv (which I believe is replicated throughout Israel) is the emphasis placed on maintaining public spaces.  Granted, the amount of space in Tel Aviv is limited, particularly any green space (other than the sanctuary in the midst of all the concrete, the Hayarkon Park) but wherever there is communal space two things are apparent.

Firstly, any facilities placed in the space are both clean and well maintained.  Examples include; public toilets, outdoor and free to use gym equipment, cold water fountains and children’s play areas.  Secondly, the general public’s access to the public facilities are not controlled, monitored or restricted.  Consequently, throughout the day and late into the night, you will come across all generations - young and old - using and sharing the same communal space.  This, at the very least, provides a visual interaction between young people and adults within the same communal space - something more often than not that is lacking in London.

Before I left London, I paid a visit to The Museum of London’s Street Photography Exhibition where a collection of photographs from the late 19th century to present day were displayed.  What was particularly striking was to see how many pictures showed young people playing and ‘hanging out’ on the streets.  I’m certainly not harking back to ‘the good old days’, however in England, over the last ten years there has been an alarming reduction in the amount of free cosmmunal space young people can socialise in without being asked to move on or be seen as trouble-makers.  This was reiterated in the JRF report which highlighted that by allowing young people to play or simply ‘hang out’ fosters local attachments which are at the heart of local communities.  Following the Summer's riots in London, maybe it's time for local authorities and the voluntary sector to work together to re-examine how London organises and manages its communal space?

Thoughts about ‘what next’ from a hand-wringing, cappuccino drinking, sandal wearing, tree hugging, youth worker.

Those who read my first blog about the London riots may have noticed an absence of any practical suggestions or solutions to some of my postulations.  The point of the blog was not to offer suggestions, merely to reflect upon some of the underlying issues about the rioting and to question a number of the commonly held assumptions about why young people took part. 

One such assumption was that most of those who have been charged for the riots were “feral youths” when actually, it seems three quarters of those charged by the courts are above 18.  

The point of my second blog however is not to continue with the “whys” but instead to focus on the ‘hows’, namely how can we move forward as a society in addressing some of the underlying issues raised in my first blog?  My suggestions – I think – come from a range of political paradigms and some may seem ‘a bit Melanie Phillips’ but like a good Chinese take-away, you need a bit of sweet and sour for it to taste good. 

One small but important caveat is that most (but not all) the suggestions are practical/tangible ideas as I attempted to explore the wider structural issues in my previous blog.  The suggestions are not an exhaustive list (feel free to add more in the comments section) and are not listed in order of importance.  Some will take much more effort to implement than others, but to quote Thomas Edison:

“The value of an idea lies in the using it”

Ideas for modern living:

1.      Put in place plans to encourage more male primary school teachers

2.      Ring-fence a percentage of corporations/bankers tax for grassroot/local organisations

3.      Create a statutory responsibility for young people to hold budgetary responsibility for local decision making processes

4.      Create a national peer-led skill matching service or ‘Learning Webs’  a la Ivan Illich’s ‘Deschooling Society’

5.      All national heritage sites to cap their charges (£10 per person?)

6.      Keep citizenship studies on the national curriculum

7.      Create a national holiday (or use an existing one) to celebrate the establishment of parliament and democracy in the UK

8.      Any potential national project effecting all members of the UK costing over x amount of money must go to a referendum for anyone aged 16 or above

9.      Incentivise dual parent families (without removing support for single parents)

10.  Businesses earning over x amount or employing over x amount of people should enter voluntary contracts to take on young people as apprentices

11.  Stop the unmitigated spread of surveillance cameras

12.  Increase prison rehabilitation schemes, particularly reparation programmes

13.  Somehow! create a welfare system that doesn’t pay for an individual not to work if they are capable of working

14.  Create peer-led parenting workshops for sharing skills and knowledge (see no.4)

15.  Create an ‘institute of trades’ partly funded by the private sector

16.  Ring-fence statutory responsibility for provision of youth services

17.  Create/preserve more local recreational spaces e.g. parks/swimming pools

London Riots: A Youth Work Perspective

Since the rioting first broke out late Saturday night, Martin Luther King’s “Rioting is the voice of the unheard” has appeared in numerous blogs, opinion columns and social networking sites.  However, many people have been quick to refute the argument that the rioting is a manifestation of exclusion and disenfranchisement but instead pure thuggery and greed carried out by a few “feral rats” (to quote one member of the public interviewed on Sky News).

So what exactly has gone on and why did the riots take place?

I am not sure I have the answers to many of the legitimate questions being asked about the why’s and how’s, but I do think this is an ideal opportunity for us, as a society, to ask ourselves a number of critical questions about how we view and treat our young people. One thing I certainly find interesting is how violence has cropped up in a many people’s vernacular, underpinning any response to those young people who took to the streets.  Don’t get me wrong, I’m not suggesting the police should hand out boxes of Milk Tray to the rioters but to hear so many people advocating the use of rubber bullets or other forms of “tough love” raises some interesting questions about how we should deal with the social problems we face.  Without getting too psychoanalytical, I wonder whether this is a cathartic expression of the general resentment many adults feel about today’s society?

I have been saying for a quite a while now, drawing mainly on conversations with young people and their youth workers, that there is an ever-increasing lack of empathy between young people and adult society which is creating a vacuum of misunderstanding and ignorance between them.  Of course in many ways young people are not meant to be understood by adults – indeed that is often the point of being young.  However, I feel what is lacking is what Carl Rogers talks about in the relationship between client and patient: Unconditional Positive Regard –acceptance of the individual. We seem as a society to have lost our ability to accept young people unconditionally, that is not to condone young people’s misdeameanours but instead, a belief that they are fundamentally trustworthy and have the capacity to do good.  The consequence is that young people, on the whole, do not participate in the decisions that affect them the most.

Indeed, the United Nations defines social exclusion as “A lack of participation in decision making and in civil, social and cultural life” – if we are searching for answers about why the riots took place maybe we might like to provide young people with some real power to influence and shape their own lives.

One further reflection was triggered by Robert Peston the other day on BBC Radio 5 Live.  He mused that in the past 3 years there has been major corruption in the financial sector (banking), media (hacking) and Government (expenses) and wondered whether this was purely coincidence or instead something more endemic to our society.  He left it at that (which was probably the safest thing to do!) but it got me thinking.  There has been a great deal of verbatim since the riots took place about the lack of suitable role models – primarily parents – young people have in today’s society.  Of course we would all want to revert back to the 1950’s nuclear family with Don (warning: plot spoiler) and the now separated Betty Draper as our misogynist fag smoking butt slapping dad,  but unfortunately these are modern timez (sic) and thus moral panics are abound about the state of today’s parenting.

Parenting aside, arguably the three (and now four with the police and whole News of the World saga) most important and powerful institutions that shape so much of what young people see and do are corrupt and pretty much rotten to the core.  What underpins it all is greed.

I find it unbelievably hypocritical for those individuals within the aforementioned institutions to lambast young people for looting the luxury goods stores when these institutions have been nicking stuff for years.  The difference of course is one is blue collar crime, the other, white.  My point however is not that both are wrong – they obviously are – but instead how in recent years young people have been exposed to a society in which serious elements of our Government, media and financial institutions – ones which help to shape our own understanding of how we see the world – have been shown to be systematically and institutionally corrupt and built on greed.  No wonder some young people may act in a greedy, and hyper-consumerist fashion.  We reap what we sow.

My final point is about how young people see what we value in society.  In a burst of spontaneity brought on by my fury of Tessa Jowell and her beloved “legacy” of the olympic games, I did some maths, which for anyone who went to JFS, is pretty impressive.  £9billion (cost of the games) divided by £25,000 (a decent London wage) x 5 years (a decent job lifespan) = 360,000.

If I am not mistaken (and if I am, I blame JFS) we could’ve used the cash to generate 360,000 well-paid jobs over five years.  I can’t begin to think about the good that would’ve been done to young people by funding apprenticeships, teachers, youth workers, coaches, etc.

Instead, we have opted for a penis extension of a project lining the pockets of the “exclusive” corporations and sponsors that are involved paid for by the tax payer.  Rant over, however what message does it provide to young people that we aren’t prepared to fund the services most valuable to young people e.g. youth clubs, local leisure centers, recreational grounds let alone the ‘role models’ the money could pay for e.g. teachers, youth workers sports coaches etc but are prepared to fund two weeks of a corporate vanity project designed for elite (adult) athletes.  Don’t for one second believe the “army of volunteers” “legacy”, its bullshit spouted by the very people who bid for it for their own self-service.

So what now?  There certainly isn’t a quick fix and the answer like most things probably isn’t to be found in politically opportunistic posturing.  I think a good start can be found in a comment made by one of the leaders of the social protest movement taking place in Israel at the moment.  

“Solidarity between us and the young generation is what will determine this social campaign in the land.”