Search results
-hegemonic’ 153 154 Engendering an avant-garde landscape painting, control of real physical spaces in the city was very much in dispute in 1970. First Nations and recent immigrant populations contested property ownership and corporate-backed urban redevelopment schemes in diverse forms of protests, organized political activism including lawsuits, and physical confrontations. For the settlers and exogenous population of immigrants, land use protests were organized around two general concerns: the environmental impact on wilderness and wildlife by resource extraction
more isolated and detached from the social fabric than in the past (Putnam, 2000 ). Changes in the character of party organisation may also have played a part. In the past, neighbourhood party organisers encouraged turnout. However, urban redevelopment swept away the cohesive and relatively homogeneous neighbourhoods in the inner-city areas, and there are far fewer party activists at precinct and county level. Others argue that the very large number of elections discourages turnout. Voters, they say, become bored
the East London rent strikes, 1935–1940’, Women’s History Review, 4:3 (1995), pp. 283–99; Smith, ‘East End Jews in Politics’, p. 70. 36 See R.V. Steffel, ‘The Boundary Street Estate: An example of urban redevelopment by the London County Council, 1889–1914’, Town Planning Review, 47:2 (1976), pp. 161–73; M.J. Daunton (ed.), Councillors and Tenants: Local Authority Housing in English Cities, 1919–1939 (Leicester: Leicester University Press, 1984); A. Olechnowicz, Working-Class Housing in England between the Wars: The Becontree Estate (Oxford: Oxford University Press
or less than themselves. From such awareness often came the realisation that ‘their lives were controlled by more powerful people’ who acted seemingly without care for those below them.15 Sue Bruley grew up in a newly built Surrey council estate close to Epsom Downs race course. The working-class estate was part of the extensive post-war urban redevelopment that included council housing programmes financed from government subsidies paid to local authorities. Sue’s parents took part in the working-class migration from inner cities to suburbs situated in the New
selfdetermination, support and trust they had envisaged for the group and Camden Town at a point of transition in traditional working-class London communities. In 1969 –71 CMPP members were amongst an array of metropolitan grass-roots activists protesting against the urban redevelopment schemes displacing old communities and exacerbating the homeless crisis.44 For Sue Crockford, Queen’s Crescent market was an emblem of the mythic community CMPP envisaged. She understood it as one of the few ‘egalitarian places’ allowing for ‘normal human transactions regardless of class’, and
thing’; living it out was ‘quite another’. The new collective life Beyond the Tufnell Park milieu, however, other ‘non-aligned’ men and women more readily embraced collective living as part of the ‘avalanche of new ideas’ guiding social and subjective transformation.55 By the early 1970s the rapid growth of the WLM saw loose assortments of left libertarians mushrooming across relatively poor, working-class provincial and metropolitan areas; in north, east and south London the post-war urban redevelopment schemes made run-down Victorian terrace housing empty and
decimate or ‘lay waste’) could have been invented with Manchester in mind. Within months of starting work on ‘Moving Manchester’, the project team was struck by how much of the contemporary writing, music and art associated with the city is preoccupied with its successive waves of demolition and reconstruction Although Manchester’s notorious urban redevelopments, especially with respect to its domestic housing stock, are by no means unique in England’s industrial North (Taylor, Evans and Fraser, 1996: 3970 Postcolonial Manchester:Layout 1 28/6/13 12:37 Page 25