Dale Farm

Welcome to UKHIppy2764@2x.png

UKHippy is a long running online community and of likeminded people exploring all interpretations on what it means to be living an alternative lifestyle -- we welcome discussions on everything related to sustainability, the environment, alternative spirituality, music, festivals, politics and more -- membership of this website is free but supported by the community.

  • Not the past the present.Agreement on the present objective reality.

    It's still irrelevant. Solutions do not require agreement. That's like saying "well I won't work with you to sort out this problem unless you admit that I'm right" :S


    Quote

    I asked you the question 'why wont it happen?'.Those were doable,reasonable suggestions so if there are other reasons besides prejudice then tell me what they are.I'm listening.

    Because traveller sites are generally in rural areas, and rural areas are generally represented by land-owning, right-wing, Tory councils who are prejudiced (and also, it has to be said, who may very well have had negative experiences with travellers in the past).


    Quote

    But these problems arent insurmountable.When public awareness has been raised and work done on Travellers PR the public response to sites has been much more favourable because its mostly fear and ignorance at the root of the resistance,reflected and magnified by tabloid media.It doesnt need to be the big deal it is,we can find solutions but only if that reality is acknowledged and worked with.

    It isn't necessarily fear and ignorance - it can also be experience and reality. It will, to an extent, depend on the people involved. By definition, those most likely to be involved in a process of engagement are also those who are willing to overcome the issues on both sides.

  • Right... you wont like this one bit, but it has to be said. Without using others "Quotes", but a lot of what I have read here, people are saying that travellers (albeit) Irish travelles want to live with people of their own blood. Fair enough. However if an Englishman were to say the same thing, about living in a homogenous society he would be decreed a racialist, so come on get of the fence

  • Right... you wont like this one bit, but it has to be said. Without using others "Quotes", but a lot of what I have read here, people are saying that travellers (albeit) Irish travelles want to live with people of their own blood. Fair enough. However if an Englishman were to say the same thing, about living in a homogenous society he would be decreed a racialist, so come on get of the fence


    In places like Spain there are expat communities where UK expats stay together. Living in a homogenous campsite is not quite the same thing as asking for an entire nation to be homogenous.

  • I have little sympathy for people who call themselves travellers but dont travel. They surely should be called settlers, or then again, why do they need a title? is it because they want to be different from the rest of society? they want a tag all of their own? they want to feel apart from society? There's talk in this thread about "blood" and wanting to be with the same. Well, I have news for you, we are ALL brothers and sisters. If you cut any human on this planet, you would be hard pressed to work out very much about the way they choose to live by looking at their blood. Being a traveller is no more in the blood than liking a cup of tea, enjoying the smell of cut grass or dipping ones toes in the ocean.
    If we take the title away from these brothers and sisters, they become just human as we all are. If they think they can be somehow more special or entitled to dispensation because of their choice of dwelling thats absurd. What they desperately need, more than anything, is education.
    Having listened to several radio debates with representatives from the community within and the community without, it seems clear to me of a level of uneducated arrogance exists within the self titled traveller community.
    I could I guess, in theory call myself a traveller, a neuvo-gypsy, a nomad. But I won't, because I dont want a label. I choose to live a nomadic way, therefore making my choice of moving living accomodation different from the majority of settled, static dwellers, but it doesnt make me special and it doesnt make me lawless as seems to be the case with quite a few of those who choose to label themselves a traveller.
    Those who bring up children into a lawless community, where it's ok to take what you like from the rest of the gorgia or non-traveller labelled community, but obviously look after your "own" need to learn to think a little more highly of their fellow species and learn some respect, outside of their self proclaimed commune.

  • I have little sympathy for people who call themselves travellers but dont travel.

    How much of that is down to the fact that it's very difficult to travel and live on the road in the UK though?


    Quote

    They surely should be called settlers, or then again, why do they need a title?

    Is it a title they chose, or one that was given to them? :shrug:

  • How much of that is down to the fact that it's very difficult to travel and live on the road in the UK though?


    Its difficult, but not impossible. en masse its practically impossible, but as one or two vans here and there its much easier and entirely possible, if thats what you want to do in life. travelling is a choice, being a traveller is a choice. choosing not to travel but live non-nomadically, means you choose to live like the majority and, essentially, live a much easier and convenient life. especially if it means getting medical care and state run education. I can see why people give up the travelling ways. it SHOULD be a choice, not something handed down the generations. If you are born into a traveller family, it should not be expected that that is the only way of living. If I had children, I would not be unhappy if they chose to go and live on land. But, equally happy if they chose it for themselves.

    Is it a title they chose, or one that was given to them? :shrug:


    everything in life is a choice. they choose to keep the title of traveller that has been handed down to them. they could easily choose another, or simply drop it.


    If I state that I am a Jedi does that make any of my offspring a jedi too? no. its a choice.

  • Its difficult, but not impossible.

    That still means that it's not entirely unreasonable to think of yourself as a traveller, regardless of whether you're practically able to travel at any point in time. I think of myself as a photographer, and I wouldn't cease to be one if my camera was broken. ;)


    Quote

    everything in life is a choice. they choose to keep the title of traveller that has been handed down to them. they could easily choose another, or simply drop it.

    But then labels are a convenient way of establishing identity and shared interests/concerns/issues. Why drop it?


    Not that I have any firm opinion either way, but I do think it's a situation that's too complex to reduce to simple either/or statements.

  • That still means that it's not entirely unreasonable to think of yourself as a traveller, regardless of whether you're practically able to travel at any point in time. I think of myself as a photographer, and I wouldn't cease to be one if my camera was broken. ;)


    But then labels are a convenient way of establishing identity and shared interests/concerns/issues. Why drop it?


    Not that I have any firm opinion either way, but I do think it's a situation that's too complex to reduce to simple either/or statements.


    people choose labels so that they feel a sense of belonging. clearly the society is too large for us all to feel that we belong and are somehow rather special and valued. Amongst 65 million thats hard, but amongst 165, entirely possible.
    I understand the reason why people try to collect together as a group, a clanship, but it doesnt give anyone more rights than any other clan. and should someone want to jump between clans, then why not?


    sadly society, it seems, has dis-owned anyone with a nomadic label. mistrust after years of abuse from both sides is never going to go away, unless boundaries are removed, labels taken down and tolerance from all sides.


    but it will never happen. Humans are savage. they love to hate.


    Im glad dale farm finally got the eviction notice served, BUT not because I agree with the council or the local nimbys, no, its mainly because those who were breaking the law, somehow thought they were above the law. that it didnt apply to them, a sense of lawless superiority and disrespect for others.
    I dont agree with any kind of land ownership, as a rule, the planet is not ours to own, we are merely guests. so the local nimbys and the travellers who "own" the land they were on, none of them have any rights to the land really. its just a piece of the planet. I have as much right to that land as any other bird, fox or worm.
    its just s/he who fights the hardest to keep his arse firmly planted on it!

  • people choose labels so that they feel a sense of belonging.

    But labels are also helpful in identifying needs/issues.


    Quote

    Im glad dale farm finally got the eviction notice served, BUT not because I agree with the council or the local nimbys, no, its mainly because those who were breaking the law, somehow thought they were above the law. that it didnt apply to them, a sense of lawless superiority and disrespect for others.

    I'm not familiar enough with the particular circumstances of Dale Farm to have a firm opinion regarding the attitudes and behaviour of the residents, but I do find it difficult to disagree with the eviction for reasons stated earlier in the thread. That being said, I also think that the government needs to recognise and deal with its own shortcomings where travellers are concerned, because knee-jerk Daily Mail politics don't really offer a constructive way forward.

  • Im glad dale farm finally got the eviction notice served, BUT not because I agree with the council or the local nimbys, no, its mainly because those who were breaking the law, somehow thought they were above the law. that it didnt apply to them, a sense of lawless superiority and disrespect for others.

    Well I don't know your personal values, but with the above in mind I wonder how many people have this attitude, and have also never done any of the following:


    Downloaded pirate video or music
    Parked on a yellow line
    Not paid full income tax
    Driven too fast
    Smoked a spliff
    Used other illegal substances
    Gone over their duty free quota
    Used pirated software
    Not told the DSS they had someone living with them


    etc.


    Being "subject" to UK law we're expected to obey them all, without question - surely that makes it hypocritical to judge other people for behaving "above the law" when most of us bend the rules at some point?

  • Well I don't know your personal values, but with the above in mind I wonder how many people have this attitude, and have also never done any of the following:Downloaded pirate video or musicParked on a yellow lineNot paid full income taxDriven too fastSmoked a spliffUsed other illegal substancesGone over their duty free quotaUsed pirated softwareNot told the DSS they had someone living with themetc.Being "subject" to UK law we're expected to obey them all, without question - surely that makes it hypocritical to judge other people for behaving "above the law" when most of us bend the rules at some point?

    The difference with dale farm, is that once they were discovered to be breaking tthe law, they tried to continue doing so. We all break the law at some point, but we fess up when caught, we assume responsibility for our actions. Or we get away with it and feel smug. But its not fair, that if when caught you try to weasle your way around the law somehow by claiming all sorts of human rights issues.so, im not saying im whiter than white and never broke a rule, but when im caught, I take it on the chin rather than get uppity.as I think I said before, im not a nimby or in favour of nanny states, we should have a bit of freedom to roam, but the rules are there for everyone. They may not suit some, but they do serve a purpose.

  • irish travellers a very divisive issue, i think a whole debate on their culture and more importantly the roots of their culture would be the place to start to try to understand their way of life, being no expert on the subject and not wanting to offend anyone i do think the travellers history is important, for it is said that they are the original disposed from their lands back hundreds of years ago by the turmoil in ireland, again not wanting to start a blame game here but many families were shoved off the land by landlords wanting to build vast estates, these mansions are dotted around the irish countryside to this very day. the onset of the irish famine swelled the travellers ranks which wasnt really a famine but a potato blight that starved the poor as the potato was the food that fed the masses, other crops flourished but were too expensive, so to survive in an unforgiving world the original traveller had to fend for themselves against huge odds, so a look to the past is maybe a way of understanding for settled people, it may also be an idea for travellers to bang heads together and somehow come to terms with the injustice of their forefathers/mothers, its a little like american natives without the reservations, of course im open to correction on any of these points as ive said im no expert on the subject.

  • The difference with dale farm, is that once they were discovered to be breaking tthe law, they tried to continue doing so. We all break the law at some point, but we fess up when caught, we assume responsibility for our actions. Or we get away with it and feel smug. But its not fair, that if when caught you try to weasle your way around the law somehow by claiming all sorts of human rights issues.so, im not saying im whiter than white and never broke a rule, but when im caught, I take it on the chin rather than get uppity.as I think I said before, im not a nimby or in favour of nanny states, we should have a bit of freedom to roam, but the rules are there for everyone. They may not suit some, but they do serve a purpose.

    Exactly the same then ... they get away with it and potentially "feel smug" - just like anyone else.


    Once upon a time there were rules that made people pay tax on fresh air, rules that made Jews wear armbands, rules that banned homosexuality, rules that prevented women from voting and so on...


    Rules are not there for everyone, and saying that "we take it on the chin" certainly doesn't apply to everyone I know ... why should people take it on the chin if they believe the rule is unfair, pointless, or shouldn't apply to them?


    I don't obey laws out of a respect for the authorities or powers that be. The chances are the laws I follow are obeyed by default as a result of personal conscience, or by fear of getting in trouble. I certainly don't feel any sense of allegiance to society.

  • Hi, newbie here, trying to live 'sideways to the grid' on a very small boat in an essex boatyard - what I find really refreshing here is the quality of the debate. Irrespective of strongly held views there is none of the invective that I find in mainstream media. As to the issue at hand - it really is a case of 'six and two threes' - at some point, in some way a compromise has to be found - like every other situation that you find life throws at you


  • very good point made there.
    I dont follow rules for the sake of it, I follow them because I want to do to others as I would like done to me. If i treat others with respect and understanding I hope that it would come back to me, as a reflection of my actions.


    Maybe if the dale farm people had been a little more respectful of their neighbours, then a blind eye might have been turned and they would have the smug warm glow about screwing with the law rather than the glow of a burning caravan.
    to receive their human rights, maybe they first need to respect the rights of those around them.


    but I can see equally that those around them may judge first and ask questions later. (if at all)


    Rules are there to be challenged. I dont think they did it in a very clever way though. en masse in such numbers. it lasted 10 years though, so in that respect, they had 10 years of success.

  • A point well put, Varekai, however ,.... 20 million pounnd, for this eviction, so ******* what. 20 million "estimated for the cost of summer urban riots, a drop in the ocean to what these murdering bastards do to us. Traveller or not. Bomb the **** out of any country who does not toe the line to the western powers, and has a state owned bank! Iraq Afghanistan and Libya. The only remaining countries who still do not comply are Sudan, North korea, Cuba and Iran.
    Unfortunately our governments are the most corrupt of all..... Whos next? I must admit that I even pay taxes to this bunch of charlatans. I wish, non payment of taxes was more effectuall than futile. However I digress an I now am hitting rant mode