Recently, a collective of people in Birmingham decided to facilitate a temporary social centre in the heart of the city, to highlight issues surrounding the G8 protests, make poverty history, global human rights and DIY culture.

A building - 117 Digbeth High Street - was spotted, but after 18 hours of occupation two people turned up outside the building claiming to be the owners. Several minutes of negotiation occured, during which it was explained that the occupiers had no legal obligation to open the door and that the persons claiming to own the building had no legal right to threaten or use violence to open the door. Despite this the persons claiming to own the building indeed threatened violence if the door was not opened, and decided to kick down the door. This achieved, the occupiers agreed to leave, while having a discussion with the illegal invaders about the legality of their actions and about the plans for the social centre. The 'owner' appreciated all the work that had been achieved in the 18 hours in the abandoned building, including extensive cleaning, but seemed locked in a capitalist and beurocratic attitude of mind which to some extent precludded meaningful discussion of these issues. Later on, when someone turned up with a new mop and bucket to find the social centre evicted, she had an extensive discussion with the new occupiers/'owners' in which they continually insisted that squatting is illegal, when it is not, and even offered the person a job painting the building! She replied that she had a job, and the new occupiers were very much confused by her status as a teacher. The 'owners' calimed the squat would be 'taking food from their children', when in fact there was a plan to offer free food at the social centre, as well as refurbishing the building. If the owners had been less prejudiced against squatters and agreed a licence, their dilapidated plaster ceiling would have been repaired! A number of different community groups had planned to use the building, including Birmingham LETS and the local campaign for the closure of the Guantanamo Bay internment camp.

Earlier on, during the eviction process, the social centre occupiers were collecting their belongings from an upstairs room when seven or so young men turned up, formed a semicircle and backed the three social centre facilitators towards the back of the room, pushing them around in an ineffectual attempt at intimidation. Soon they bored of this and the facilitators continued on their course, collecting tat and going for a nice walk.

The new occupiers were quite happy for people to return later to collect some other items. Despite this I'm reminded of a term introduced to me recently by an anglo-indian friend: 'coconuts', meaning those who are brown outside but white inside. The questions of the gentleman leading the eviction showed extreme prejudice towards the poor - when told that the social centre was not interested in profit making, he replied that that was obvious becasue we were poor. When offered a peppercorn rent, he argued that the building had something called a '24 hour food licence', which would raise the rent to high levels. He would therefore seem uninterested in the idea that people might not need permission from an elitist white power structure we call 'government' to prepare and serve food to hungry people!

Can we as a movement challenge this problem of conciousness by which positive social change is countered, not by governemnts or big corporations, but by private citizens acting in their percieved best interests? How can we act to change conciousness first and foremost? Does anyone have any interesting research to share on this question?

Incidentally, plans for events this weekend and next are
still in full effect - get involved now to cre8 future reality!