The theft of our culture

In 2008 Liverpool will be handed the title 'European City of Culture'. Already the local press and television are indoctrinating people with the news of plans for future cultural events and the 'regeneration' of the city centre with the help of European grants. In theory everything looks rosy but scratch beneath the surface of this regeneration and something much more sinister is happening.

The misnomer City of Culture has nothing to do with the ordinary people of Liverpool or our vast cultural heritage. It has nothing to do with our history of resistance to the excesses of capitalism and the state. From the wave of strikes that heralded the syndicalist revolts before World War I, through the General Strike of 1926, the working class militancy of the late 1960s and '70s, the uprisings on the streets in the '80s and the working class resistance to the poll tax.

While this is our culture, the moneymakers and racketeers operating inside and outside of the City Council, are busy trying to reinvent our city and our culture of resistance. For regeneration read gentrification. For cultural renaissance read opportunities for greedy profiteering. For caring for our needy and vulnerable read sweeping them off the streets of the city centre away from the expected visitors and the cash they bring with them. For the money-hungry it's a case of out of sight out of mind.

It's planned that key areas of the city centre, including the actual streets, will be privatised and patrolled by privately employed security (bully boys in pseudo police uniforms). If you don't match the stereotype of newly gentrified Liverpool then you can expect to be moved on and hassled out of the area, "riff raff elements" won't be welcome. Various activities within the privatised streets will be controlled and banned: alcohol and food only to be consumed in designated areas; sleeping not permitted; skateboarding and rollerblading not allowed; vagrants and tramps will be moved on; no begging; street entertainers will need permission; and demonstrations will also need police permission with a controlled meeting place; added to this will be the banning of any type of flyposting or leafletting unless authorised and payed for beforehand.

Outside of the privatised area corporate interests, the interests of the powerful and wealthy, will be protected by increased cctv surveillance. It's likely this will include cameras using parabolic microphones to monitor conversations as well as images in public areas.

However, resistance to the plans is growing. The Open Spaces Society, campaigning for the rights of public access, has been actively opposing the plans to privatise the streets in a recent Public Inquiry. The civil rights group Liberty is also examining the possibility of mounting a legal challenge against them.

While use of the existing laws should be persued; by any means necessary, we shouldn't ignore our most potent weapon - direct action.

By taking to our streets, our public ways, together or as individuals, under the glare of security cameras or under cover of darkness, we have the means to stop the theft of our streets and our culture of resistance.