Nonverbal Feedback Essay Example | Topics and Well Written Essays - 250 words

Nonverbal Feedback - Essay Example hich individuals end up in a conflict or businesses and their representatives leave a negative image of themselves in the eyes of the customers is back of their failure to skillfully use nonverbal communication (Troester, 2007). It has become very essential for businesses and their representatives to use nonverbal communication in an effective and efficient manner while dealing with customers. It is essential for organization’s representatives to appropriately use the components of physical cues as well as physical appearance to deal with the customers otherwise they may end up losing their customer (Baack, 2012). For example, I witnessed a lady going up to a customer representative asking for a bank account opening form. The representative did not seem quite interested in opening the account of the customer because he believed that it was not a major account and quite casually directed her towards the counter where the bank account opening forms were kept. The lady sat down t rying to fill the form but could not understand the details of the form. Due to this she went to the representative and asked him to her help her. The representative responded in quite an unconcerned manner and told her to wait. The lady immediately understood that the representative was not interested and she left the bank in an angered manner. I followed her and asked her what the problem was. The lady told me that she wanted to open a new bank account and wanted to deposit a handsome amount of money but she felt that the bank was not interested. Due to this the bank lost a very major

Needs of Various Stakeholders Essay Example for Free

Needs of Various Stakeholders Essay As we already discuss about the important of the stakeholders. A stakeholder does not exist but makes demand of the organization. The reason why stakeholders are important in strategic analysis is because of they want something from the organization. The demand of different stakeholders may become conflict to each other. For example shareholders of Tesco want maximum returns from the organization whereas the management team may retain profits for long term investment. Also the employees of tesco want higher payment or simply keep employee during the economy crisis, but the management may with to go through the difficult time by cutting posts and costs. Because of the individual needs are various, the conflict exists. And it will change along with times, macro-environment change and organizational changes: The government:- The government has power on influence the daily operations of tesco. Now days the government may give more support to the business because of the global economy downturn. Customers:- The small change of social communications behaviors and the innovation of high promotion may lead more demand on the services and products provided by tesco. This is very important power for the tesco to continue developing to satisfy the customer. Shareholders:- Shareholders may have the less expectation on returns during the crisis in the stock market. However, when the economy blooms again, say after several years, shareholders will expect more returns from the organization. Employees:- Who could be considered as dependent stakeholders. They are willing to retain the same pay level in order to keep employed during the recession period, but when things gets better, the staff will wish to increase their pay and other welfares. Suppliers:- The operation of the business is very difficult and complex with the effects of globalization. Small changes in the country would have direct and indirect impact over the business operations. Local community:- Local community may wish tesco help improving the quality of local environment. They may wish the organization perform better and give the full satisfaction to the customer.

The Marginalized Groups of Immigrants in Canada

The Marginalized Groups of Immigrants in Canada Imoghena Usman   Immigration to Canada may seem like a dream for many foreigners, since it arguably provides many opportunities. However, immigration causes difficulties in regards to settlement and integration into the country. Certain groups of immigrants face particular struggles when they arrive in Canada and try to navigate new and different social systems. They face obstacles in that institutions such as the government do not fully support them with the potential issues they face. This essay will argue that the experiences of illegal immigrants, migrant women and the school-aged immigrant children are full of hardships in which the Canadian government has created problems that have prevented them from fully integrating into the country. In the chapter, Illegalized Migrants, Charity-Ann Hannan examines the particular struggles that illegal immigrants have had to face. It can be argued that illegal immigrants face an increased set of challenges than legal immigrants. In Canada, the majority of illegal immigrants obtain this status when they overstay their visa or permit (Hannan 144-145). Without legal documentation, this leads to a number of issues they cannot escape. They are not able to fend for themselves from other institutions that try to hurt them. They are marginalized, as they are able to be exploited by their employers and cannot access government services (Hanson, cited in Hannan 2015, p. 145). Immigration becomes a hardship since illegal immigrants are used for their work and no one wants does not help them. In fact, it seems that they are being punished for being illegal, when they could be trying to live better lives for themselves. The chapter gives a history of the migration of illegalized migrants whic h highlighted cases of Canadas hesitance of bringing immigrants into the country. For example, in 1869, Canada passed its Immigration Act that did not allow criminals in the country (Makarenko, cited in Hannan 2015, p. 146), and employers hired immigrants to work for cheap with no chance for unionization (Avery, cited in Hannan 2015, p. 146-147). Without any way to come together and protect themselves, illegal immigrants arguably could not live good lives nor defend themselves from being exploited for their work. Immigration consisted of hard work without interests being fulfilled. The Chinese were specifically targeted as well. In 1885, the Chinese Immigration Act required them to pay an entrance fee, but British Columbia pushed the provincial government to deny entry, so the 1923 Immigration Act was passed to officially bar entry (Avery, cited in Hannan 2015, p. 147-148). By barring the Chinese from entering the country, the Canadian government demonstrated that it was opposed to immigration by certain groups of foreigners. By going after a specific ethnic community, this policy proves that immigration had a bad image because it was based on discriminatory practices. In 1967, Canada shifted the Immigration Acts focus onto skills (Hannan 148), and the 1976 version created classes for immigrants to enter through (Avery 1995; Immigration Act 1976-1977, cited in Hannan 2015, p. 148), which was to create the image that Canada was making a more fair and equitable immigration system, (Hannan 150). However, the government also implemented the TFW program, where if they stay past their visas, they become illegal immigrants (Hennerbry, cited in Hannan 2015, p. 150). The Canadian government may have tried to improve their image in creating these legislations that encouraged immigration, but they also created legislation that could be believed to have continued their legacy of discrimination against immigrants. This has continued into recent times as well; the 2002 Immi gration and Refugee Act restricted immigrant investors and sponsorship of family (Hannan 150). Immigrants continue to be restricted from being allowed into Canada, and this legislation portrays how the government is still prejudiced against immigration from specific categories. Temporary foreign workers of low skill work for four years and are forced back to their country of origin, but when the first period ended in 2015, it was predicted that there would be more illegal immigrants (Alboim and Kohl, cited in Hannan 2015, p. 150). This arguably caused the Canadian governments efforts to restrict entry to the country to be undermined by having temporary migrants becoming illegal immigrants, since the text indicated there will be an increase of illegal immigrants due to policy (Hannan 156). Canada illustrates a negative attitude towards certain groups of immigrants, in which their policies demonstrate that they are not wanted. This image is also seen through the work of migrants. In t he labour market, there is a secondary segment of work that has low wages, few benefits, poor working conditions, high labour turnover, and little chance of advancement, (Doeringer and Piore, cited in Hannan 2015, p. 153), which is where many migrants work in to address labour demand (Piore, cited in Hannan 2015, p. 153). This is seen with illegal immigrants, as they earn less then legalized migrants (Davila and Pagan; Mehta, Theodore, Mora and Wade; Phillips and Massey; Rivera-Batiz; Youn, Woods, Zhou and Hardigree, cited in Hannan 2015, p. 154). Illegal immigrants are in risk because they are put in a financially difficult position and do not have the resources to get out of it. They basically serve to work without any benefits, showing that Canadian immigration for this particular group possibly does not lead to any good outcomes. There are also other factors that divides them even more. Men earn higher wages than women (Cobb-Clark and Koussoduji 1999; Mehta et al. 2002; Rivera-B atiz 1999, cited in Hannan 2015, p. 154), as well as those who were employed in the manufacturing industry (Mehta et al. 2002, cited in Hannan 2015, p. 154). According to these examples, illegal immigration is based on division in which they have to fight for survival and rights. However, employers are the ones who benefit as illegal immigrants do not have protection so they cannot unionize (Morales, cited in Hannan 2015, p. 156), demonstrating that many illegal immigrants are to fend for themselves. In Chapter 10, Leslie Nichols and Vappu Tyyskà ¤ write about the experiences of migrant women. In Canadas colonized history, white female immigrants were portrayed as co-settlers with their male counterparts, (Nichols and Tyyskà ¤ 250). There was number of cases in Canadian history where women of colour were targeted in racialized discrimination. One case was black Caribbean women, who worked as domestics after British and Finnish domestics came between 1900-1930 (Das Gupta, cited in Nichols and Tyyskà ¤ 2015, p. 251). They only had temporary contracts, and had to go back home, the opposite experience of European women (Nichols and Tyyskà ¤ 251). The blatant racism showed how non-white females never got a chance to prove their worth and to live a better life in a new country. The temporary contracts prove that there was a negative bias towards immigrant women because they did not want women of colour around for a long period of time; they were unwanted. In terms of economics, imm igrant women continue to struggle. This can be seen through the way they entered into Canada as, during 201257.6% of women entered through the family class, (Citizenship and Immigration Canada 2012, cited in Nichols and Tyyskà ¤ 2015, p. 253). It can be inferred from the statistics that many women do not have the financial resources to provide for themselves. This is also demonstrated with the facts that less than half of immigrant women were employed (Statistics Canada 2011, cited in Nichols and Tyyskà ¤ 2015, p. 254), and the most recent arrivals earned a median income of $15, 590 (Statistics Canada 2013, cited in Nichols and Tyyskà ¤ 2015, p. 255). Women could be financially struggling because there are no jobs that are stable for them, so they need to be reliant on others. For example, men are the breadwinners of the family (Nichols and Tyyskà ¤, 255). They are also unable to learn necessary skills in order to live fully, such as not being able to attend language classes th rough the Language Instruction for Newcomers to Canada because childcare is limited to very young children (Pothier, cited in Nichols and Tyyskà ¤ 2015, p. 256). It demonstrates that female immigrants are unable to get the skills needed because the government do not provide better alternatives/programs for them. They will remain financially dependent on others. Women also face challenges from within their families as well. With their spouses, if a woman becomes employed, the males would lose their breadwinner status and lose confidence (Ali and Kilbride, cited in Nichols and Tyyskà ¤ 2015, p. 257), which causes them to become violent towards the family (Tyyskà ¤ 2005, 2008, cited in Nichols and Tyyskà ¤ 2015, p. 257). When immigrant women do get jobs, it causes conflict with their spouses that can lead to a dangerous experience. This further causes them to become marginalized, and may deter them from finding work. Younger women face pressure to conform into cultural norms in ter ms of sex which they must pass on to their children (Handa; Tyyskà ¤, cited in Nichols and Tyyskà ¤ 2015, p. 261), and are encouraged into practices such as arranged marriage (Ghimire and Axinn, cited in Nichols and Tyyskà ¤ 2015, p. 261). Immigrant women are being suppressed by their families because they cannot integrate into Canadian norms, even if they want to, and lack the choice to make their own decisions. This may be due to patriarchal hierarchies in cultural groups (Nichols and Tyyskà ¤ 257). If males are dominant, then women lack the leadership to grow into their own person. This portrays an image of Canadian immigration where women are pushed into sexist roles, and cannot work to make better lives for themselves because the government and other factors continue to stop them. In Chapter 11, Mehrunnisa Ahmad Ali examines child immigrants and their schooling. A variety of immigrant children of colour experienced challenges in terms of race when entering into Canada in its history. One example is when black migrants moved from the United States to Canada (Joshee and Johnson, cited in Ali 2015, p. 275), black children were segregated from their white peers in legislated separate schools due to parental fear of their influence (Ali 275). It shows that black children would not be able to settle into the country without being ostracized by their communities. Since the schools were legislated (Ali 275), this proves that the government did not consider the wellbeing of immigrant children of colour; they were presumably left to fend for themselves. Another example was when a law was passed forcing Aboriginals to attend school, leading to forcible removal to residential schools where their culture was taken away from them (Ali 276). Immigration for children would be tough and not welcome by many. It proves that the discrimination of immigrants in Canada was not limited by age. This segregation has continued on into present day, where immigrants move to areas with a common culture and/or affordable, and those in low-income areas send their children to schools where there are many immigrant children (Ali 277). Immigrants are separated from permanent residents due to their situations and lack of similarities. This portrays a divide between the two groups. Immigrant children tend to struggle more in school; since they do not have the grasp of English, they fall behind in class and are put into non-academic streams which lead to lower status jobs then post-secondary education (Ali 278). Immigrant children will grow up to struggle into their adulthood, showing that they will most likely end up in difficult situations. It shows that Canadian immigration for children will pose more challenges for their futures. The government does not help them as wel l, as there is a lack of funding for English as a Second Language Programs and provincial benefits that only last for a short period of time (Ali 278-279). The significance of this is that the government has not fully learned from history by not providing the resources necessary to help them settle into their new lives. Immigrant children stand to suffer from the lack of services and the government does not seem to support them. The schools do not seem to look at their experiences and lifestyles as well; for example, the curriculum focuses on Canadian heroes and not how they were immigrants (Ali 2009, cited in Ali 2015, p. 281). Immigrant children are also segregated between themselves. Those who live in areas with poverty and high crime go to schools that focus more on dropout rates then academic achievement, while those who come into the country fluent in English or French can enter school more easily, but can face bullying if they have an accent (Ali 285-286). Depending on the ch ilds circumstances, there is always a chance of failure. Immigration, according to those three groups experiences, is basically a hardship. From past to present, there have been numerous examples where migrants of those categories struggle to make it into their new lives. From the evidence, it can be determined that there needs to be more done in order to make immigrants more comfortable in Canada. If they cannot feel like they are part of a community and have access to resources that can help them know the country more, then it would be difficult for them to feel like they are at home. In Immigration Policy, Settlement Service, and Immigrant Mothers in Neoliberal Canada: A Feminist Analysis, Yidan Zhu describes that not so many immigration settlement organizations provide parenting or mothering courses/workshops for mothers, (148). Zhu proves that if certain resources are not provided, then one would infer that immigrants would never be able to learn important information that could help them live better. In all three cases, there has bee n a division between immigrants and Canadians in which it could almost be categorized as a segregation. This division has cause conflicts between the two groups. For example, Canadian teachers want immigrant parents to raise their children with Canadian values (Ali 2012, cited in Ali 2015, p. 283). There should be a push to immigrants and permanent residents to work together, such as a call for global citizen education (Richardson, cited in Ali 2015, p. 280). If not, these issues will continue, such as how immigrant children face alienation and no sense of belonging in Canada due to discrimination (Omidvar Richmond, cited in Oxman-Martinez et al, p. 377). Immigrants should be able to feel like they are at home where they feel safe, instead of being separated from the rest of Canadians for being who they are. Finally, the Canadian government should be pushed in making more of an active effort in assuring immigrants of these groups are not marginalized. In all three cases, the govern ment contributed in the mistreatment and/or obstacles they have faced. Both individuals and communities must push to make them realize that immigrants need help instead of constant battles that they do not have the power to face. For example, Zhu explains that while the state provides immigration resources for women, their own experiences of mothering are considered unimportant and the state is made to look responsible for them as the parents (152). There needs to be more communication between the government and immigrants with push from the numerous immigrant communities and other resources because if not, then there will continue to be misguided actions that hurt the community. In conclusion, immigrants are blocked from reaching their full potential when they arrive in Canada. Illegal immigrants face exploitation, women are devalued and placed under sexist norms and children struggle to integrate into a school system that is not always welcoming. Meanwhile, the government continues to block any chance they have in succeeding in their new country, while outliers also affect their newfound status. Overall, there needs to be more change in order to allow these groups of immigrants to thrive in an unfamiliar world. Works Cited Ali, Mehrunnisa Ahmad. The Schooling of Children of Immigrants. Immigrant Experiences in North America: Understanding Settlement and Intergration, edited by Harald Bauder and John Shields, Canadian Scholars Press Inc., 2015, pp. 273-291. Hannan, Charity-Ann. Illegalized Migrants. Immigrant Experiences in North America: Understanding Settlement and Intergration, edited by Harald Bauder and John Shields, Canadian Scholars Press Inc., 2015, pp. 144-163. Nichols, Leslie and Tyyskà ¤, Vappu. Immigrant Women in Canada and the United States. Immigrant Experiences in North America: Understanding Settlement and Intergration, edited by Harald Bauder and John Shields, Canadian Scholars Press Inc., 2015, pp. 248-272. Oxman-Martinez, Jacqueline, et al. Perceived Ethnic Discrimination and Social Exclusion: Newcomer Immigrant Children in Canada. American Journal of Orthopsychiatry 82.3 (2012): 376-88. Web. 26 Mar. 2017. Zhu, Yidan. Immigration Policy, Settlement Service, and Immigrant Mothers in Neoliberal Canada: A Feminist Analysis. Canadian Ethnic Studies, vol. 48, no. 2, 2016, pp. 143-156, Canadian Business Current Affairs Database; Political Science Database; ProQuest Sociology Collection, http://ezproxy.lib.ryerson.ca/login?url=http://search.proquest.com/docview/1815479346?accountid=13631.

Analysis of Sonnet 73 Essays -- Sonnet essays

[Line 1]* - 'that time of year' being late autumn or early winter. [Line 2]* - Compare the line to Macbeth (5.3.23) "my way of life/is fall'n into the sere, the yellow leaf". [Line 4]* - 'Bare ruin'd choirs' is a reference to the remains of a church or, more specifically, a chancel, stripped of its roof and exposed to the elements. The choirs formerly rang with the sounds of 'sweet birds'. Some argue that lines 3 and 4 should be read without pause -- the 'yellow leaves' shake against the 'cold/Bare ruin'd choirs' . If we assume the adjective 'cold' modifies 'Bare ruin'd choirs', then the image becomes more concrete -- those boughs are sweeping against the ruins of the church. Some editors, however, choose to insert 'like' into the opening of line 4, thus changing the passage to mean 'the boughs of the yellow leaves shake against the cold like the jagged arches of the choir stand exposed to the cold'. Noted 18th-century scholar George Steevens commented that this image "was probably suggested to Shakespeare by our desolated monasteries. The resemblance between the vaulting of a Gothic isle [sic] and an avenue of trees whose upper branches meet and form an arch overhead, is too striking not to be acknowledged. When the roof of the one is shattered, and the boughs of the other leafless, the comparison becomes more solemn and picturesque" (Smith 148). [Line 7]* - 'black night' is a metaphor for death itself. As 'black night' closes in around the remaining light of the day, so too does death close in around the poet. [Line 8]* - 'Death's second self' i.e. 'black night' or 'sleep'. Macbeth refers to sleep as 'The death of each day's life' (2.2.49). [Line 12]* - 'that' i.e. the poet's desires. [Line 13]* -... ...the west, After the sun sets in the west, Which by and by black night doth take away, Which is soon extinguished by black night, Death's second self, that seals up all in rest. The image of death that envelops all in rest. In me thou see'st the glowing of such fire In me you can see the glowing embers That on the ashes of his youth doth lie, That lie upon the ashes remaining from the flame of my youth, As the death-bed whereon it must expire As on a death bed where it (youth) must finally die Consumed with that which it was nourish'd by. Consumed by that which once fed it. This thou perceivest, which makes thy love more strong, This you sense, and it makes your love more determined To love that well which thou must leave ere long. Causing you to love that which you must give up before long.

Innocence in William Blakes The Divine Image Essay -- Blake Divine Im

Innocence in Blake's The Divine Image  Ã‚      Blake was both a poet and an artist and he created many Illuminated works which combined the two. These forms, each powerful in their own right are even more so when used together as in "The Divine Image." In analyzing this piece I will be looking at the elements and principles of art, the corresponding ‘elements and principles' of poetry and how they support one another to convey William Blake's idea of Innocence. Elements are the fundamental building blocks used in either art or poetry. In art they are line, shape/form, value, texture, colour (which I wasn't able to deal with in this case as the only reproduction was black and white) and space. In poetry one might classify the elements as word choice, word placement, scansion or meter, capitalization and punctuation. Principles are what are produced by putting the elements together. In art they are focal point, movement, subordinate area (background or setting), contrast and repetition. Interestingly in poetry several are similar, namely movement, contrast and repetition. Other things one might classify as principles of poetry are rhyme, line treatment, and tone. Of all the elements of art I will be dealing with, line and shape are by far the most important. All the figures are outlined and the vines running throughout the picture constitute line as do the letters. Line is also essential in the creation of value as this was printed on a press and all the ink is the same value. To create changes in value Blake used different densities and numbers of lines. The only texture in this work is a sort of implied texture that comes with creating value through a build up of line; some areas tend to acquire a ridged look. The use o... ... contrast of the living and the fire but neither the vine nor the figures are consumed. This presents an image of innocence similar to that of the Lion and the Lamb. Both the poem and the image serve to re-enforce each other as they present the freedom, harmony, and safety found in the state of Innocence. It seems fitting that these together would be called an Illumination as they help shed light on Blake's true meaning. Works Cited and Consulted Blake, William. Songs of Innocence and of Experience. Intro. Geoffry Keynes. New York: Oxford University Press, 1967. Easson, Kay. "The Art of the Book." Blake in His Time. Essick and Pearce ed. 1978. (35-51). Frye, Northrop. "Poetry and Design in William Blake." The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. 10 (Sept., 1951) 35-42. Mellor, Anne. Blake's Human form divine. U of California P Berkeley; 1974.

Having eaten what would

The day started out like any other one I had. I woke up to the sounds of my mother puttering pots and pans in our yellow-painted sunny kitchen downstairs. Smoothing my pajamas a bit, I went down our creaky stairs, wondering what’s for breakfast and what to wear today. I thought about my still unused black top with a pink print that mom bought the other day at the mall and wondered if I would look good in it.As I got nearer the kitchen, the smell of my favorite toast and scrambled eggs wafted deliciously in the air. Upon reaching the open kitchen door, I greeted mom with my usual big grin and sat facing her, who was washing the dishes that she used for cooking. Having eaten what would have fed an army of hungry soldiers; I drank what’s left of my old coffee mug and dashed upstairs to prepare for school. Having shouted a hurried goodbye to mom and dad from across the house, I hopped to the front porch, the smell of mom’s yummy toast still following me on the way ou t.Looking up, I saw that the skies promises a good day for everyone, with the sun shining comfortably above, and the wind softly touching the leaves of the trees which lined the sidewalk. And because I was scheduled to go to an orphanage after classes are dismissed for a project, I hoped the weather will last till the afternoon. With what I had just wolfed down for breakfast, I literally sang my way to school, getting smiles along the way for my seemingly infectious good mood.The day went by uneventfully, with the exception of my burly economics teacher pointing out that I was looking so much outside the newly-cleaned classroom window he joked if I was wondering why it wasn’t clean enough. When the bell sounded signaling class dismissal, I was one of the first to go out the room, thinking I might as well hurry up and go to the orphanage so I can go home early. This is the first time I was going to an orphanage and I did not know what to expect. Little did I know that my trip to that old, run-down building would change how I see life in general from that point on.Going outside the school building, I saw that the good morning weather did not hold. It was a wet, dismal afternoon, the pendulous branches of the silver maples sweeping the ground. The orphanage was a long, drab rectangular building, three stories high and badly in need of repair.The outer walls were soot- blackened and pockmarked with grey blobs where the plasters had flaked off. A white inner core revealed by recent flaking showed up here and there. Upon entering the orphanage, I immediately sensed the sad atmosphere of the place as it looked dark and dismal to me, but I thought that perhaps it was just the use of the building that made it seemed so.The windows were small and set well back in the blotchy walls. The ground floor was comprised of the director’s sleeping quarters, kitchen, dining room, administrative offices and chapel, all connected by a corridor which ran right around t he building, forming an inner rectangle and overlooking a courtyard on all four sides.However it was the lack of options in the children’s lives that had no choice but to grow up there struck me the most. Although the building was a better place to live in than the streets, the surroundings are disheartening.The profusion of a variety of flowers lining the paved path walk towards the main door of the orphanage did not help much to bring cheerfulness to the place. No pictures or posters broke the monotony. One child said that often, the water did not turn on, and the toilets did not always work. Unlike many children who have homes to call their own including me, the children had no choice about the kinds or even the amount of food, though they had an adequate diet.Each child was assigned a bed with sparsely bedding, placed in two long rows along the third floor of the building, two to each bed for children seven years old and below. The second floor was taken up by the bare cl assrooms where the children were taught. With only a small number of financial contributors, I was told that the orphanage was regularly hard pressed to care for the growing number of orphans.At the time that I spent there, I observed that the children’s day was ruled by the sound of a loud bell – by its shrill ring they would know that it was time to start the afternoon prayers, or eat their main meal. I noticed most of the children have a pleading look in their eyes when they look at outsiders who visit the building. With unwavering gaze, one child, about six years old with a creamy olive skin, enormous dark eyes and a long, shining dark brown hair, constantly followed me around, even when I went inside the office of the orphanage director to ask him several questions.As I walked down a long hallway towards the director’s office, she was like my shadow following my every step. I immediately noticed the peeling paint on the walls of the small office that the ta ll, kindly director invited me in, while seeing from the corner of my eye that the child has reluctantly stepped back to let the director close the wooden door. I brought out the list of questions that I prepared from my backpack, along with my small, black recorder, and I immediately started the interview to which the director answered as much as he can.Straightening up from the hard chair and shaking his hands while thanking him for his time, I headed outside when the bell rang for the evening meal. From all over the old building the orphans began to collect outside the dining hall. In their drab gray uniforms, they all looked the same, dreary and colorless. Just like the orphanage building itself. Thinking back, the orphanage was not a harsh place.It was just sadness hung in the air like a sour smell. I never really saw my life as sad. I was blessed in so many ways that the orphans were not, although these blessings I failed to be really thankful of until that day at the orphanag e.When I got back home, I hugged my mom so tight she had an inquiring look on her face when I let her go, and smelled the appetizing aroma of dinner cooking, the pleasant smell of home. As we sat together had chicken with chardonnay and fresh herbs, I recounted my experience at the orphanage and what I saw there. In the midst of our family talk, I said a silent prayer of thanks for the blessings that I previously took for granted.Before, I thought that I lacked so many things in life. But after a day at the orphanage, I become conscious of every little thing that I am blessed with. Most especially my parents, who were sitting with me at dinner that time; talking animatedly about how we could make the orphans happy, if only for a day.

Against Anti †Social Activities Essay

Antisocial behaviour: the construction of a crime Now the New Labour government has revealed its ‘respect’ agenda, the problem of ‘antisocial behaviour’ has moved to the forefront of political debate. But what is it? by Stuart Waiton ‘Antisocial: opposed to the principles on which society is constituted.’ (Oxford English Dictionary, 1885). ‘Antisocial: contrary to the laws and customs of society; causing annoyance and disapproval in others: children’s antisocial behaviour.’ (Oxford English Dictionary, 1989). ‘Antisocial behaviour’ is used as a catch-all term to describe anything from noisy neighbours and graffiti to kids hanging out on the street. Indeed, it appears that almost any kind of unpleasant behaviour is now categorised as antisocial, with the behaviour of children and young people most often labelled as such (1). This expresses a growing perception that the ‘laws and customs of society’ are being undermined by rowdy youngsters. Yet the term ‘antisocial behaviour’ was rarely used until the 1990s. Throughout the 1980s a couple of articles a year were printed in the UK discussing antisocial behaviour, whereas in January 2004 alone ther e were over 1,000 such articles (2). Not even the most pessimistic social critic would suggest a parallel increase in problem behaviour. Indeed, in recent years there has been a slight fall in actual vandalism, for example, against a dramatic increase in newspaper mentions of antisocial behaviour (3). When looking at the issue of antisocial behaviour, the starting point for most commentators is to accept that the problem exists and to then work out why people are more antisocial today. The ‘collapse of communities’ is often seen as a key influence in the rise of antisocial behaviour, with young people growing up without positive role models and a framework within which to develop into sociable adults. This idea of the loss of a sense of community – or indeed of ‘society’ – rings true. We are indeed more atomised and individuated today, and there are fewer common bonds that hold people together and give them a ‘social identity’. It is less clear, however, that this necessarily means people are increasingly out of control, antisocial and on the road to criminality. Alternatively you could argue that this fragmentation of communities and of social values has helped foment a ‘culture of fear’ (4) – a culture that elevates what were previously understood as petty problems into socially significant ones. This essay examines the construction of the social problem of antisocial behaviour, by focusing, not on the behaviour of young people, but on the role of the political elite. It may be understandable for a tenants’ association or local councillor to be engaged by the issue of noisy neighbours and rowdy children – but for the prime minister to prioritise this issue as one of his main concerns for the future of the nation seems rather strange. What is it that has put ‘antisocial behaviour’ so high up on the political agenda? Constructing crime as a social problem When introducing laws against antisocial behaviour, curfews, and new crime initiatives, the New Labour government invariably asserts that these are in response to the concerns of the public. While there is undoubtedly a high level of public anxiety about crime and about the various problems and irritations now described as antisocial behaviour, this anxiety is clearly shaped by the concerns of the political elite. It is also worth noting that when the government highlights particular ‘social problems’ as being significant for society, it puts other issues and outlooks on the back burner. The elevation of crime and, more recently, antisocial behaviour, into a political issue has helped both to reinforce the significance given to this kind of behaviour and to frame the way social problems are understood. By defining antisocial behaviour as a major social problem, the political elite has, over the past decade, helped to generate a spiralling preoccupation with the petty behaviour of young people. At no time in history has the issue of crime as a social problem in and of itself been so central to all of the political parties in the UK – and yet, there has been a significant statistical fall in crime itself. The key difference between the moral panics over crime and social disorder in the past and anxiety about crime and disorder today is that this anxiety has now been institutionalised by the political elite. Up until the 1970s the political elite, as distinct from individual politicians and the media, generally challenged or dismissed the panics associated with youth crime and subsequently held in check the effects they had. In opposing certain calls for more laws and regulations on society, more reactionary ways of understanding these problems were often rejected and the insti tutionalisation of measures that help create new norms were equally opposed. For example, while the moral panic that arose in the media around the Mods and Rockers in the 1960s has been widely discussed thanks to Stanley Cohen’s famous study Folk Devils and Moral Panics, first published in 1972 (5), these concerns were marginal to politicians, and never became an organising principle of political life. More recently, however, the political elite has panicked and legislated on the strength of extreme one-off events, like for example the Dunblane shootings in 1996, which resulted in the banning of handguns, or the killing of Victoria Climbie in 2000, which led to legislation requiring schools to organise around child protection. An important consequence of the institutionalisation of anxiety is that in contrast to the intermittent moral panics of the past, panics are now an almost permanent feature of society. And whereas moral panics – particularly before the 1990s – were generated within a traditional conservative moral framework, today i t is the new ‘amoral’ absolute of safety within which they tend to develop. Politicising crime The politicisation of crime can be dated back to the 1970s, with the 1970 Conservative government being the first to identify itself explicitly as the party of law and order. As crime developed as a political issue through the 1970s, however, it was fiercely contested. When Conservatives shouted ‘law and order’, the left would reject the idea that crime was increasing or was a social problem in and of itself, pointing instead to the social problems thought to underlie it. Significant sections of the left, influenced in part by radical criminologists in the USA, challenged the ‘panics’ – as they saw them – promoted by the so-called New Right. They questioned the official statistics on crime, challenging the ‘labelling’ of deviants by ‘agents of social control’, and attacked the moral and political basis of these panics (6). Thus, the idea that crime was a broader ‘social problem’ remained contested. Crime b ecame a political issue at a time when there was an increase in serious political and social conflicts, following the more consensual political framework of the postwar period. Unemployment and strikes increased, as did the number of political demonstrations, and the conflict in Ireland erupted. In contrast to the current concern about crime and antisocial behaviour, which emerged in the 1990s, the New Right under Margaret Thatcher promoted crime as a problem very much within a traditional ideological framework. In 1988, Alan Phipps described the Tory approach to crime like this: ‘Firstly, it became conflated with a number of other issues whose connection was continually reinforced in the public mind – permissiveness, youth cultures, demonstrations, public disorders, black immigration, student unrest, and trade union militancy. Secondly, crime – by now a metaphorical term invoking the decline of social stability and decent values – was presented as only one aspect of a bitter harvest for which Labour’s brand of social democracy and welfarism was responsible.’ (7) As part of a political challenge to Labourism in the 1970s and 80s, Conservative prime minister Margaret Thatcher developed an authoritarian approach to the ‘enemy with in’, which attributed greater political significance to criminality than its effects on victims. Despite an increase in the financial support to the Victim Support schemes in the late 1980s, victims of crime were themselves often used politically, ‘paraded’ by Conservative politicians and by sections of the media as symbols of disorder, not as the central focus of law and order policy or rhetoric itself. Sociologist Joel Best describes a process of typification, whereby an often extreme example of crime is used to define a more general perceived problem (8). The ‘typical’ criminals of the 1970s and 1980s were the violent trade union militant and the young black mugger. Traditional British values and individual freedoms were contrasted to the collectivist, promiscuous values of the ‘enemy within’ (9). Even burglars were understood as being part of the ‘something for nothing society’. Here the ‘criminal’, whether the trade union member, the mugger or the burglar, far from being a victim of circumstance, was an enemy of the state, and, importantly, the damage being done was not primarily to the victim of crime but to the moral values of society as a whole. ‘Social control’ and ‘public order’ were promoted within both a political and moral framework in which the deviant in question was likewise understood to have certain political or moral traits that needed to be confronted. Where the petty criminal acts of children were mentioned, the target was not simply this behaviour itself, nor the impact it had on individuals, but rather the ‘soft liberal’ moral values – held by teachers and social workers – that it was argued were undermining British Victorian values of discipline and hard work. In keeping with this, Thatcher saw the responsibility for cutting crime not simply as that of the government or police, but also of the public, who, it was argued, should take action to defend themselves. Go directly to jail ‘The demand for law and order, which at first sight appears to attempt a restoration of moral standards, actually acknowledges and acquiesces in their collapse. Law and order comes to be seen as the only effective deterrent in a society that no longer knows the difference between right and wrong.’ (Christopher Lasch, Haven in a Heartless World, 1977.) American sociologist Christopher Lasch identified key developments in the USA in the 1970s. In the UK, while an increasing emphasis on law and order reflected a certain weakening of the political elite’s grip on society, crime had been understood in largely ideological and political terms. Thatcher used the issue of crime in the battle against Labourism and welfarism. By the early 1990s, however, things were changing fast. John Major’s desperate and ultimately failed attempt to revitalise the political dynamic of the Conservatives with his ‘Back to Basics’ campaign in 1993 demonstrated the Toriesà ¢â‚¬â„¢ inability to develop a political direction that engaged both the elite and the electorate, and it was at this point that the politics of crime took on a new, less ideological, but even more authoritarian character. The issue of ‘persistent young offenders’ became a political issue and a recognised ‘social problem’ in 1992 and exploded as an issue of concern in 1993. The ‘violent trade union militant’ was now replaced by this ‘persistent young offender’ as the ‘typical’ criminal, and, as then home secretary Michael Howard explained, ‘self-centred†¦young hoodlums’ would ‘no longer be able to use age’ as a way of hiding from the law (10). It is important to note that under Thatcher, despite the ‘most consistent, vitriolic and vindictive affront to justice and welfare’ in general, the criminal justice approach to young people developed under principles that resulted in ‘diversion, decriminalisation and decarceration in policy and practice with children in trouble’ (11). Despite the tough rhetoric with regard to adult crime, the Thatcher administration maintained a pragmatic and even progressive policy towards young offenders. Under John Major this all changed. The enemy within became ‘minors rather than the miners’ (12). With the end of the contestation between right and left, and the resulting decline in the ideological politicisation of crime, the direct control and regulation of the population substantially increased, and between 1993 and 1995 there was a 25 per cent increase in the number of people imprisoned (13). Politically-based authoritarianism was replaced by a more reactive ‘apolitical’ authoritarianism which was directed less at the politics and moral values of the organised labour movement and other enemies within, than at the more psychologically-framed behaviour of individuals. ‘Antisocial behaviour’ now began to be recognised as a significant ‘social problem’ around which new laws and institutional practices could be developed. Following Lasch, it appears that by 1993 law and order had come to be seen as the only effective resource for a political elite that no longer knew the difference between right and wrong. Rather than using the fight against crime in an effort to shape the moral and political outlook of adults in society, the Conservative government increasingly opted simply to lock people up, thus acknowledging and acquiescing in its own political and moral collapse. Cultures of crime As part of the growing preoccupation with the ‘underclass’, the floundering Major government also attacked what he described as a ‘yob culture’. This identification of an alien, criminal culture had developed in the late 1980s, as crime panics began to move away from concerns with the organised working class and shifted on to the behaviour of ‘hooligans’ and ‘lager louts’. The criminalisation of the working class, by the early 1990s, was framed not in political terms, but increasingly as an attack on the imagined ‘cultures’ of alien groups. These aliens were no longer black outsiders or militants, but white, working class, and young, who could be found not on demonstrations but in pubs and estates across the UK. The door was now open for an attack on the personal behaviour and habits of anyone seen to be acting in an ‘antisocial’ manner. The idea of there being alternative ‘cultures’, expressed by conservative thinkers at this time, implied that significant sections of the public were no longer open to civilising influences. However, and somewhat ironically, within criminological theory, this idea of impenetrable cultures had developed from radicals themselves back in the 1970s. Stanley Cohen and the cultural studies groups of the Birmingham Centre had been the first to identify youth cultures and deviant subcultures as specific types of people existing within a ‘different life-world’. At a time of greater political radicalism, these groups were credited with positive ‘difference’. With the decline of radical thought these imagined cultures were rediscovered in the 1990s, but this time were seen as increasingly problematic (14). In reality, the growing preoccupation with ‘cultures’ – for example the discovery of a ‘knife culture’ in 1992 – was a reflection of a loss of belief in politics as a way of understanding and resolving wider social problems. With the loss of ideologically based politics on the right and the left, reflected in the r ise of New Labour, the problem of crime became increasingly understood as a problem of and for individuals. New Labour, New Social Problems ‘What my constituents see as politics has changed out of all recognition during the 20 years or so since I first became their Member of Parliament. From a traditional fare of social security complaints, housing transfers, unfair dismissals, as well as job losses, constituents now more often than not ask what can be done to stop their lives being made a misery by the unacceptable behaviour of some neighbours, or more commonly, their neighbours’ children. The Labour MP Frank Field, in his book Neighbours from Hell: The Politics of Behaviour (2003), explained how politics had become a matter of regulating behaviour. Field neglected to ask himself whether poor housing and a lack of opportunities are no longer problems, or whether his constituents have simply lost faith in politicians’ ability to do anything about them. Similarly, Field ignored the role the Labour Party itself played in reducing politics to questions of noisy neighbours and rowdy youngsters, and the wa y in which New Labour in the 1990s helped to repose ‘traditional’ social concerns around issues of crime and disorder. A more fragmented and atomised public was undoubtedly subject to a ‘culture of fear’, but the role of New Labour was central to the promotion of concerns related to antisocial behaviour. Under Tony Blair, crime became a central issue for the Labour Party, especially after Blair’s celebrated ‘tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime’ speech in 1994. This ended any major political opposition to the recently reposed ‘social problem’ of crime. A key ‘right’ for New Labour now became the ‘right’ to be, and to feel, safe. By 1997 the New Labour manifesto was strikingly confrontational around the issues of crime and antisocial behaviour. As the Guardian newspaper noted in April of that year: ‘There are areas where Neil Kinnock’s manifesto barely ventured. In 1992, crime, for instance, rated five paragraphs and mainly concentrated on improving street lighting. Now law and order rates two pages with the n ow familiar â€Å"zero tolerance† strategies and child curfews fighting for room next to pledges to early legislation for a post-Dunblane ban on all handguns. Such policies seemed unthinkable five years ago. However, in this case, Blair’s â€Å"radicalism† – with its social authoritarian tinge – may play better with the centre rather than the Left.’ Freed from the politics of welfarism and the labour movement, New Labour in the early 1990s reoriented its approach to the politics of crime, not only accepting that crime was a key social problem in and of itself, but also in expanding it to include the non-criminal antisocial behaviour of ‘neighbours from hell’ and ‘antisocial youth’. With the prioritisation of crime and antisocial behaviour came a focus upon the emotional reaction of victims, reflected in the concern with the fear of crime. ‘Tackling the epidemic of crime and disorder’ was now a ‘top priority for Labour in government’ and ‘securing people’s physical security and freeing them from the fear of crime and disorder’ was described as the ‘greatest liberty government c an guarantee’ (15). Liberty was transformed from the active freedom of individuals, to the protection given to them by government and the police. In contrast to the social and economic framework within which crime had been largely understood by the ‘active’ labour movement in the 1980s, New Labour now addressed the problems of crime and disorder with reference to a more passive, disorganised and fragmented public. As the government took a more direct approach to tackling crime in its own terms, so the issue expanded to consume problems that previously had been understood in more political terms. Accordingly, social, economic and political solutions were replaced by attempts to regulate the behaviour of both criminals and antisocial neighbours and children. Imprisonment, antisocial behaviour orders and more intense forms of behaviour management of parents and children increasingly became the political solution offered by New Labour to these problems. Engaged by safety The term ‘community safety’ did not exist until the late 1980s, but has subsequently become a core strategic category around which local authorities and national government have developed community-based policies. Community safety is not about crime as such, but is more broadly about the fear of crime and of petty antisocial acts, especially committed by young people, and thought to undermine communities’ sense of security. Here the loss of ‘community’ that has been generated by such major social shifts as the defeat of the old Labour movement and the weakening of the postwar institutional welfare framework has been reinterpreted as a problem of mischievous children creating fear across society. An important watershed in the organisation of society around the issues of safety was then shadow home secretary Jack Straw’s notorious attack in 1995 on the ‘aggressive begging of winos, addicts and squeegee merchants’ (16). Only a year ea rlier, Straw had accused John Major of ‘climbing into the gutter alongside the unfortunate beggars’ when the prime minister had made seemingly similar comments (17). There was an important difference, however. Major and his chancellor Kenneth Clarke had attacked beggars as dole scroungers – ‘beggars in designer jeans’ who receive benefits and ‘think it is perfectly acceptable to add to their income by begging’. Still understanding crime through the political prism of welfarism, Clarke saw begging as a criminal act that defrauded the benefit system. In his later attack on beggars, Jack Straw redefined the issue. For Straw the problem was not the crime of begging or the political or economic problem of benefit fraud, but the disorderly and intimidating behaviour of the aggressive beggar, which was understood to increase the fear of crime and help to undermine society’s sense of wellbeing (18). Jack Straw believed that the Tories had failed to understand the significance of street disorder as a cause of the fear of crime, the ‘loutish behaviour and incivility’ that made the streets ‘uncomfor table, especially for women and black and Asian people’ (19). The issue for New Labour was not the political question of benefit fraud, but the emotional sense of security of a newly discovered vulnerable public. By the time the election year of 1997 came around the soon to be prime minister, Tony Blair, had elaborated on the typical beggar. This was not a man quietly scrounging money off the public, but the often drunken ‘in your face’ lout who would, ‘push people against a wall and demand money effectively with menace’ (20). No figures for the rise in bullying beggars were given, but Tony Blair noted that he himself sometimes felt frightened when he dropped his children off at King’s Cross in London – a notorious area for ‘winos’, prostitutes and ‘aggressive beggars’. Straw, using a well-worn feminist slogan, demanded that we ‘reclaim the streets’ – streets that had been ‘brutalised’ by beggars and graffiti vandals. The radical creation of victimhood Because much of this rhetoric of intimidation, abuse and the collapse of communities has its origins in the radical school of criminology, Labour politicians felt able to employ it without embarrassment. In the late 1980s, left-wing and feminist criminologists had a significant influence on Labour-run inner-city councils, carrying out victim surveys, and sitting on a number of council boards particularly within the Greater London Council. Developing out of the radical framework of the early 1970s, a number of such criminologists had become disillusioned with the fight for political and social change and, rather than challenging the focus on crime as an expression of class prejudice as they once might have, increasingly identified crime as a major issue, particularly for the poor, women and blacks who were now conceived of as ‘victims’ of crime. Instead of identifying with and engaging its constituency in terms of politics and public matters, the left sought a new relatio nship with the poor and oppressed based on their private fears and their sense of powerlessness. Identifying fear as a major factor in the disaggregation of these communities, the so-called ‘left realists’ noted that it was not only crime but the non-criminal harassment of women and petty antisocial behaviour of young people that was the main cause of this fear among victimised groups (21). The identification of harassed victims of antisocial behaviour rose proportionately with the declining belief in the possibility of radical social change. As the ‘active’ potential of the working class to ‘do’ something about the New Right declined, Jock Young and other realists uncovered the vulnerable ‘done to’ poor. Discussing the shift in Labour councils from radicalism to realism, Young noted that: ‘The recent history of radical criminology in Britain has involved a rising influence of feminist and anti-racist ideas and an encasement of left-wing Labour administrations in the majority of the inner-city Town Halls. An initial ultra -leftism has been tempered and often transformed by a prevalent realism in the wake of the third consecutive defeat of the Labour Party on the national level and severe defeats with regards to â€Å"rate capping† in terms of local politics. The need to encompass issues which had a widespread support among the electorate, rather than indulge in marginal or â€Å"gesture† politics included the attempt to recapture the issue of law and order from the right.’ (22) Indeed, crime and the fear of it became so central to Young’s understanding of the conditions of the working class that, on finding that young men’s fear of crime was low – despite their being the main victims of crime – he argued that they had a false consciousness. Rather than trying to allay women’s fears about the slim chance of serious crime happening to them, Young asked whether it ‘would not be more advisable to attempt to raise the fear of crime of young men rather than to lower that of other parts of the public?’. For the first time, it was safety that began to frame the relationship between the local authority and the public, expressing a shift from a social welfare model of that relationship to one of protection. The significance of the left realists and feminists at this time is that they were the first people systematically to redefine large sections of the working class as ‘victims’, and thus helped to reorient Labour local authorities towards a relationship of protection to the public at the expense of the newly targeted antisocial youth. It is this sense of the public as fundamentally vulnerable, coupled with the disengagement of the Labour Party from its once active constituency within the working class and the subsequent sense of society being out of control, that has informed the development of New Labour’s antisocial behaviour initiatives. Issues related to inner-city menace, crime and what was now labelled antisocial behaviour, which had been identified as social problems by conservative thinkers periodically for over a century, now engaged the Labour Party. Increasingly for New Labour, having abandoned extensive socioeconomic intervention, the problem of the disaggregation of communities and the subsequent culture of fear that grew out of the 1980s was identified as a problem of crime, disorder and more particularly the antisocial behaviour of young people. The Hamilton Curfew and the politics of fear The development of the politics of antisocial behaviour was accelerated in 1997 when the first ‘curfew’ in the UK was set up in a number of housing estates in Hamilton in the west of Scotland. Introduced by a Labour council, this was a multi-agency initiative involving the notoriously ‘zero tolerance’ Strathclyde Police and the council’s social work department. The curfew that followed was officially called the Child Safety Initiative. This community safety approach reflected a number of the trends identified above. Rather than tackling crime as such, the initiative was supposed to tackle the broader, non-criminal problem of antisocial behaviour, in order to keep the community free from crime and also, significantly, free from the fear of crime (23). The rights of people in the community promoted by this initiative were not understood in terms of a libertarian notion of individual freedoms, nor within a welfarist conception of the right to jobs and se rvices. Rather it was ‘the right to be safe’ and the ‘right to a quiet life’ that Labour councillors promoted. Without a collective framework within which to address social problems, and concomitantly without a more robust sense of the active individual, a relationship of protection was posited between the local authority and the communities in question. Talk of ‘rights and responsibilities’ implied the right of vulnerable individuals to be and feel safe, not by being active in their own community but rather by either keeping their children off the streets, or by phoning the police whenever they felt insecure. Advocates of the Child Safety Initiative identified all sections of the community as being at risk – children were at risk simply by being unsupervised; adults were at risk from teenagers who hung about the streets; and young people were at risk from their peers, who could, by involving one another in drink, drugs and crime, ‘set patterns’ for the rest of their lives, as the head of the social work department argued. Even those teenagers involved in anti social and criminal activities were understood as an ‘at risk’ group – the ‘juvenile delinquents’ of the past were thus recast as ‘vulnerable teenagers’ who needed protection from each other. The centrality of the concern with victims of crime, which has developed since the Hamilton curfew was first introduced, is reflected within the curfew itself. In effect all sections of the public were understood to be either victims or vulnerable, potential victims of their neighbours and of local young people. The legitimacy of the police and the local authority was based not on a wider ideological, political or moral platform, but simply on their ability to protect these victims. The politics of antisocial behaviour lacks any clear ideological or moral framework, and therefore it has no obvious constituency. In fact, the basis of the Child Safety Initiative was the weakness of community. Rather than being derived from a politically engaged public, the authority of the council and the police was assumed, or ‘borrowed’, from that public in the guise of individual victims. Accordingly, the police in Hamilton constantly felt under pressure to show that the potential victi ms they were protecting – especially the young people who were subject to the curfew – supported what they were doing. Of course, nobody has a monopoly on borrowed authority. A number of children’s charities similarly took it upon themselves to speak for the children, arguing that the curfew infringed their ‘rights’ and coming up with alternative surveys showing that young people opposed the use of curfews. There was little effort to make a substantial political case against the curfew, however. In fact, ‘child-friendly’ groups and individuals tended to endorse the presentation of young people and children as fundamentally vulnerable potential victims, and some opposed the curfew only on the basis that children would be forced back into the home where they were even more likely to be abused. Just as Blair was put on the defensive over his attack on aggressive begging by charities campaigning for the rights of the victimised homeless, so the curfew exposed the authorities to charges of ‘harassing’ or ‘bullying’ young people. Since the curfew w as justified precisely on the basis of protecting young people from these things, the charge was all the more damaging. This was more than a tricky PR issue: it demonstrated a fundamental problem with the politics of antisocial behaviour. In presenting the public as vulnerable and in need of protection, the state transformed the basis of its own authority from democratic representation to a more precarious quasi-paternalism; in effect it became a victim protection agency. The very social atomisation and lack of political cohesion that underlies the politics of antisocial behaviour means that the authority of the state is constantly in question, despite the fact that its assumptions about the vulnerability of the public are widely shared. As such, the Hamilton curfew gave concrete expression to the attempt to re-engage a fragmented public around the issue of safety, and the difficulties this throws up. Criminalising mischief In contrast to the pragmatic approach of past political elites to the issue of crime and occasional panics about delinquent youth, the current elite has come to see crime, the fear of crime and antisocial behaviour as major ‘social problems’. With the emergence of New Labour in the 1990s any major political opposition to the issue of crime as a key social problem has disappeared and its centrality to political debate and public discourse was established. Under New Labour, however, the concerns being addressed and the ‘social problems’ being defined are less to do with crime and criminals than with annoying children and noisy neighbours. These petty irritations of everyday life have been relabelled ‘antisocial behaviour’, something which is understood to be undermining both individuals’ and society’s sense of well being. At its most ridiculous extreme what we are witnessing is the criminalisation of mischief (24). Basil Curley, Manc hester council’s housing executive, told the Guardian: ‘Yes, we used to bang on doors when we were young. But there used to be badger-baiting once, too. It’s different now, isn’t it? Things are moving on; people want to live differently.’ (25) This casual comparison of children playing ‘knocky door neighbour’ with the brutality of badger-baiting tells us nothing about young people, but indicates that what has changed is the adult world with an inflated sense of vulnerability driving all antisocial behaviour initiatives. For New Labour the problem of the disaggregation of communities and the subsequent culture of fear that grew out of the 1980s was located within politics as a problem of crime and disorder. Devoid of a sense of social progress, in the 1990s it was the political elites – both right and left – who became the driving force for reinterpreting social problems within a framework of community safety. Lacking any coherent political direction, the government has both reacted to and reinforced panics about crime and disorder, institutionalising practices and initiatives based upon society’s sense of fear and anxiety. In an attempt both to regulate society and to reengage the public, over the past eight years New Labour has subsequently encouraged communities to participate in and organise around a raft of safety initiatives. Despite the fall in the official crime statistics society’s sense of insecurity has remained endemic and no ‘sense of community’ has been re-established, much to the government’s frustration. However, rather than recognising that constructing a society around the issue of safety has only helped to further the public’s sense of insecurity, New Labour is becoming ever more reactive and developing more and more policies to regulate a growing range of ‘antisocial’ activities and forms of behaviour. By thrashing around for solutions to the ‘politics of behaviour’ in this way, the government is helping to fuel the spiral of fear and alienation across society. Rather than validating the more robust active side of our character, validation is given to the most passive self-doubting aspects of our personality. Communities and a society that is more at ease with itself would expect men and women of character to resolve problems of everyday life themselves, and would equally condemn those who constantly deferred to the authorities as being antisocial. Today, however, we are all being encouraged to act in an antisocial manner and demand antisocial behaviour orders on our neighbours and their children. Rather than looking someone in the eye and resolving the incivilities we often face, we can increasingly rely on the CCTV cameras to do this, or alternatively look to the community wardens, the neighbourhood police and the antisocial task force to resolve these problems for us. We are told to act responsibly, but are expected to call on others to be responsible for dealing with noisy neighbours or rowdy children. As this approach develops a new public mood is being created, a mood based on the notion of ‘safety first’ where an increasing number of people and problems become the concern of the police and local authorities. This weakened sense of individuals is a reflection of the political elite itself, which lacks the moral force and political direction that could help develop a sense of community. Ultimately, it is the crisis of politics that is the basis for the preoccupation with curtain-twitching issues – the product of an antisocial elite, which is ultimately creating a society in its own image.