It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Amsterdam to create 'scum villages'

page: 5
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in


posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 09:48 AM

Originally posted by destination now
reply to post by Merriman Weir

Hey, who cares though? As long as we can't see it for now and it's other people's problems, right?

Well it's currently my problem (in fact as I speak one of my neighbours is currently shouting "bawheed" outside my door) and I don't think the majority of us who are law abiding decent people who live in this block should have to put up with the minority's behaviour and it really doesn't have anything to do with the economic environment, these people have made a choice to live like this..if you gave them a decently paid job, nice house, car etc tomorrow, they would walk out of the job, wreck the house and drive around drunk with no insurance within a month, because they do not care about anything or anyone and that is not generalising people, sadly it is a fact that there are people in society who will not change no matter what you do for them

I live in area similar to you (I live in a tower block on a 60s sink estate outside Manchester that was legally defined as 'slum' properties at one time). I also have no alternative but to live here as I've had long term health problems, on and off, all my adult life; I can't afford to live anywhere else. Also, being in a test area for Universal Credit, come April, I won't even be able to afford to live here and will probably be homeless (the government removed the legal obligation to house people with very little fanfare over the last couple of years).

Why do you think these areas are like this? Why are these areas allowed to become like this? Why is it when they're 'regenerated' it's inevitably part of a process of gentrification, and the existing residents pulled to similar areas before the gentrification?

It's a problem that has a much wider context than people will accept. It's a lot more than neighbours throwing dog # over people's fences (to quote a caller on LBC that I've just heard) whilst being pissed on 30p cans of lager. I'm not disputing that people like you describe exist at all, but I can't think of a better way to create whole generations and towns of people who will know nothing other than this behaviour and a lockdown mentality than to create the enforced ghettos that's described in the Telegraph piece. Imagine being born into somewhere like this. All your life, from being a baby, going to school in this kind of environment, and then hitting 18? What happens then? Are they removed by the authorities? After all, being of legal adult age, they're no longer under the care of the parents who were being punished by forced to live there? How well will they adapt to towns without this kind of regime and controlled environment? Will they stay and have kids of their own.

Guaranteed dystopia.

posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 10:11 AM

Originally posted by buddha
The word " ghetto " comes to mind.
and it was a total accident that it will burn down
killing the trap't scum!

it would not be long be for the police could not enter it at all.
look at mexico! run by gangs.
they will regret this.

You should probably watch the video I posted. These areas only have about 10 houses to them, and look pretty separated from their surroundings. Not really on the same level as Compton...
edit on 4-12-2012 by boncho because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 10:11 AM
I assume the term anti-social was taken directly from the article which was most likely publicized in The Netherlands first, where in dutch anti sociaal has a much stronger meaning not simply being anti-social but destructive and harming e.g. House disturbances.

posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 10:14 AM
reply to post by Merriman Weir

Yes, I agree to an extent, but we are talking about people who decide to abuse the system, people who make these areas difficult to live in. My flat is actually very nice, good size, in the town centre, balcony etc. I look after it, keep, it clean. I look after all of my furniture and always make sure that there is money for gas and electricity to keep it warm and maintained (not easy in my situation but I do it, as much for my teenage daughter's sake as I have her friend staying here as well as her family live in a very rural area and she would not be able to get to college everyday from there, whereas here, the college is a 5 min walk)

The only problem with my flat is 3 neighbours, one above me, one on the ground floor and one directly opposite me (the ones shouting bawheed repeatedly 20 mins ago) who just continuously cause damage, noise nuisance, and generally leave the entire block in a mess. It's got nothing to do with your beliefs on gentrification (which I don't really believe anyway) because these are nice flats in a very central and convenient location, but having been in one of them recently (smelling of dog mess, no carpets, no curtains, a broken chair..and it wasn't always like this, I saw it just prior to them moving in and it was a fully furnished flat, with beautiful carpets) the people living in it just don't give a damn, and that's the real problem, the welfare state has enable them to live as they please, without having to work or take any responsibility for their actions, and whilst I am a great believer in providing those in need with a safety net, as a person who worked for 25 years, paying into the system, I was extremely relieved to be able to use it when I became ill, those who abuse it and everything society gives them really makes me angry (as does getting woken up at 3am with people shouting outside my door, and having to pick up beer cans etc every time I walk down the stairs)

So it's not really about pushing out the poor, it's about dealing with antisocial people who will create problems wherever they live and how ever much society does for them (often at the expense of the less well off who go about their daily lives without causing problems to others) and there has to be a new solution to deal with them, and as far as I'm concerned, letting them all live with each other, leaving the rest of us in peace seems like a very good idea.

posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 10:18 AM
reply to post by destination now


Sometimes it may not be easy, and like me you've maybe considered murdering these people, it's best to try and just laugh about these dysfunctional people, as simple and annoying as they are, they can be amusing sometimes

edit on 4-12-2012 by Zcustosmorum because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 10:21 AM
reply to post by Zcustosmorum

haha yes, being in the west of scotland sometimes the banter is hilarious...who needs Jeremy Kyle when you have the neds and their senga's shouting "Ahhmmm gonnna rip ye" outside your door...priceless

posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 10:22 AM
reply to post by silent thunder

This guy Geert wilders he has no power anymore...he lost the last elections and It's just some crazy ideas, leftovers from the time he had some power. Never going to believe this is going to be elaborated in the parliament.

posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 10:22 AM
reply to post by destination now

I'm the opposite side of the country, but I know exactly what you mean, Kyle eat your heart out

posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 10:24 AM

Originally posted by destination now

So it's not really about pushing out the poor, it's about dealing with antisocial people who will create problems wherever they live

After having read each post in this thread and especially yours, I do have to say one thing.

I believe likely everyone agrees (or most do) on the reasons for it. I think the problem is one of semantics; calling it anti-social. I think each culture defines the term 'anti-social' differently internally. Some will view it as the inability to socialize, while others see it in a far darker borderline criminal behaviour.

I would bet this article would have garnered far less attention had it been titled

"Borderline Criminals and Vandals Being Relocated"

posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 10:39 AM
reply to post by alphabetaone

Yes, I agree, the term antisocial can have many meanings, but there is a difference between those who don't conform to societal norms but do no harm to anyone and those who the OP is focusing on are wildly different.

Kudos to you for seeing the difference and understanding the problem without just re-hashing the same old argument about what constitutes the term antisocial because whilst most people would agree that just because someone looks or acts a bit different from the norm, it shouldn't mean they are shunned by society, but when they start drunkenly banging on your door at 3am it's a different matter

posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 10:52 AM
Container houses are obviously the future.

They won't probably get this one but still they should be gratefull. They could be the only ones with homegrown food In the end.

Let's call it New Amsterdam 'cause it may easily became bigger than the old one soon.

posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 10:58 AM

Originally posted by boncho

Is this totalitarian and Orwellian social lockdown, or simply a practical solution to the issue of growing dischord in Amsterdam?

Considering they are not lining up to throw people in jail like some countries, I doubt the "scum villages" will even be that bad.

Regardless of whether or not these proposed "villages" might not be that bad,it is still a means of targetting elements of a population who have been arbritarily tagged as being without the moral composition expected of society as a whole.

Now who sets the criteria by which to determine who is deserving to be labelled anti social and thus moved to these ghettoes?,what constitutes anti social behaviour?,will it be limited to those who genuinely have been known to harrass their neighbours continuously,or will it also encompass those who are late getting to work,or not paying their bills on time?,where does it end? This could be a very slippery slope to head down.

posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 11:01 AM
Many people in this thread are confusing Anti-social behavior with Unsocial behavior.

Unsocial: not seeking the company of others.
Example: the guy at a party who is sitting by himself, having a drink and observing his surroundings. I've been that guy on occasion and often have girls tell me to "stop being so antisocial".

Anti-social: behavior that shows a lack of consideration for others.
Example: the guy at a party who is loud, drunk and belligerent, picks fights with other guests, vandalizes the hosts property, urinates on the bathroom floor, vomits wherever he pleases and is otherwise a nuisance in any way possible.

Now tell me how horrible the Dutch are for wanting such characters removed from their neighborhoods.

posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 11:04 AM
so now you have to be "social" to live in the city
so if you do not have many friends and is not on the social media as facebook you are not very social...
you do not even have to do something as long as enough of the social group think that you are not a good element you can get evicted and put in a communist prison camp
yes i saw the nice little video of antisocial living, so when there are no more of these people drinking or playing music do You wan't to go to a party, you could get drunk, you could act antisocial, i suggest you stop drinking and also your cigarettes is not very social to others quit them too, and also your dog, its too big, get a bird instead.
the last #ing normal party will be made in an anti social trailer camp..
i do not advocate "anti social" behavior but the term is toooooooo broad
typical communist USSR or new world order communist thinking.
and all brainwashed sheep just loves the word social... instead of the word HUMAN

posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 11:08 AM
reply to post by silent thunder

I am from Amsterdam and prior to WOII there were scum villages where people deemed annoying were housed. This new thing I have to read because I hadn't heard it before.

posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 11:13 AM
reply to post by silent thunder

Whatever works for them.
Hopefully it solves some of their problems.

Sometimes you have to get tough.

posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 11:24 AM

Originally posted by destination now responses from the "poor souls at the fringes of society who just need our help" practical solutions or suggestions for those of us who have to live among the antisocial, just pointless soundbites

Your from Scotland i would not imagine you take crap from anyone. However a practical solution when dealing with antisocial scum, allways carry a bigger stick than they have. Whether it be your words or something with more substance. Caging them in a specific area though seems rather draconian to me. Reminiscent of Mr Hitler treatment of the jews IMHO.
edit on 4-12-2012 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 11:34 AM
This article and OP were very timely for me. The majority (if not all) the members who have contributed seem to be outside the USA...
I'm in the dead center of it.

I live in a modest home in a quiet neighborhood of working-class people; I've been here since 1999. Over the last 3 years the house next to mine has became a drug house.

It is erratically occupied by a huge extended family who have no consideration for the general peace and quiet, nor the friendliness and cooperation that has been the neighborhood norm for a long time. They are loud, abusive, disruptive, screaming at each other and their kids at all hours, there is no mom/dad/kids structure at all.

Sometimes they're gone for DAYS, then they all arrive and start with the shrieking, screaming, and loud, booming music and generally rude, belligerent, LOOK AT ME I LIVE HERE NOW behavior that is standard fare in "the ghetto".

It's horrible. The cops have been there dozens of times; so have family services, animal control, fire department....
they (the occupants) are impossible to talk to (refuse to do so), and I'm sick and tired of it. I don't live in "social housing" (we call that "public housing"), but down the road less than 1/2 mile away there IS public housing, and the siren-noise and gunfire is never-ending.

This house, though, is privately owned (mine AND the one next to mine), and the owners are MORE obnoxious, inconsiderate, rude, and hateful than most of the "public housing" people, and their dozen or so offspring are usually unsupervised and ALWAYS LOUD. Now the ghetto-behavior has spread to a few other houses (they appear to be related to one another), and I don't understand why they don't seem to get that we, the homeowners, ENJOY the peace and quiet, and they are DISTURBING THE PEACE.

I hate it. This Amsterdam plan looks to me like a great solution; except extend it to privately owned home areas, too. We pay taxes on our property and part of that is so that we (the rest of the very friendly, integrated neighborhood owners) can enjoy the peace, quiet, upkeep, and atmosphere of our modest pocket of town.......learn how to act!!

If you're going to live here.....ADAPT to the atmosphere!

I'm sorry if this offends anyone, but social skills are important and necessary. Being disruptive, rude, obnoxious, inconsiderate, and loud when you KNOW that isn't the neighborhood culture, and doing it on purpose, is NOT COOL.

I want them to go away.

edit on 4-12-2012 by wildtimes because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 11:39 AM
reply to post by silent thunder

Scum villages are happening because why? You can thank the raves at Amsterdam for keeping the drug flow going. Drug usage there is what's making their society dumb down. People can't get jobs because their mind is in a vegetative state. No wonder they land themselves on the street.

In Canada, we call these scum villages "the social housing for the poor"

I say good for Amsterdam...but still not worth seeing pictures like these on the internet.

Read Image Article Here
edit on 4-12-2012 by Skywatcher2011 because: (no reason given)

posted on Dec, 4 2012 @ 11:49 AM
What a great idea. I wish they had that here in Canada. Were are experiencing a huge social breakdown because of a rapidly increasing drug culture.

Doesn't matter where you live anymore, stupidity is everywhere. You can be stabbed in a nice neighborhood for pocket change.

I was thinking more along the lines of an island, where they can enjoy living like the animals they are, or euthanize them by firing squad.

Honestly, in this overpopulated and greedy world we live in, if you can't get along with your neighbors, and can't refrain from breaking the law, then it should be curtains for you.

new topics

top topics

<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in