Finally got around to watching Benefits Street - And now I am Angry

I blogged a few days back about Benefits Street in my post I admit that I had never seen it but couldn't find anything to substantiate the claim that it was Demonizing the Poor. Well I have now managed to catch up with the first four episodes and to be honest it has left me feeling pretty angry.

I am not in anyway angry with the residents of James Turner Street (Although I find "Black Dee" very annoying and in need of a bit of a reality check.) but the rest of them I feel sorry for as they struggle to escape the welfare trap they have been placed in. I feel angry at the left wing twitterati taking to social media to denounce every part of the show with the great assurance of an ostrich with it's head in the sand singing "there's no problem" over and over again.

Because you know what, There is a problem and these people need help, they may not fit in with your idealised "Worthy Poor" that you are so heavily invested in it blinds you from everything else, but these people need help, they need responsibility and to be treated as adults - and I believe that is what the upper class left don't want.

Far from demonizing the poor I saw a great deal of hope from the first four episodes of Benefits Street.
In the last episode we saw White Dee's daughter taking work experience where she was cleaning toilets as it was better to start somewhere rather than just live of the state.

Then there is the 50p man, Stephen Smith,  who creates a business from trying to help people who may not be able to afford the whole product, he spends his time driving round selling 50p portions of washing powder, soap, toilet rolls etc... and is actually a great role model for anyone of possible solutions to the welfare trap.

Even Fungi who at first glance looks like the worst of the worst is trying to sort his life out, even though his idea of a life coaching note is biro scribbled on the wall this is still showing that he has the desire to change and should therefore be helped to have the ability.

And that is what I think the real point of the welfare system should be and where we have massively missed the point, the welfare system should not be about Benefits and definitely not about unconditional benefits, it should be about helping people get into work, get sorted and lifting them above where they are regardless of limitations, not just handing them cash and going to the wine bar to meet your friends safe in the knowledge that you have done whatever you can for the "poor unfortunates." 

This is no better represented than by Mark and Becky, the young couple who struggle to look after two out of control children, at the first meeting they appear to be terrible parents without prospects for their children and seemingly unconcerned with parenting, and yet over the course of the shows we see a different story, a young couple who are struggling to do their best in a society that they don't think gives them any choice. Who, and this is the important bit, when given the skills they need are desperately trying to better themselves as parents, Mark who has never worked in his life even gets a job trying to sell charity subscriptions, he may not succeed in selling any, but for the first time in his life he tries to stand on his own two feet, and that is the first step to a life not just without benefits but with self respect and the feeling of pride that can only come by looking at what you have and knowing that you have earned it from your own hard work. This is what the Champagne Socialists want to prevent him from experiencing and this is why I am angry.

Benefits Street - Propaganda or Real Life

There is a great deal of debate going on about Benefits Street and what the show is trying to show. Channel 4 say it is a "fair and balanced observational documentary". whilst commentators on the left claim it is about Demonizing those claiming Benefits.

Now I hadn't planned on having a view on this as I have simply never seen the show and so don't know what the fuss is about. but I have read a great deal of the opposition about it and it appears to me to break down along the lines.

1) Benefit Claimants are not like this

From the things I have read about being shown, then I have to say that SOME are, in my time as a local Councillor and even more so simply from my time living in a deprived neighborhood I have heard nothing about the residents that I find shocking. Whilst I would never say that everyone on Benefits is "Playing" the system or "up to no good" I have met enough of them to know it isn't an isolated occurrence.

2) All Residents of James Turner Street are crooks.

The first I heard about the show stated that the street had 90% claimant rate, I assume this would have been challenged if it wasn't true so assuming this is right they are still saying that 10% do not receive any benefits. Also to argue that most people on Benefits are not unemployed (Including Pensioners and Low Paid) is fine but is there evidence that people claiming benefits were purposely ignored for the show? Maybe there is but I haven't seen it.

3) It tries to show that ALL benefit claimants are crooks.

One thing I have never heard claimed is that Benefit Street is a typical representation of ALL claimants and if anyone did (other than a few mupwits on twitter) I would refute that, as just as I have experienced many people the likes of which seem to be represented on the show, I have met many who are simply trying to do the best with the situation they are in, and it is these people who should feel the most anger to the people featured as it is not the TV company who make people on Benefits look bad, it is the people on Benefits who act badly.

4) People were mislead to appear

I have heard this many times (Although never with a direct quote) but from what I understand the name of the show and the focus on benefits was known to everyone who was filmed. Even if we assume that the premise of the show was kept secret then I still don't think that the film company would be responsible as surely all they did was point a camera at the people, they didn't make them go out and steal (And if they did the person being filmed should have said no, after all if they asked them to jump of a bridge would they?)

So whilst I think that this show sounds like gross examples of the Benefit system for the Left Wing Commentators to pretend it doesn't exist explains why they never tried to get a handle on the issue, personally I think this is a lot more to do with the fact that all the Champagne and Idealism Socialists are angry because their argument of 100% or benefit claimants belonging to the Noble Poor doesn't stand up to scrutiny of placing SOME of them in front of the camera, at the end of the day the Daily Mail could try and Demonize the Poor all day long but it will never be as efficient as letting the people who are taking advantage of the system Demonize themselves.

FINAL NOTE - I just wanted to stress one last time, before the hate mail starts coming in. The views here are based SOLELY on MY experiences with living in a deprived area and meeting SOME people like the ones portrayed as well as SOME who were not. I do not believe nor do I claim that it was ALL people either in the area I lived or ALL people who claim benefits.