Tweet
Occupying Raleigh's Sidewalks (Photo: kakissel, flickr)
Occupation is a complicated endeavor. Its a week in and we are just starting to confront a variety of concerns.
We got a report back from legal today. The permit request to allow us onto just a section of the Capitol grounds for one week was denied. They claimed our request went against their policies. Of course we know other groups have been allowed to do exactly what we requested so it has nothing to do with their policies. Its just an attempt to not allow the occupation to grow. The last thing the government wants is a force that opposes them to grow bigger. Can’t say I am surprised. That they would violate their oaths to serve the public and instead serve their own self interest is disappointing but par for the course. If the government was responsive to the needs and rights of the 99%, we would not be out there.
The lawyer from the National Lawyers Guild, Peter, mentioned something about the sidewalk we are currently occupying that helps illustrate the sort of bureaucracy we are dealing with. The state says they do not control the sidewalk. The city says the state does control the sidewalk. Maps suggest the city controls the sidewalk but even that may depend on which map you look at. Lastly Peter added that the reality at this point is that the occupation controls the sidewalk.
At the moment it doesn’t appear we are going to challenge the denial of the permit in court. We could continue to apply for permits but there does comes a point where an occupation just has to assert its rights as citizens as afforded to them under the Constitution. There is nowhere in the Constitution where it says you need a permit to exercise ones rights to Free Speech and Assembly on public land. It reminds me of the Orwellian concept of “Free Speech Zones” that the governments sets up during the political party’s national conventions. Our government will continue to erode our freedoms and rights if we let them. Its one of the many reasons push back from the 99% is so desperately needed. “All evil needs to triumph is for good people to do nothing.” If the government takes away one of your rights and one does nothing, soon they will look to take another.
Even though the permit was denied it is not going to stop us from having a rally again on Saturday. We are starting at 11am and have a series of activities planned throughout the day. Much of our success in how far we can exert our rights without being arrested will depend on our numbers. If 300 people or more go onto the Capitol grounds, the police order them to leave and they don’t, its possible the powers that be will not order the police to arrest everyone. Logistically that is a lot of people to arrest but also it would be a powerful statement and image. In NYC the mass arrests on the Brooklyn Bridge brought many more supporters the following day. I assume that would at least give them pause. That many willing to be arrested may suggest that following through on the arrests could be like throwing gas on a fire. If enough parents where there with their kids it could be like throwing napalm on a fire.
The lack of numbers is consistently our biggest weakness. We have people that have shown extreme dedication in the face of sleepless nights and harsh elements. We have had plenty of provisions be it food, water, blankets, medical supplies, chairs, and even a growing cash reserve. But without the numbers we lack the ability to force the issue in establishing the occupation on the Capitol grounds. As some of us have looked back on how things went the first day of the occupation which started with the large rally we can see some missed opportunities and even suspect one or two of being plants to subvert the start of the occupation. If they were not plants they sure did a good job of screwing things up in ways that diminished our numbers. One suggestion I would give to future attempts by others to set up their occupations is that until you have established the occupation be quick to silence those who appear to be trying to scare people who may be considering defying an order to leave the occupation site. While allowing everyone a voice is crucial, everyone doesn’t have to speak the very first day. Saboteurs are not acting in good faith anyway. The occupation owes them nothing.
Don’t err too far on the side of just passively standing by. It is important to live up to the ideals of the movement but the forces arrayed against us don’t play fair or honorably, so do not hamstring yourself in a way that gives those forces free reign to hurt you. When Geraldo Rivera with his FOX news crew came into Liberty Park they did not just let him peacefully use their space to generate a story of propaganda due to a miscalculation about respecting his right to Free Speech. They rightfully used their voices to drive him out. When our likely saboteur asked for a show of hands for a second time for who was staying in defiance of the eventual police order to leave I almost went and grabbed the mic from his hands. I should have and then followed with some fire and brimstone reinforcing an implicit assumption we were all staying. What can I say. I am new to this.
I am not sure what kind of numbers we will have tomorrow but I doubt it will be anywhere close to the first rally which we had more time to advertise. If tomorrow does not get us on the Capitol grounds one strategy may be to take a couple weeks to advertise and prepare another large rally and then try to avoid the sort of pitfalls that happened the first time around. One thing that helped Occupy Wallstreet is they were able to draw people from outside the city who could come and actually live in the camp. That is just not possible for us to do while we are stuck on the sidewalk. We have many of our logistical concerns well handled but we just lack the bodies. People need to stop settling for the easy path of supporting from a distance. We need more truly willing to fight. I have spoken with too many people who visit us on the sidewalk who show seemingly clear understandings of how unjust and broken things are, but refuse to take the the next step. I do not know how to rally them.
Another ongoing development has to do with the homeless community. More are coming to our sidewalk occupation. At first it was just giving them food and water and then they would move on. This caused no problems and everyone was happy to help. Then we started having mild altercations with homeless who were drunk or mentally unstable. At one point a drunk homeless man named Larry kept disrupting a GA. It wasn’t that disruptive though and most seemed fine basically ignoring him. Eventually though one or two people had enough and called the attention of an officer nearby to deal with Larry. The fact that people got the police involved really bothered a couple of the other occupiers. Larry is one of the 99% and needs help. They just felt that we should be able to find a better way to resolve the situation than getting the police involved. I agree.
A couple separate times someone gave other homeless people a blanket to take with them. Later it was decided that we would be willing to let them use a blanket if they did not take it. But we have had at least a couple attempts, once successful and the 2nd stopped, of homeless people attempting to steal provisions. When I left tonight there were around 3 to 4 homeless people sleeping under blankets in lawn chairs.
They are part of the 99%, and a part that has been the most neglected and most hurt by an increasingly fascist system that is content as long as they are out of sight. There are shelters around and yet some chose to come be with us. We do not have fantastic food or anything and even under blankets they are choosing to sleep in chairs out in the cold instead of in a shelter. I am embarrassed to say that right now I am wishing I had just asked a couple of them why the chose to join us.
Someone posted on our Facebook page tonight, “We need support tonight. We are be over taken by the homeless population and the police are doing nothing about it!” A long discussion followed and it seems inevitable it will come up at a GA pretty soon. I wish I knew more about the experiences of other occupations. I think banning anyone, homeless or not, obviously under the influence of alcohol or other drugs will be a must. Not only is it a safety concern but also its a PR issue while we try to wage a PR battle to get onto the Capitol grounds. I seem to remember hearing they did that at Liberty Park though I am not certain.
An occupation needs to be a place where everyone can feel comfortable. If someone smells rank is that enough to encourage them to move on after offering them food and water? (I think not) If they never participate in the community, and only come for food and to sleep there, should they be welcomed to continue to do so? ( I think yes) If their behavior appears mentally unstable should the occupation even attempt to make them feel comfortable enough to continue coming to get food and water even if they are then encouraged to move on? (I am conflicted)
Perhaps I sound heartless. I honestly just find myself conflicted and confused. My understanding of occupations, the process of building consensus democracy based communities, is that there is a mixture of participation and compassion, and both are critically vital. But participation is an ambiguous term. However its not just about forming communities. It is also a fight for economic and social justice against very powerful forces. We are trying to force the powers that be to stop ignoring us and to pay attention to our needs. When I think about the homeless the bold text in the previous sentence echos.
Occupation is a complicated endeavor.
25 Comments
“Then we started having mild altercations with homeless who were drunk or mentally unstable.”
Are you sure they weren’t just Wall Street spies? The three martini lunch does strange things.
After reading this I’m expecting the Koch Bros. to start bussing in the homeless to all the rallys. A perfect disruptive ploy that will indeed cause problems while they can laugh at the irony of putting our liberal ideals to the test.
..”the sidewalk we are currently occupying that helps illustrate the sort of bureaucracy we are dealing with. The state says they do not control the sidewalk. The city says the state does control the sidewalk. Maps suggest the city controls the sidewalk but even that may depend on which map you look at. Lastly Peter added that the reality at this point is that the occupation controls the sidewalk”.
The one thing they do agree upon is that our tax dollars will pay for the construction of the sidewalks and that when repairs need to be made, we as homeowners will be required to pay for those, as well. Then they can go back to arguing whether the state or the city can control our access to them during a protest.
I am really impressed with your caring and compassion for the homeless who are indeed rejected and ignored by our society. Your conflict shows how brave you are to confront issues for which you and we do not have ready or easy answers. In a sense, Occupy societies are the best remedy for those among us to whom no one listens or responds to with care. On the other hand, we all need to participate and find a role that serves the community we are creating too.
Some of your guilt is misplaced, IMO. The occupation is not a welfare agency. At the least, until you are well-established and organized, it seems reasonable to me that the welcome mat should be restricted to those who are there to make a positive contribution to the purpose of the occupation. I applaud your self-examination, though, as well as your commitment to the movement. And I agree entirely with your take that basic First Amendment principles are in conflict with, and trump, petty and arbitrarily enforced local permit regulations. Onward and upward.
There are known Homeless Camps in most cities. There are 100 homeless living in the woods – a short walk from Daytona Speedway.
Hey everybody, want to take a ride? We’ll give each of you ten bucks and a McDonald’s coupon book.
The Kochs could have success in busing homeless in to occupy events. It is a valid counter strategy.
Combined with agents provocateurs. That’s a big one-two punch.
Corporate Media Blackouts, Brownouts seem to be in place.
I think you hit the nail on the head.
Feeding The Homeless (while noble) is diverting energy and resources away from the cause.
The Kochs will surely begin busing them in.
However, if they bus too many homeless in, then they will actually help the Occupy efforts by increasing its numbers.
Perhaps it is up to each Occupation to find their own way on this, though I had assumed our approach would be universal. We of OccupyMemphis cannot find a way to justify denying access and resources to anyone who agrees to abide by our Non-violence Agreement. We are, after all, inhabiting a public space. That space has been home to other people before we occupied. We have committed to a principal of Inclusiveness.
These commitments and agreements, can cause somewhat complicated, somewhat loaded interpersonal challenges, challenges that while potentially messy – and very human – can be overcome with compassion, judiciousness, patience, and perseverance. These challenges, like those experienced during contentious, grueling GA controversies, are ultimately rewarding when the outcome is derived in accord with our agreed-upon values.
People without homes are of us, the 99%.
We invite them to join us, and they live among us. We share food, clothing, shelter, gripes, tobacco, stories, laughter.
They have brought great value in myriad ways: on personal levels and in managing the encampment.
Some situations involving people who lived in our camp before we got there required conflict resolution. Some of the previous residents have been able to help out immensely in deescalating these conflicts.
Our Occupation includes a Homeless Caucus.
I found it poignant when you told of how some of the homeless chose to stay with the occupation and sleep on chairs in the cold rather than spend the nights in a shelter.
It seems to underscore how deep the need for companionship and belonging. You are right, occupation, like the establishment of a just and civil society, is a complicated endeavor. Thank you for your willingness to examine your assumptions and conflicts and work toward that goal.
You wrote, “I am embarrassed to say that right now I am wishing I had just asked a couple of them why the chose to join us”. Don’t be embarrassed. Many of us would not have even recognized that in ourselves. I am confident that you will ask, the next time. Hopefully, we will think to ask and listen, too.
Thank you for your efforts, and your thoughtful diary.
That has been one of the most inspiring parts of the individual Occupy groups – the ability and willingness to identify specific and unique needs and muster a working group or caucus with interest and expertise in that area.
OccupyMemphis does not believe it is a diversion; it is part of the cause (See our declaration @ http://www.occupymemphis.org .
We have no reason to be believe that we will not have enough to go around. We believe that a hoarding mentality is not healthful for us.
Thank you, gnomedigest, for the inside view of the real difficulties faced by occupiers. You’ve really found the #1 problem is to get more people out sheer numbers are a basic to successful occupations.
I don’t know if the homeless could be enlisted as allies by engaging them via listening to their individual stories and helping them make a sign to reflect their plight. “I am a homeless vet for 6 years” “house foreclosed” “disabled, no insurance” “add & no $$ for meds” “orphanage ’til kicked out @ age 16 — 29 years old now”
If the homeless could be enlisted to help with recruitment of others to help keep the area clean and help you maintain order with RESPECT to everyone, you might succeed in building a core group.
It may be possible for you to obtain some advice from other occupy groups on how to handle disruptive people — perhaps calling for a large group “hug” for the disruptive person?
I admire your valient effort. never. give. up.
sincerely,
karen
Thanks for keeping the issues real.
Some suggestions, which might or might not work. You need someone with practical expertise in dealing with drunk or mentally unstable homeless people to conduct a teach-in for the occupiers. Maybe multiples times, since I understand you folks are rotating shifts in order to hold the sidewalk.
The issue of alcohol and drugs with homelessness is one that is very difficult to deal with, which is why these folks are wandering the streets in the first place. Wrestling with this issue as a community in your general assemblies or having a small group discuss some innovative ideas, not excluding the possibility of finding empty space for a shelter is something that other occupations apparently have done.
You are an occupation, a protest, but also a community–and that doesn’t separate you from the complexity other communities of your size have. And in the wider world, there are small communities continually on the edge of eviction because of nearby resources, increases in neighboring property values, and so on. The only difference most of you folks have is the luxury of going home. You decide to be there. And thank you for it.
How does Occupy Memphis handle drug and alcohol issues with the homeless? Or with anyone else for that matter?
Or mental episodes that discomfit the rest of the group?
There is a bit of culture shock when folks first start living on the streets, even if it’s an intentional decision.
At Occupy New Hampshire in Manchester, the homeless population are being included. They are referred to as Park Occupation Experts.
You say “The last thing the government wants is a force that opposes them to grow bigger. ” Does that mean you would oppose government efforts to put people to work like Roosevelt did? Do you want to fire more teachers, firefighters, nurses? I personally doubt that “the government” fears that it won’t grow bigger. I think they simply respond to elite interests and what they perceive those interests to be. If you joined the occupation because you don’t want government to grow bigger, I hope you are able to pick up some other points of view while you are there. Like about the homeless. Thinking these issues out is also a complicated affair, that’s why we all need to do it.
“The occupation is not a welfare agency.”
Or maybe it is. Maybe what this whole thing is about is creating a new way of living..together.
Set up a medical area, find qualified people to staff it as possible for those who are unable to contribute to the cause. Give everyone else a job to do, the burden shared is a burden lessened.
Be the change
Gi
This article by Barbara Ehrenreich could be a great contribution to the discussion about the homeless.
http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175457/tomgram%3A_barbara_ehrenreich%2C_homeless_in_america/
OscarRomero, you beat me to the punch! (Great minds think alike.) Ms. Ehrenreich’s piece is really important.
I would add, please don’t feel conflicted about the mentally unstable. If they are not actually violent, you will be doing them such a favor(and a favor to their agonizing parents) just to allow them to hover on the fringes if nothing else. There is an epidemic of young folk out there who could be classed as such – I know, my son was one of them. Often they seem mentally unstable because they are trying to get off drugs, not because they are on them. Homeless communities in the past helped my son. Time for us to help them.
First thing is: All of the following applies to all of us, without regard to diagnosis or socio-economic status. Period.
Our Non-violence Agreement includes pledge of no weapons, drugs, or alcohol on site.
If someone is perceived to violate our social contract, we try to open a mutually respectful non-judgmental low-key conversation about what OccupyMemphis is doing, along with a gentle reminder about the agreed-upon rules. We talk about how important it is that we all be in solidarity on these rules, how they help us grow together, how they help protect us and our vision. Needless to say, usually we don’t even have to go that far into the conversation before heads start nodding up and down in agreement. Sometimes, folks just walk away.
Only once thus far (that I am aware of), did the conversation failed to produce a mutually satisfactory outcome. This was during GA, by the way. Our Peacekeeping Team asserted that we are unable to share our food, shelter, company, and other resources with our sisters and brothers who can’t abide by our Non-violence agreement. We explained that we can’t allow ourselves to be in proximity to people when they are inebriated, violent, in possession of illegal drugs/alcohol, etc. We said that, though we will not summon the police (except for immediate, compelling threat of physical harm), we will not lie to law enforcement officials on anyone’s behalf who cannot abide. That sent the message and the individual just walked away.
(Other homeless sisters and brothers were eager to summon the police, though we tried to talk them out of it.
What I meant was that they do not want the Occupation itself to grow bigger. I didn’t mean government itself. I personally think talk of things like “big government” tends to just be a diversionary tactic that is not even well defined. Its brought up to elicit an emotional response not foster an honest discussion.
Governments beholden to corporate interest want to be able to continue to serve their corporate donors without having a large and increasingly vocal group of citizens publicizing to everyone else how the individual elected officials pass laws to help corporations while ignoring the needs of the 99%.
I think that these elected officials understand that if they allow a true camp to form on the capitol grounds it has a better chance to draw more people to actually come and live there. The larger the occupation gets the louder it gets and the more attention it gets. That is what I was referring too.
The last thing I want is for more teachers, policemen, firefighters, or frankly anyone else, to lose their jobs. When I was arrested on the first Saturday a TV reporter asked me if I had any comments about being arrested as I was being led away by the police. I responded, “Someone has to fight for the pensions of these cops.” I meant that 100%. Someone also has to fight for the jobs of these sorts of civil servants.
I certainly agree with that sentiment, and the long-term goal. But I am also aware that Noah did not put the animals into the Ark until the Ark was ready to transport them.
Hm.
Very good point.
We happen to be uniquely poised, perhaps, to deal with uncertainties of the street a little better than others. Among our occupiers is an E.R. doc, an active-duty Firefighter/EMT who formerly worked as a social-service provider to dual-diagnosis homeless populations, an EMT, and several community first-responder trained individuals.
Many of our group are deeply plugged into our local Peace and Justice movement.
Nice mix.