As I said, I love camping, but I can bet you my bottom dollar if I and my family were to pitch a two room Great Outdoors Tent on council land in the middle of a metroplitan area I'd be given a notice of trespass and ask to move on quick smart.
So how do these "freedom Campers" get away with it? Simple - they're protesters. And that means as long as it is peaceful, they have all the rights to remain where they are and protest.
But this raises a number of issues. Firstly there are children involved with the protests and by all accounts these protesters have limited access to ablutions and cleaning areas. So do we not only have a bunch of smelly sickness beneficiaries and Green Party Card Members we also have children living in a situation where disease is a possibility. Now what right minded parent would subject their children to that possibility?
I watched TVNZ interview a number of protesters around the country. I think they provided a fair coverage but what got up my goat was one interviewee who was utterly vehement towards the camera yet acted up for it consistently. Apparently he was a senior member of the protest and spokesman, but all he did was keep telling the reporter and on camera that TVNZ wasn't welcome on his protest site and kept giving the camera the bird. And there was the sickkness beneficiary who didn't really know why he was there, ceded that it had something to do with governments and corporates, and here he was camping in hostile conditions "on the sickness benefit" (for the challenged, having a go at the hand that feeds).
I applaud the stance of these protesters, but to be honest they aren't winning any votes if they are disrupting the lives of ordinary folk, and not to mention the schooling and health of their children. I think there is enough power in the Trespass Act for city councils to issue notices and for the Police to enact those notices. I don't care if it becomes a physical confrontation, move them on to camping grounds where they have services and where they have to pay their way. They're on a free wicket doing what they are doing. Not to mention being a health and safety risk.
It has got to the point now where disruption and risk are the only real options left for those who wish to protest. I have watched this unfold over the last ten years and this is literally our only option in the short term, short of violence. Until your generation and the one above it are at retirement age and out of the power positions, there is no hope of real change without actions such as this. The police here have done the right thing by understanding that following the orders they were given were not really that productive and would've done more harm than good.
ReplyDeleteMoving protesters to camping grounds completely defies the point of the protest.
And as a sickness beneficiary, I would still consider protesting. I don't consider that biting the hand that feeds- I consider it a peaceful last resort to get my voice across. MPs do not listen to your suggestions. WINZ do not listen to your suggestions. The lawmakers do not listen to your suggestions. They listen to the people holding the money. I am not protesting the welfare system, although I could quite happily. The welfare system is just as flawed as the bigger system behind it.
The occupy campers are there for a reason. They're in public spaces for a reason. It is not a protest in the traditional sense- it's a massive think tank and an exercise in awareness and personal power. We as people have every right to gather and demand productive change from those that govern us.
Everyone at the occupy protests around the world may have different reasons for being there and that is okay. Some people do not know why they are there- but I can guarantee sooner or later they -will know- and will either stay and be informed, or leave informed.
I personally am not protesting as i've spent 10 years trying to get the word out and I feel now is my time to be working on myself, creating a person that I feel will be able to change our future positively.
The way the world is being run now is absolutely vile and unfortunately a bunch of sociopaths have decided they have the only say in how it is run. We are destroying our planet, and ignoring the fact that things can change dramatically for the better on many levels. I don't even have the words anymore to describe how fucked we are, and if the worst action to that is some activists camping on public land, so be it. I'd rather that than open guerilla warfare, riots, coups, wars or one of the many alternative options. I applaud the occupy movement for insisting on peaceful and open protest, I applaud them for being ready to stand up and share with others the reality of the world we live in.
Don't get me wrong Moonest, I too applaud the reason. And yes short of inciting domestic rioting or physical protest the means that currently is being used is applaudable. All I ask is that the protest be taken away from squatting (which it is by law) and more into tangible forms of protests (hit and run governments, councils, corporates in a peaceful but meaning way). Hikoi has more benefits than squatting.
ReplyDeleteMost occupy movements are strongly incorporating those tactics into the protest, particularly in the U.S. Regular marches to specific corporate or government entities, etc. The camp sites are generally a home base for several other activities that are going on under the umbrella. Funnily enough, in the U.S.A they are actually looking at taking over foreclosed homes, which is true squatting. In this case (nz) it's more civil disobedience, rather than actual squatting and civil disobedience is a common and productive form of protest. I know in Auckland we have tribal permission to occupy Aotea Square, and no council problems as far as I know. Large populations of people using their brains and mouths together have more power than squatting AND hikoi, and yet all three are technically being used in this case :)
ReplyDeleteHmm - while I applaude their right to protest - wot about the right of the other city folk who dont have access to their square? But then if there was no objection to the protestors occupation, they would not get any media time. Their occupation seems to be the only thing the media covers and not the reason behind the protest. I can see both sides ---buddhism ... however Ive neva liked the way folk will put their children in marches and protests around NZ. That, to me, is exploitation of those children. Children have no place as far as I see involved and 'living' in this situation.
ReplyDelete