Daily Archives: 13 May 2012

Following on from my last post, this is the closest to a list of demands so far issued by Occupy. It has not yet been endorsed by any indivudal part of the Occupy movement! I’ll take it clause by clause. The manifesto is in italics. My commentary is in plain text.

Global May Manifesto

The statement below does not speak, or claim to speak, on behalf of everyone in the Global Spring/Occupy/Take the Square movements. This is an attempt by some inside the movements to reconcile statements written and endorsed in the different assemblies around the world. The process of writing the statement was consensus based, open to all, and regularly announced on our international communications platforms, that are also open to all (e.g. the ‘squares’ mailing list, the weekly global roundtables and the ‘international’ facebook group). It was a long and difficult process, full of compromises. This statement is offered to peoples’ assemblies around the world for discussions, revisions and endorsements.

Consensus in this context means that everybody involved in writing it had to agree before it was passed.

There will be a process of a global dialogue, and this statement is part of it, a work-in-progress. We do not make demands from governments, corporations or parliament members, which some of us see as illegitimate, unaccountable or corrupt. We speak to the people of the world, both inside and outside our movements. We want another world, and such a world is possible:

That’s pretty clear – there are no demands to existing political or economic leaders. Instead, this manifesto appeals directly to the people of the world. That inevitably means that anyone supporting this statement has put themselves beyond reach from political action unless all existing systems are destroyed and constitutions completely rewritten. That is theoretically possible but it does mean that very many people who might otherwise have become involved will not because they fear the prospect of the wholesale revolution required to create the new world the manifesto dreams of. It is a fundamentalist approach and completely uneccesary. There’s no reason to exclude any group of people from the conversation. To deliberately exclude even the possibility of dialogue with people wielding power is, at best, politically short-sighted and, at worst, self-defeating.

1. The economy must be put to the service of people’s welfare, and to support and serve the environment, not private profit. We want a system where labour is appreciated by its social utility, not its financial or commercial profit. Therefore, we demand:

2. To achieve these objectives, we believe that the economy should be run democratically at all levels, from local to global. People must get democratic control over financial institutions, transnational corporations and their lobbies. To this end, we demand:

3. We believe that political systems must be fully democratic. We therefore demand full democratization of international institutions, and the elimination of the veto power of a few governments. We want a political system which really represents the variety and diversity of our societies:

This is a worldwide Global Spring. We will be there in May 2012; we will fight until we win. We will not stop being people. We are not numbers. We are free women and men.

Glib words. Not exactly the rallying cry at the end of the Communist Manifesto is it? It’s not even grammatically or schematically accurate (Occupy is a peaceful movement, thus no ‘fighting’).

For a Global Spring!

For global democracy and social justice!

Take to the streets on May 2012!

Yeah, yeah. Except that in London only 300 people turned up. There were more people in my local pub last night.

Yesterday, Occupy London activists staged another protest stunt. They marched around the City of London, identifying the key players in the world of predatory corporatism as they went. By the evening they had settled on the steps of the Royal Exchange, where they held a ‘people’s assembly’ to decide what action to take, although some had already set up tents there as if intending to stay. Although literally anybody could join the assembly, the City of London police did not. When I was previously involved with Occupy London, I imagined that the reason the police did not join the assemblies with a view to frustrating them was because it was perfectly clear that the activists frustrated their own intentions when left to their own devices. The history of Occupy London’s general assemblies is a history of taking only the most obvious decisions and, very often, not even those. The keenest of activists told me that their numbers last night were 500. Assuming that figure is accurate (which I doubt because other activists were reporting between 200 to 300) that is a very different picture to the 5,000 that gathered on the steps of St Paul’s Cathedral last October. By the look of the tweets at the end of yesterday, it looked like they had been evicted from the steps and a number of arrests made.

It is also very different from the picture emerging from Spain. The BBC is reporting that thousands of people have filled public squares in Madrid and set up camp there. BBC Radio 4′s Today programme reported that the Spanish activists have announced that they will stay there for three days. Obviously there are stark differences between Spain and the UK. Leaving to one side the key points that Spain is considerably poorer and suffering worse deprivation, sorry, austerity, than the UK, notably the Spanish have set a time limit on this particular period of activism.

For some reason, Occupy London lacks the ability to make clever decisions about political timing. As with comedy, timing is very important in politics. I argued from the very beginning of Occupy London that the activists should have set a time limit on any one camp, to prevent each one disintegrating into social chaos and a media feeding frenzy and to keep the focus on the politics. An open ended occupation without conspicuously specific demands which invites literally anyone to join is bound to fail for the simple reason that it must inevitably devote most of its energies into constant social organisation.

That is what happened inside Occupy London with the consequence that most of the people involved at the start were driven away, myself included. The numbers attending this high-profile relaunch are embarassingly small. Even the EDL can muster greater numbers for a high profile event. Previously Occupy London had declared that 1,000 people had declared via Facebook that they would join in yesterday. Clearly, at least half of those apparently committed activists did not turn out, even with the good weather. Occupy London will argue that this was intended to be a fluffy walkaround the City and the big event is due to occur on Tuesday. I’m not holding my breath.

When asked what its demands Occupy London endlessly refers enquirers to its initial statement. Here it is:

This initial statement was collectively agreed by over 500 people on the steps of St Paul’s on 26 October 2011. Like all forms of direct democracy, the statement will always be a work in progress and is used as a basis for further discussion and debate.

1. The current system is unsustainable. It is undemocratic and unjust. We need alternatives; this is where we work towards them.
2. We are of all ethnicities, backgrounds, genders, generations, sexualities dis/abilities and faiths. We stand together with occupations all over the world.
3. We refuse to pay for the banks’ crisis.
4. We do not accept the cuts as either necessary or inevitable. We demand an end to global tax injustice and our democracy representing corporations instead of the people.
5. We want regulators to be genuinely independent of the industries they regulate.
6. We support the strike on the 30^th November and the student action on the 9^th November, and actions to defend our health services, welfare, education and employment, and to stop wars and arms dealing.
7. We want structural change towards authentic global equality. The world’s resources must go towards caring for people and the planet, not the military, corporate profits or the rich.
8. The present economic system pollutes land, sea and air, is causing massive loss of natural species and environments, and is accelerating humanity towards irreversible climate change. We call for a positive, sustainable economic system that benefits present and future generations. [1]
9. We stand in solidarity with the global oppressed and we call for an end to the actions of our government and others in causing this oppression.
10. This is what democracy looks like. Come and join us!

Notes

[1] Article 8 was added to the statement following a proposal being passed by the Occupy London General Assembly on 19 November 2011.

Excepting the fifth point, there is nothing here which could be immediately written into law. All of it, as the prefatory remark says, is a work in progress. Other statements were issued too. When the City of London Corporation was preparing to evict the original Occupy London camp it offered an unreasonable deal for the activists to quit. At the time, I posted my own explanation of how to deal with the Devil’s details, clause by clause. Essentially, the offer was clever in that it was framed in a way that could not be accepted by the activists but definitely represented a reasonable offer for the purpose of the activists applying for legal aid. Luckily, I was able to recruit high calibre lawyers to work for the camp for free. At the end of that post, I urged a sensible counter offer was made, to prolong the negotiating period. Instead the camp’s general assembly cobbled together some political demands, which by their very nature could not be construed as a legal offer with respect to the camp. Unsurprisingly, the City simply ignored these demands. For quite a long time, these and the fifth point above were the only specific demands of Occupy London. Here they are:

The following demands made of the City of London by Occupy London’s City of London Policy Working Group reached consensus at the General Assembly by St Paul’s Cathedral in November 2011.

• Publish full, year-by year breakdowns of the City Cash account, future and historic.

• Make the entirety of its activities subject to the Freedom of Information Act.

• Detail all advocacy undertaken on behalf of the banking and finance industries, since October 2008.

Whilst many political activists can readily see the important of these demands, they’re not exactly crowd pleasers. To most Londoners they appeared irrelevant. There are a series of other statements. Here they are:

This statement from Occupy London’s International Outreach Working Group to create global dialogue reached consensus at the General Assembly by St Paul’s Cathedral in November 2011.

• Our global system is unsustainable. It is undemocratic and unjust, driven by profit in the interest of the few.

• An economic system based on infinite growth, but which relies on finite resources, is leading humanity and the environment to destruction. As long as this system remains in place, people of the world continue to suffer from an increasingly unfair share of income and wealth.

• We seek a global system that is democratic, just and sustainable. The world’s resources must not go to the military or corporate profit, but instead go towards caring for people’s needs: water, food, housing, education, health, community.

Again, this is little more than meaningless guff which practically everyone could agree with. Eventually, Occupy London managed to agree a tangible set of demands. Here they are:

This initial statement of Occupy London’s Corporations Working Group reached consensus at the General Assembly by St Paul’s Cathedral on 25th November 2011.

Of the world’s 100 largest economic entities in 2000, 51 were corporations and 49 were countries. [1]

With its relentless pursuit of profit at all cost, the present corporate system fits the definition of a psychopath, driving the rapid destruction of our society and the natural environment. [2] This is done only to benefit a small minority and not the needs of the 99 per cent. The way corporations and governments are intertwined fundamentally undermines democracy. Corporations are rarely transparent or accountable to the people. This corporate system is broken and we call on the people to reclaim their power and bring about a radical and immediate change.

We propose these following points as first steps towards this:

Globally, corporations deprive the public purse of hundreds of billions of pounds each year, leaving insufficient funds to provide people with fair living standards. We must abolish tax havens and complex tax avoidance schemes, and ensure corporations pay tax that accurately reflects their real profits.

Corporate lobbying subverts our democracy. Last year corporations spent £2 billion influencing the British government. We believe exploitative corporate lobbying has no place in a democratic society. Legislation to ensure full and public transparency of all corporate lobbying activities must be put in place. This should be overseen by a credible and independent body, directly accountable to the people.

The existing system of corporate sanctions allows executives and board members to avoid individual responsibility for the consequences of their actions and inactions. Those directly involved in the decision-making process must be held personally liable for their role in the misdeeds of their corporations and duly charged for all criminal behaviour.

A welcome development at Occupy London is that many people working within these corporations have communicated support for our concerns. We encourage anyone to come forward and offer their opinions, or any relevant information, either openly or confidentially, to add to this discussion.

We recognise that corporate employees may feel like they do not have the power alone to create change, but by welcoming them into talks with Occupy London and working together, we can create a socially responsible and sustainable economic system.

Notes
[1] Sales: Fortune, July 31, 2000. GDP: World Bank, World Development Report 2000
[2] http://www.thecorporation.com/index.cfm?page_id=47, http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0218-01.htm

Thus far we have three concrete demands which are capable of being swiftly converted into law because they are specific and three demands which focus solely on the City of London. Six demands then. Unfortunately, Occupy London did not see fit to list them all together in any one convenient place. The reason for this is that the activists inside Occupy London do not understand how to organise a political campaign. Over time, they have degenerated into only talking to themselves. Political action requires recruitment. Admittedly, there have been political organisations that exclude people and then become ‘successful’. The Bolsheviks are a classic example. However, they formally excluded people, whereas Occupy London is hell bent on driving them away.

Doubtless this harsh view will upset some of the activists who I got to know inside Occupy London. I well understand that they have committed so much to the project that they have developed a sense of ownership of it. It is difficult to let go of stuff like that. However, as political projects go, Occupy London has gone awry and is now damaged beyond repair. Here’s another statement, from last December.

This initial statement by Occupy London’s Economic Working Group reached consensus at the General Assembly by St Paul’s Cathedral on 6th December 2011.

Our economy is in crisis and urgently requires profound changes; both small and immediate as well as radical and systemic. This statement is intended to be a springboard for discussion, both within Occupy LSX and beyond, about how to achieve this transformation.

Occupy LSX has been labelled as many things but what unites us is our commitment to economic justice and social equality. We are part of a worldwide movement working to create a more equitable, democratic and sustainable society which will ultimately benefit everyone. Below we outline some of the major issues in the current economic system that need to be addressed.

1. Banks and financial institutions need to be accountable to society
Financial institutions have increased in size to dominate our economy but have not become socially accountable in line with their increased power. Since 2008 hundreds of thousands of people have lost their jobs and millions have experienced pain and hardship because of reckless financial practices. The debts incurred have been loaded onto almost every person in this country while a wealthy elite further enrich themselves. Despite promises of reform, banks have been allowed to continue business as normal. Remuneration practices that irresponsibly reward risk and speculative behaviour must end, and deeper structural changes must follow, or our financial system will inevitably continue to fail.

2. Current austerity measures are making a bad situation worse
The UK government’s approach is damaging its own citizens now and the future of generations to come. Cuts to public services are having a disastrous impact on education, employment, business, health, social care and law and order. We oppose the unfair cuts and regressive taxes, currently inflicted on those vulnerable groups least able to bear the burden. Women especially pick up the pieces, often through unwaged work. Deep and painful cuts, coupled with increased taxation, have been put in place based on political motives and flawed beliefs. The strategy is misguided, damaging and not working.

3. The current economic system is unsustainable
Our economy encourages short-term profit at the expense of long-term sustainability. Not only does it precipitate environmental damage, it is also ill equipped to remedy it. It has fuelled a proliferation of financial debt and is piling up ecological damage that future generations may never be able to repair. The climate crisis and dwindling energy and mineral resources, land to build and produce food on, and the growing population, are incompatible with the prevailing economic strategy. We must rewrite the rules of the economy in the interests of sustainability and wellbeing.

4. Tackle systemic economic inequality
The economic system we live in increasingly benefits the few over the many. We believe it is fundamental to the future health of society to reduce economic inequality and its grave social consequences. There has been a widening of the chasm between rich and poor in the last 30 years and a persistent gender and age pay gap. Inequality has torn apart families, left children hungry and without care, pensioners to freeze and turned communities against each other in a battle for housing and other scarce resources. Many within society are burdened with crippling debt. It cannot continue. We must acknowledge the role of the monetary and current tax system in perpetuating and augmenting inequality. It is not enough to redress the excesses of the system: we must reverse the damage done.

5. Clamp down on tax avoidance
Our economy allows widespread avoidance of tax by those able to afford it. There has to be reform to the tax system to ensure that those with the greatest capacity to pay tax do not have the greatest capacity to avoid it. We must abolish the use of tax havens and complex corporate tax structures and loopholes that allow corporations, financial institutions and the wealthiest individuals to avoid contributing their fair share to society.

6. Independent and effective regulation
We call for effective regulation that works for the good of our society. Regulators must be totally independent, transparent, publicly accountable and provided with proper enforcement powers. Dangerous and highly leveraged trading practices have not been regulated properly. Britain must cease obstructing international efforts and take the lead in developing stronger regulation.

The St Paul’s Institute found that 75% of financial services workers agree with us that the gap between rich and poor is too wide [1]. Occupy London is creating an open, participatory space to confront the problems at the heart of our financial system, outside of the confines of current political discourse.

This conversational piece doesn’t add much to the picture. Finally, one more statement was issued. Here it is:

This statement of autonomy by Occupy London reached consensus at the General Assembly by St Paul’s Cathedral on 14th December 2011.

Occupy London is a people’s movement. It is party-less, leaderless, by the people and for the people. It is not a business, a political party, an advertising campaign or a brand. It is not for sale.

We welcome all, who in good faith, seek redress of grievances through non-violence. We provide a forum for peaceful assembly of individuals to engage in participatory as opposed to partisan debate and democracy. We welcome a diversity of opinion, particularly those gained from direct experience, and are open to amending or modifying proposals based on what we hear and compatible with our stated intentions.

Any statement or declaration not released through the General Assembly and made public online at occupylsx.org should be considered independent of Occupy London.

We wish to clarify that Occupy London is not and never has been affiliated with any established political party, candidate or organisation. Our only affiliation is with the people.

The people who are working together to create this movement are its sole and mutual caretakers. If you have chosen to devote resources to building this movement, especially your time and effort, then it is yours.

Any organisation is welcome to support us with the knowledge that doing so will mean questioning your own institutional frameworks of work and hierarchy and integrating our principles into your modes of action.

SPEAK WITH US, NOT FOR US.

Occupy London values collective resources, dignity, integrity and autonomy above money. We have not made endorsements. All donations received are transparently allocated.

We acknowledge the existence of professional activists who work to make our world a better place. If you are representing, or being compensated by an independent source while participating in our process, please disclose your affiliation at the outset. Those seeking to capitalise on this movement or undermine it by appropriating its message or symbols are not a part of Occupy London.

We stand in solidarity. We are Occupy London.

This strikes a somewhat defensive tone, I think. I can’t see the point of it either. These statements are the sum total of the official political statements of Occupy London. Despite having an excellent media crew, the official output is stymied by the principle that everyone has to agree everything. Personally, I don’t want to live a society governed along those lines. I don’t think many other people do. It isn’t what democracy looks like. It isn’t what anarchy looks like either. It is something else. It is a peculiar form of intellectual laziness, that refuses to acknowledge that as a system of social organisation this methodology doesn’t make decisions which people adhere to. Thus, early agreements were that there would be no drugs or alcohol in the camp. This was broken every night, often by people who publicly supported the agreement.

With the passing of time, Occupy London is dissolving. Without such an auspicious start, that is a shame. It’s very easy to maintain a claim to political perfection. It’s not so easy to roll up your sleeves, go and talk to people who don’t want to camp out every night, get involved in real politics and make compromises when they hurt. The first step to doing this is to agree one set of demands. Political parties call these manifestos. Whatever you call them, without them there is no politics, just the pursuit of photo-opportunities.