Heather Conn Blogs

Occupy Vancouver tents on their last day by the art gallery (Nov. 21)

I applaud how Vancouver, BC mayor Gregor Robertson handled the recent dismantling of Occupy Vancouver. Unlike some mayors in U.S. cities (e.g. Portland and Oakland), he deserves tremendous credit for avoiding riot squads, confrontation and violent clashes on the occupiers’ final day in front of the art gallery (Nov. 21). Thankfully, the occupiers, too, remained peaceful as they left.

On the morning of their last day in that location, I asked one young man, who was holding high a “Vive la Revolution” sign, if he expected the occupiers’ 2 p.m. departure to be violent. He told me: “Part of me hopes so.”

I watched a half-dozen occupiers take apart their tents at 11:30 a.m., two-and-a-half hours before the city had ordered them gone. The atmosphere was relaxed. A man with a throaty voice and lone guitar was singing “Democracy” at the main microphone. A handful of city officials and uniformed policed mingled with occupiers, standing on the outskirts of the mini tent city. One young man with a painted face walked up to three officers and told them “I’m glad you’re here.”

Song sparrows chittered in the trees at the corner of Georgia and Hornby. From a block away, my stomach felt the pounding, visceral beat of drums. A small group of first nations men and women had formed a circle of seats at Georgia and Granville and were drumming, with bold, rhythmic power, to protest the police handling of the murders of women who went missing on Vancouver’s Downtown Eastside. “I want to know what happened to my sister,” a native man said into a microphone, standing on the downtown intersection that the city had closed in preparation for protest.

The occupiers’ camp had helped spawn this display of free speech. Hurray for such an open lament. An expert in social movements, quoted recently in Canadian Press, has said that Occupy is the most important democratic social movement of the last two generations and that demonstrators who have taken over parks and other public spaces should be left alone. Occupy Wall Street has said: “You can’t evict an idea whose time has come.”

“We’re observing a process of commercializing and privatizing public space, and we should be outraged by it,” says Vincent Mosco, professor emeritus of sociology at Queen’s University. “But we don’t hear about limits on public space until a genuine public movement raising significant political issues decides to make use of public space.”

“I hope it [Vancouver’s Occupy movement] is not dead,” environmental leader David Suzuki told about 100 people at his foundation’s Elders’ Forum, held Nov. 24 at the downtown Vancouver Public Library. Democracy is tough, he added, and today’s young occupiers need the helping hand of elders to tell them what roots they’re coming from.

“They’re trying to be different in having no leaders but that’s doomed in the world we’re living,” he said. Suzuki visited the occupy camps in Vancouver and Montreal, but he must have missed the occupiers’ elders’ tent in his home city. At a morning breakout session in his own day-long forum, several female seniors spoke in favor of the occupy movement and its desire for grassroots change. They might not have had tents pitched with the occupiers, but their hearts were alongside them.

Both individually and as a society, as we face daily challenges of injustice and inequities, we all have a basic choice to make: What will we use to motivate our thoughts and actions – love or fear? Do we choose peace or conflict? This sounds ridiculously simple, yet look at how fear fuels much, if not most, of human behavior around the world.

I like what Charles Eisenstein, author of Sacred Economics, says in the five-minute documentary excerpt of Occupy Love, produced by Velcrow Ripper. We need a healing world of peace that works for everyone. People, whether they’re part of the 99 or one per cent, flourish in an atmosphere of joint creativity, intimacy, community, and open communication, where life has meaning. We can all create such a world. Let’s start now. Occupy Love.

    — photos by Heather Conn

Are you on the side of the 1% or the 99%?

“We need intelligent leaders with a sense of their own limits, experienced people whose lives have taught them caution. We still need the best and brightest, but we need them to have somehow learned humility along the way.”  — Ross Douthat, The New York Times   

As we approach upcoming municipal elections across B.C., within the larger context of the global Occupy movement, I urge all voters on the Sunshine Coast to consider:

• Who will best honour public (community) interests, input, and involvement in local decision-making, rather than the private interests of developers and logging companies?

• Who is willing to create or support new, sustainable business models that will protect our environment and reflect the long-term interests of the Sunshine Coast as a whole, rather than make localized choices for short-term gain?

The group Sunshine Coast Citizens for Responsible Development recently stated:

“We support responsible smart development, which includes involving the greater community in decisions affecting us all. Your vote may decide whether your town becomes a free-for-all for developers or whether you will be allowed to participate in what happens in your town and your ability to freely speak about it.

“It is important that we have elected officials who are working for the people and not looking at ways to silence them. Please get out and vote this time around and encourage others to do so as well. There is a lot at stake and once it’s gone, it’s gone.”

I support this position. At the world level, it is clear that “the people” (99%) are tired of having their voices, interests, and needs ignored or minimized. Any election is a powerful time to change this dynamic. In our local scene, we can vote for someone who will support collaborative, transparent government and not choose profits over people.

In journalism, we’re taught: “Follow the money.” What private organizations or individuals are funding a certain election campaign and why? Whose interests are some candidates truly representing? Follow alliances, public and private, and see where they lead.

As a Roberts Creek resident, I support incumbent Donna Shugar as our representative from Area D. Donna is great at bringing together community members with conflicting interests, creating an open and respectful public forum to air views, and responding with a decision that truly reflects the majority viewpoint. (As Occupy movement members like to say: “This is what democracy looks like.”) She has an excellent track record and I like what she stands for:

• An inclusive community where all our citizens enjoy a healthy environment and economic dignity
• Ensuring the opportunities of future generations are not compromised by our actions today
• Balancing the priorities of environmental responsibility, economic resilience, health and social well-being, cultural vitality
• Dialogue, negotiation, and consensus-building
• An economy built on small local enterprise.

I think it’s appalling – and telling — that at this week’s Green Issues Forum in Gibsons, hosted by the Sunshine Coast Conservation Association, candidates such as Wayne Rowe (running for Gibsons mayor) and Barb Hague (Area D) did not appear. If these people can’t be bothered to show up to participate in public dialogue about important local environmental issues, from logging on Mount Elphinstone and independent power projects to the Chapman Creek watershed, why on earth would they care what people think if they were elected?

I urge everyone on the Sunshine Coast to vote on November 19 for those who represent our version of the 99%, not the 1%. My anarchic heart recognizes the huge limitations that our regional district faces when dealing with the Ministry of Forests and other larger government bodies, but I still fundamentally believe in an individual’s democratic power, and right, to vote. People in other countries are dying to gain this right. Let’s not squander ours.