After spending much of the morning and afternoon over at Occupy Portland—waiting to see what kind of deal Mayor Sam Adams, Portland cops and Portland Marathon officials might offer the downtown camp—I wound up back among the occupiers last night for their big meeting on what to do about that offer.
In short: Would they take the deal and stay in Chapman Square for Sunday’s race—albeit behind black-curtained fences and with heavy security? Or would they find another park that wasn’t in the middle of the marathon’s red zone and immediately next to the chaotic finish line where 14,000 runners and thousands more volunteers would be massing? And if so, which park?
After more than an hour of incredibly emotional debate on an issue initially slated for 30 minutes—in a testament to the intense challenges of managing the kind of consensus democracy the hundreds-strong group is attempting to nurture—the decision was, let’s say, murky: Murky like “both.” And it came only after a blizzard of procedural debates, fervent entreaties to keep on subject, semi-circular arguments, and even one man shouting “shut up” before he was booed away.
Eventually, some occupiers, it was agreed, would stay behind in Chapman Square. While others, especially those who don’t believe the cops’ promises not to swoop in, would find somewhere else to show themselves during the race, outside the blackout fences that many felt would hide their message and keep their ranks from swelling. (“Yes, we are an eyesore,” one man said. “But everyone needs to look.”) But whether that meant fully moving out for the day, or just wandering the streets, or planning another massive rally (“We already had 10,000 out, and this is a weekend!”), wasn’t decided. Neither was any destination. All that’ll wait until another long meeting this morning.
And you could see it in some participants’ faces as the meeting went on and on. Occupy Portland’s deliberative focus on consensus—a refreshing idea—is actually a little bit of a pain in the ass. Of course, I mean that in a good way, because I also think it’s totally fascinating to watch.
Yes, it’s inclusive and idealistic and empowering, a way to engage with and connect with and give respect to even marginal voices. But I’d say some campers are clearly uncomfortable with the kind of major investment in time and brainpower a truly participatory democracy requires. It’s a commitment, and the crowd dropped once less important issues were up for discussion.
There’s a reason most Americans would rather watch TV and let politicians they don’t like all that much speak in their names in the halls of government. It’s akin to the economic principle of specialization.
The system has other hiccups. Because the makeup and size of the group that gathers for voting assemblies varies by time of day, true Practical Consensus shouldn’t be seen as an absolute. It’s also not terribly efficient at generating new ideas—something that two different people lamented would probably work best in groups of 10 or a dozen, no more. And there’s a certain irony that the method for choosing which (still undetermined) consensus threshold to approve—two-thirds, three-quarters, 90 percent, or 100 percent—partially relied on a vote total with a mere plurality. Maybe, these are just growing pains, though.
“It’s messy,” said one organizer about the process. “But this is democracy.”
Rant over, there were a few other interesting things about the nascent camp life that struck me:
• The group appears to have more committees than it does willing committee members. Of particular concern is that there’s only one person on the finance committee, which is tasked with overseeing and budgeting the cash donations the group has been hauling in.
• Will people get up and march again like they did Thursday? Some organizers acknowledge that solving the logistical issues around the marathon has taken precedence over earnest talks on how to grow and sustain the Occupy Portland movement.
• So many people have donated grub to the camp, not so much with plates and cups and bowls. Seriously, as night fell, person after person came marching in with hot stockpots of home-cooked food, handing them off to a patient crew who then ladled out their contents on a continually washed and rewashed stream of what few plates have actually been provided.
• Organizers really trying to enforce the notion that the camp is a “safe and sober” place—a way to make sure people continue to feel okay bringing their toddlers around. Alcohol seemed hardly present, and very much frowned upon. Marijuana, which has its loudly loyal devotees in the camp, was more present, but still frowned upon, if not quite as much. The language is still somewhat passive-agressive, “we understand it’s an individual’s decision,” but it’s one way, they say, of keeping the police presence from getting too heavy.
• Along those lines, there seems to be a general hankering for the kind of rules that make a place agreeable to spend time, belying the notion that this is just a bunch of freewheeling anarchist stereotypes, etc. Smokers seem destined to exile in one corner of the park. There’s also talk of quiet hours and special zones for late-night music-making. Meanwhile, medics are telling everyone to wash their hands.
• There are “sanitation issues regarding dogshit.” And cigarette butts. And too much trash in general. And bathrooms.
• Suspicion of cops runs incredibly deep among some occupiers—a potential fault line that could divide the camp.
Yes, the tone struck by Adams and bureau brass has reassured many. “They would not violate that and look like shit to the entire city of Portland,” one man said. But others can’t shake the Portland Police Bureau’s past troubles with shootings and peace-rally pepper-spray incidents.
One speaker looked around the park, then at the Justice Center and courthouse, and bluntly said, “This position is tactically flaccid. That is the jail. Those are the police.” Whether the occupiers work with the cops or not, “We are right next to our new bedrooms.”
• And yet the camp has an internal police force, with committee members who sometimes look disturbingly like actual cops. Or rent-a-cops, at least. Two large guys wearing black polo shirts with blue-duct-tape arm bands were doing perimeter patrols with Nextel radios. For a second, I totally thought Clean & Safe was storming in. Then someone set me straight.
Judith I do feel, Reg, that any anti-imperialist group like ours must
reflect such a divergence of interests within its power base.
Reg Agreed. Francis?
Francis Yeah. I think Judith’s point of view is very valid, Reg, provided the
movement never forgets that it is the inaliable right of every man…
Stan Or woman.
Francis …or woman. To rid himself…
Stan Or herself.
Francis …or herself.
Reg Agreed.
Francis Thank you brother.
Stan Or sister.
Francis …or sister. Where was I?
Reg I think you’d finished.
Francis Oh, right.
Reg Furthermore, it is the birthright of every man…
Stan Or woman.
Reg Why don’t you shut up about women, Stan. You’re putting us off.
Stan Women have a perfect right to play a part in our movement, Reg.
Francis Why are you always on about women, Stan?
Stan I want to be one.
Reg What?
Stan I want to be a woman… from now on I want you all to call me
Loretta.
——–[Unlike the cruel-hearted others, I’m going to comly with his
request.]
Reg What???
Loretta It’s my right as a man.
Judith Well why do you want to be Loretta, Stan?
Loretta I want to have babies.
Reg You want to have babies?
Loretta It’s every man’s right to have babies if he wants them.
Reg But you can’t have babies.
Loretta Don’t you oppress me.
Reg I’m not oppressing you, Stan. You haven’t got a womb. Where’s the
foetis going to gestate? You going to keep it in a box?
——–[Loretta starts crying.]
Judith Here. I’ve got an idea. Suppose you agree that he can’t actually have
babies, not having a womb, which is nobody’s fault… not even the
Roman’s, but that he can have the right to have babies.
——–[This seems to satisfy him.]
Francis Good idea, Judith. We shall fight the oppressors for your right to
have babies, brother. Sister, sorry.
Reg What’s the point?
Francis What?
Reg What’s the point of fighting for his right to have babies when he
can’t have babies?
Francis It is symbolic of our struggle against oppression.
Reg Symbolic of his struggle against reality.
Thanks for all the coverage. I am far too lazy to engage in true direct democracy (apparently representational democracy is about as far as I will go), but it is fascinating to hear about the current Portland experiment.
I will now return to drinking tea in warm room inside.
Finance Committee concerns solved. We’re now 10+ strong with skilled accounting professionals.
https://www.facebook.com/groups/284344344909229/doc/291399744203689/
Good article, Denis. A friend and I discussed the “messiness” a lot last night.
OccupyPortland participants should be part of the Marathon, participate as fans or volunteers. It would give the group something to do, higher visibility, and more social traction. Imagine if all of OccupyPortland volunteered for the Marathon? That would be subversive. While it may be difficult for some people to align the ideas mentally, the physical results would be worth it: more relationships, satisfaction in doing something/accomplishment, and a continued presence in downtown Portland. [ancient asian adage about going with the flow is more powerful preferably using water here]
Good for y’all on the finance committee. Given what I heard about the economics sit-ins, and how informative and reasoned they were, I ought not be surprised it got solved pretty quickly.
IT’S LIKE REVOLUTIONARY GROUPS FEEL THE NEED TO CONTINUOUSLY REINVENT THE WHEEL. FORMAL CONSENSUS AND AFFINITY GROUPS ACTUALLY CREATE QUICK MOVING, RESPONSIVE AND INCLUSIONARY LEADERSHIP STRUCTURES. BUT THEN, MOST OF THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOOD AT THIS SORT OF THING QUICKLY LEAVE THE REVOLUTIONARY COMMUNITY.
The root reason for the, “Occupy er’s” and the “99% er’s”. Gaze upon it if you dare. Maybe this will help make the danger of fiat money clear. Imagine you and me are setting across from each other. We create enough money to represent all of the world’s wealth. Each one of us has one SUPER Dollar in front of him. You own half of everything and so do I. I’m the government though. I get bribed into creating a Central Bank. You’re not doing what I want you to be doing so I print up myself eight more SUPER Dollars to manipulate you with. All of a sudden your SUPER Dollar only represents one tenth of the wealth of the world! That isn’t the only thing though. You need to get busy and get to work because YOU’VE BEEN STIFFED with the bill for the money I PRINTED UP to get YOU TO DO what I WANTED. That to me represents what has been happening to the economy, and us, and why so many of our occupations just can’t keep up with the fake money presses.
http://photos.imageevent.com/stokeybob/fol…
Stokey – lazy economics.
Lazy indeed – what is the price of a domestic commodity relative to the dollar, what is the price relative to the euro? What is the value of the US dollar in relation to the euro?
These relative prices change every second, the constant in the equation is that the value of the domestic currency is always = to 1 in relation to all other goods and services in that economy. So my question is, who is really holding the “Super Dollar”?
I was there for this meeting and I’ve worked in the sanitation committee and while I think this was for the most part a well written article there were some quotes that were taken out of context…the quote about the jail being across from the camp was in direct response to a discussion about whether we should hold both camps, and the dogshit quote was a sentence taken from a random person who yelled that once near the kitchen….take a look around, there is no dogshit and working with sanitation I can say that we have been working hard to keep the area clean: picking up trash, plunging toilets, washing dishes, sanitizing all dishes with vinegar solution. The security does not look like a police force…unless bearded twenty somethings with ponytails, or crust-punks with blue duct tape on their arms is considered a police force…they are actually peacekeepers, their job is to make sure situations don’t get of hand so new crews and magazines that need sensationalism to promote articles and make small situations look more interesting don’t get the ammo they want to make this experiment look bad….plus, we want things to be peaceful, we want people to be happy…that
s the whole point, to see if we can create a culture where people can actually feel satisfied with what they do and what they contribute.