Occupy Seattle's Westlake Problem

Detractors and supporters alike have criticized Occupy Seattle for a perceived preoccupation (no pun intended) with confronting local authorities over accommodations at Westlake Park. Many of the occupiers themselves have expressed frustration that the Seattle branch of the movement have yet to engage in a single act of disobedience not related to the conditions at Westlake imposed by the Mayor and the police. This protest was intended to be about bigger things than tents and umbrellas.

The City has issued a partial license to the occupation, but protesters are still barred from erecting tents at night, uncomfortable now, but maybe unsustainable once Winter rain rolls in.The course of action proposed by many both inside and outside the movement is that protesters find another site to camp, while maintaining their daytime activities at Westlake. Unfortunately, there is no obvious alternative to the Westlake site.

The current encampment at City Hall is viewed by many occupiers as a capitulation to the Mayor's demands, and sentiment aside, is not big enough to accommodate large groups. Most other large parks are only open 6:00am to 10:00pm, so night-time occupiers would be subject to the same laws about trespassing and camping (and likely the attendant police harassment) as they are at Westlake Park. By contrast, the movement's spiritual home, Zuccotti Park, is open to the public 24 hours a day. An idea floated at various General Assemblies and meetings this week (and narrowly voted down last night on procedural grounds) is moving to Seattle Central Community College, but that site also has drawbacks, not least of which that Central doesn't want them. Perhaps more promising is a plan to occupy "privately-owned public spaces" downtown, most of which are also not open 24 hours, but at least have the advantage of being owned by some of the large banks and corporations targeted by the movement (the very title "privately-owned public places" being somewhat descriptive of the movement's grievances).

Obviously, a movement centered on being allowed to put tents in Westlake is nowhere near as sympathetic as one aimed at the occupation's true opponents: those who corrupt our politics society towards their own greedy ends, and as the months drag on, sleeping arrangements must be able to withstand Winter weather. For these reasons, the Westlake site is fundamentally problematic, but as anyone who's witnessed a week's worth of fruitless brainstorming and debate among the occupiers can tell you, there is no obvious alternative.

Contact the author of this article or email tips@seattlest.com with further questions, comments or tips.

By Everett Rummage in News on October 20, 2011 4:30 PM 0 Comments

Occupy seattle

Comments [rss]

Really_Bored

Why doesn't everyone get up from the safety of their public park and occupy the banks, financial institutions, and government agencies that are the culprits in this whole mess? Signs and drums and hippie slogans don't inspire the other 98% to join in. Go to the banks and demand people's homes back. Go to the institutions that take our tax dollars to pay their wealthy CEOs and shareholders. When we orchestrated the WTO protests in 1999, we blocked the streets, kept people from meeting, and provoked the authorities. It turned into a mess of tear gas, brutality, and chaos. It was lovely. We got noticed, burned off some steam, and scared the crap out of our opponents. And that was all over issues that weren't really affecting a large portion of the local population. If you want to use civil disobedience as an instrument for change, get out of Westlake and direct your actions at the culprits who've created this mess. When you do that, the rest of us in the 99% who aren't there with you will get inspired to join you.

lannij

why do you believe that it is either/or? why can't the very fact that we have to stand up to the mayor and somehow convince him he's on the wrong side, be the first step in our insistence that we must be heard? and the confrontation i espouse is non-violent. we can write letters to mcginn and the city council, we can write letters to the editor. we can use signs to call on the mayor to reconsider.

i call bullsh*t on mcginn's reason for denying us westlake park to the point of confrontation with our police department. we are nothing like the westboro baptist abomination. he's just using that as an excuse to take the easy way out, but it's not going to be easy for him because we need that park.

WDawg

Lannij:

Because that's the way it works. You've got a hard on for the mayor, and Westlake. That's fine, but you won't get the broad based support needed for the "99%/57%/43%" to change the rules.

You may be pissed at McGinn (who isn't?), but you have to make choices in the real world. You think making your target McGinn/Westlake will redress bigger picture issues?

More important, you think the folks (for instance) in Greenlake, with 2 kids, and a mortgage to pay give a rip about OS vs McGinn? I get your frustration, but does it get you closer to resolving the WS issues that started it all?

WDawg

Then you have the ultimate dilemma lannij.

The reason OS has not been confrontational, is to draw in the masses (99%, 57%, 43%) so it is a broad based coalition, that can make larger scale changes (eg: reinstate Glass-Steagall act), or.... make it about Westlake, and Hizzhonor and lose broad based support.

It's all about choices.......changes.....and egos

Good Luck!

lannij

what you don't seem to understand is that the movement is a movement against both government and corporate oppression of people, and denial of their rights because it may be messy or "inappropriate" or "unfair" to allow them their rights. for example, the mayor's double speak -- "i support your movement, but only where i say," which allows him to speak out of both sides of his mouth - a true politician. so our position is that we do not require his permission to occupy a public space to educate the people about what is happening to our country. the mayor, if he had true conviction, would be enabling the movement at every opportunity, instead of turning it into a confrontational situation with the spd and the people. as a result of mcginn's obstinacy, the movement has to struggle at home against their own mayor before they can turn their energy and attention to the greater needs of the nation. there is constant threat, intimidation, and harassment and the police are only doing their job, so i can't blame them. the blame goes to the mayor in all his blindness.