OccupyWallStreet and consensus

I overheard a couple on the bus behind me this evening bemoaning the fact that Occupy Wall Street has not developed a coherent set of demands, that they’re not for anything.  ‘I would totally get behind them if I knew what they wanted.  They just seem shiftless and opposed to a lot of stuff but not FOR anything.’

This came close on the heels of a conversation with an elderly friend of mine decrying the occupation for similar reasons.  ‘They aren’t moving in any direction, they just are.  I wish I could get behind them, but I don’t know what I’d be behind or where we’d be going.’

It is important to remember that the Occupations, on Wall Street and across the country, are consensus-driven.  There is no leader and there is no mouth-piece.  Each individual in the movement has the same say as every single other individual.  It is possible to gain a coherent, consistent voice from such a group operating under such rules, but it takes time.

The Zapatistas called it carocol and represented it visually with a snail in its shell.  The Quakers call it the sense of the meeting and are willing to devote any length of time to achieving it and prefer no decision to one which violates it.  On Wall Street, any single person present at the General Assembly can halt a move by crossing her/his wrists.  The spirit fingers of consensus and celebration are patient, strong and loving enough to tolerate and exult the delays in the process because the conclusion arrived at through consensus is the best possible solution in human decision-making.

Having said that, and under the clear condition of being the words of ONE individual in the occupation (although my works have thus far been largely remote and based in the realm of thought), please permit me to explain to you what I would like to see come out of the occupation.

The goal is very simple.  Deducing from the demands as stated to date, the Occupation wishes to see the compassionate respect for the dignity of all individuals regardless of circumstance or peculiarity.  A rich black Catholic deserves the same respect as a poor white atheist and the same opportunities as an unemployed gay Latino and the same voice as an illiterate single high school drop-out mom.  Money does not have a voice and the holders of money are not any better or deserving of any greater or less consideration than anyone else.  As long as the government who enforces laws contrary to this simple principle and as long as those with money use it to maintain greater considerations, the occupation will continue.  In brief, the statement “We are all equal, but some are more equal than others.” will be discredited.

Written in Portland, Oregon on the 19th day of the occupation.