There was a fruitful discussion on the draft declaration at last night's Occupy Melbourne General Assembly. A member of the declaration working group invited feedback in the form of changes in wording relating to substantive issues with the document. Here are my suggestions:
DRAFT First Declaration of Occupy Melbourne
We stand in solidarity with the people in the Occupy movement in Australia and across the globe. In the name of freedom and democracy, we stand resolutely in opposition to unjust, unrepresentative [delete ‘unrepresentative’ as this suggests that ‘representation’ will solve the problem. Direct democracy is preferred to expecting politicians etc to do a better job of governing for us. This is a problem with a few of the clauses that I have referred to below. See my article, cited below], and unsustainable systems and practices world-wide.
Our Vision
We recognise that we occupy already occupied land and that Indigenous sovereignty has never been ceded. Acknowledging the ongoing impacts of colonisation must be the basis of our solidarity with Indigenous peoples.
We seek to create a just and equitable society in which [this suggests that a larger minority might be better. Therefore, add ‘as much as possible, everyone has equal access to’] political and economic power is not concentrated in the hands of a small minority[and delete ‘political and economic power is not concentrated in the hands of a small minority’].
We seek broad social change and aspire to end all forms of exploitation, oppression and marginalisation.
We envision an economic and financial system that is sustainable, democratic and just. We believe this requires fundamental changes to the current system and to structures of state and corporate power. [Add: ‘This may involve replacing existing institutions with more democratic ones that are not based on state and corporate power’]
We believe that there is nothing more powerful than an engaged people inspired by the vision of a better future. Our vision is of a world in which all human beings have the opportunity to flourish peacefully within the ecological limits of our planet.
To realise this vision, we occupy Melbourne and through this Declaration, invite people to join us.
Our Group
We are an open and evolving grassroots people’s movement. We welcome, support, and are comprised of all ethnicities, cultures, abilities, genders, ages, sexualities, and faiths. We embrace our differences and choose not to be affiliated with any political party or organisation.
Our Process
We seek to understand and learn from one another and to open up spaces for discussion and dialogue. Our movement is leaderless and non-hierarchical.
We make decisions through an inclusive, participatory, and direct democratic process. We aspire to consensus-based decision-making in which all [delete ‘voices are heard and taken into account’ replace with ‘ people have the opportunity to contribute equally to decision making’. At present, it suggests that leaders can make decisions after consulting]
We do not believe it is enough to demand change from the top down nor wait for change to arrive. We strive to live our values to the best of our ability, by reflecting our commitments to [delete ‘inclusive’ add ‘direct’] democracy, justice, community and sustainability in all our actions and pursuits.
We proceed with unshakable conviction: humbly [delete ‘humbly’ – may be necessary in some circumstances but not others], passionately, and in the spirit of celebration.
Comment: overall it’s a good document. I think it may be a little philosophical and all-encompassing in places – making it difficult to achieve agreement. Therefore it may be better to concentrate on more concrete and practical issues – as you have done in places above. I think we should add the slogan on the 99% as this has gained resonance with the general public throughout English-speaking countries; most people at OM would agree with it; and it was part of the rationale for the original call-out for OM.
Reference: Jack, "Occupy Melbourne declaration requires debate: Is the system unrepresentative or undemocratic?" http://indymedia.org.au/2011/11/15/occupy-melbourne-declaration-requires...
Comments
Hammering at the institutions found not just in Canberra
I have to say, Jack, until you give us a proper example of how this "direct democracy" model is mean to work on a large scale I will continue to contest you on it.
I don't believe you are able to identify how this model can effectively govern a nation. Society consists not only of its democratic institutions (regardless of the effectiveness of that democracy) but also of legal and private institutions, such as multinational corporations.
Our constitution defines the parameters in which we live and are governed. So you must either advocate total revolution (I have no problem with this) or you must want to make changes to the law through the democratic processes available, which means changing constitutional law and changing the legal system.
I have seen certain representations about the right to "freedom of speech." Do you know that the same libertarian thinking that promotes freedom of speech also promotes property rights, that is the right to private ownership of property. How can you make capital work for the general good if it is privately owned? But you say nothing about this. Do you promote the acquisition of private property by the state? That would be a good way of returning the proceeds of crime (capitalism) back to the social base to which it belongs.
Once you have your revolution and get riddance of that bugbear of private property then we can consider the possibility of a direct democracy model. But even then I would like to know how it is going to succeed where a proportional representation model will not.
But of course Jack, you won't discuss these issues with me, let alone with the rest of the occupy movement. You will just try to force through (in the most democratic way possible, of course!) your own particular form of the movement's declaration, and ignore the questions I put. That is well and good. Enjoy your day in the spotlight, but in the meantime those of us who want to effect will change will continue hammering at the institutions of society, that are not just found in Canberra.