One of the more instructive issues to emerge from Occupy Oakland has been that of an artificial dichotomy between homelessness and occupation-activism. Like the idea of non-traditional activists from communities of color holding their ground alongside anarchists, socialists and liberals, nothing has panicked both city officials and supporters of the OWS movement more than the idea of homeless people being homeless in the middle of a political occupation for the homed.
This is illustrative of some of the many problems with the current 99% meme, and its focus on the financial scandals, bailouts and mortgage securities fraud of the last five years. Obviously, there are none who have more cause to be politically active, nor would find it easier to use the occupation strategy, than the homeless. And yet, the unease with which even protesters view their presence, and the attempt to distinguish politically aware homeless from the non-aware in protests ostensibly about income disparity, is mind boggling. Witness this statement from the Los Angeles ABC-7:
“There’s no doubt about it that some people are migrating over here. We don’t want to necessarily turn them away. What we ask from the people that are turning up that are truly homeless is that they help us out.”
A Wall Street Journal article carries the assumption that the homeless must prove their worth by immediately being concerned about political goals, rather than preventing their own starvation. There’s an incredible hubris here and it goes well past the laughable idea that some people–like the LA commenter–illegally occupying public land can tell others doing likewise where they can and cannot sleep. Somehow, its the truly homeless who must “help out” middle class protesters, rather than the middle class protesters, who’ve now tasted homelessness actively recruiting, training, enabling, and–most importantly–taking on the invisible and perpetual issue of homelessness as one of the most central and explanatory of the failure of the American economic [and healthcare] system.
That would necessitate moving the frame from its current location, heavily influenced by unions and other organizations, exclusively on issues of the finance debacle. Its not that these issues aren’t important. Indeed, some homeless people, like those I’ve had the privilege to meet at Occupy Oakland, became homeless when they could no longer afford their mortgage. And, of course, the rapidly contracting economy has made otherwise employed and homed people homeless.
This is not just an issue of focusing on the one percent, a convenient bogeyman for an umbrella protest movement afraid to alienate the upper and middle classes. Its not just about demanding a jobs program which will be impossible to evaluate in terms of efficacy for years to come. Its about examining our entire system and finding a larger platform and discourse that will one day create a better system in the US. In this fight–which is larger than simply noting the greatest income disparities–the apolitical homeless, poor, chronically unemployed and working poor are our greatest allies, not people we need to shoo away from the camps we’ve established over their old stomping grounds. No, it won’t help Democratically aligned groups and unions keep the White House in 2012. But it could just change things for the better.