What I have to say here I really want my readers to take to heart. Really think about this and don't form an opinion now, or maybe don't form an opinion about it ever. Our society has a bad case of subserviant syndrome. We have literally lost the capacity to care for ourselves. This is both by design, and of our own doing for the temptation to take the easier route is often quite strong. If this route is made available, many without thinking will take it, myself included.
I haven't written about Occupy since November. I'm not linking it as what I wrote then isn't relevant to this post. When Occupy was going strong with it's encampments, it represented independence. What emerged from that random gathering of people was in essence a small society, the birth of a new way to 'do business'. I'm not saying it was perfect, it was an infant model for self-governance - made possible with huge advancements in technology. For what may have been the first time in human history, multiple smaller societies were organizing on a global scale. To my knowledge, this has never happened in history yet was written off as some nussance. A joke with the funny hand signals and whatnot.
Journalists completely missed what could have been a most historic story. But the tents were destroyed, the governments and corporations saw to that, for these are the two entities that least admire independence. Occupy has been reduced in to a roaming protest, lobbying the corporations for bread crumbs. Right where they want you.
The tent was threatening, protests are not. Within their meager capabilities and state imposed limits the Occupy societies thrived. They probably could have thrived a hell of a lot more. OccupyNYC wanted to start a garden for food production. You can bet they wouldn't be using Monsanto's terminator seeds.
This is what excited me about Occupy, I never thought they could change a system that is fundamentally flawed. I did however think there was a chance, albeit a small chance, that they would in fact eventually supercede the current status quo. There was a chance that perhaps workers running power plants, etc, would join Occupy. If no one supports the government, then there is no government. If no one supports the currency, there is no currency. There is nothing stopping the people from replacing these entities at will, other than the belief that they cannot. It is our support, our demands, our wants which we expect them to deliver which keep them in power. Nothing more.
Occupy for a brief moment superceded the top-down control structure. Instead of begging the government for so-called demands, they just did it themselves. The long lost people the governments and the rest of society had swept under the rug finally had a new home, and new-found support. They were accepted for what was probably the first time in a long time, as people, by just regular other people. If that isn't evolution in our society, what is?
Now we've gone back to begging when we should instead be going the other way. We can not change this system; it is collapsing under infintie growth and the monetary debt that brings. We can in fact create any system we want. I'm not talking socialism, or capitalism, or anything like that here. We can do better, we were doing better, and quite frankly it scared the shit out of the system like I have never seen before.
If Occupy is to be reborn, then set up your tents, hold your ground and I'll stand with you. Don't let it fall in to the same trap as so many movements before it, and if you must give a demand then my suggestion would be to make the demand: Occupy.
Click here to recommend this post on progressivebloggers.ca and help other people find this information.
Richard Fantin is a self-taught software developer who has mostly throughout his career focused on financial applications and high frequency trading. He currently works for eQube gaming systems.
Nazayh Zanidean is a Project Coordinator for a mid-sized construction contractor in Calgary, Alberta. He enjoys writing as a hobby on topics that include foreign policy, international human rights, security and systemic media bias.