I went to the Occupy Austin General Assembly tonight for the second time. The first time I left after about twenty minutes. I went because of a Facebook post saying that is was imperative to have a large number because the Chief of Police was going to speak. I rushed down (well as rushed as you can be on a CapMetro Bus) to find that the GA actually began much later than the advertised time. So I had some coffee with a good friend as we waited around.
I arrived shortly after the GA had officially begun. Tonight they used the 'human microphone' – a system in which everyone repeats after the speaker. (It is slightly disarming and yet creates intimacy. You say “Hello my name is Art” or “I'm here on behalf of Occupy San Antonio”. Using “I” statements that are actually about someone else somehow brings you into their world. But I digress....). After the general announcements were taken care of people were invited to present Proposals. They started with the Chief of Police. He spoke very briefly and reiterated the fact that the APD does not want to see a situation like Oakland or what happened a month or so ago in NYC. He in fact said that the APD is proud of 'their occupiers'. After he finished the man in front of me turned around and gave me a hug because, as he said, “that deserves a hug”. I felt a sense of joy that here in Austin the police are with us.
Apparently, my joy was not felt by all the protesters. After the Chief spoke he very quickly left – while his speech left a lasting impression. We continued to have a discussion because his very presence and speech may have violated the rules established in prior GA's. The discussion swirled around whether or not having the Chief of Police speak like that was remaining neutral. The Occupy Austin GA had decided, in one their first Assemblies, to remain neutral towards the police. However, at a later meeting they passed a resolution that all police communication had to happen at the General Assembly. Therefore there was some confusion about whether or not this was the time and place to have an officer speak.
The long (although only supposed to be five minutes) debate ended with the discussion leader saying that Occupy Austin was neutral towards the police which means “no positive communication and no negative communication and in fact means no cooperation at all. ”
One of the speakers said something that really hit home with me. The institution of the Police is there to prop up our government, which right now is for the 1% not the 99%. However, the police officers themselves are part of the 99%. We need to remember that we are not the 99% of people who agree with us and have jobs that fight the 1%. Many of us in the 99% are working, whether intentionally or unintentionally, with and for the 1%. The officers are not the problem, the problem can be the police. I hope, and pray, that Austin will maintain an open relationship with the individual officers, even if they are neutral towards the Police.
I don't believe that neutrality means having no cooperation. I believe that neutrality means giving all officers a chance to speak at the General Assembly. Giving them the same due that all other members of the 99% receive. No more and no less. In this long battle that we are waging it is important that we have the officers on our side. The Police will eventually side with the 1% - but if the officers are with the 99% who are the Police?
