COMMENTARY

+Rob Salzman +Tina Louise I have spent several days with Occupy in NYC and really appreciate what is getting done with the Occupy presence. As I see it there is an evil 1% that has gained far too much of the economic pie over the past 30 years or so ... military industry complex, healthcare oligopoly, banking oligopoly, and the revolving door of money and politics. Now there is a 1% movement that is getting some press by 'Occupying'. There is still a 98% who are on the sidelines and being quietly looted by the evil 1%, and it will go on until they have nothing left. The free capitalist market economy does not work to satisfy need for society but only to build profit for the investor class. In the end this does not work ... the world has changed since Adam Smith was the economist in chief. The Occupy 1% has not offered a simple solution .... but it has done well to point at the systemic problem.

Why occupy should stay

The removal of tents at St Pauls and at any other site would significantly impact on articles 10 and 11 of the human rights act. For as long as governments, corporations and financial institutions remain ignorant to their roles in the illegal actions and corruption in which those responsible have committed, then we the public have a right to dissent.

Thomas Jefferson said “When injustice becomes law, resistance becomes duty”

All of the above institutions form a system in which we all live under, here and abroad. In Iraq I bear witness to the extreme end of the spectrum where articles 10 and 11 were not upheld. As an infantry signaller I was responsible for logging enormous amounts of information and build up pictures whereby it can be used in a court of law. Together with my capacity to think analytically and outside of the box I have been able to see parallels within occupy London in which I can relate to on a personal, as well as knowledgeable basis.

I will now present these parallels:

In Iraq we were led to believe that we were there to bring about democracy and liberate them from dictatorship, within this believe, we were promoting human rights. We condemn nations that put down protests through any means. The reality though is far from what we were led to believe. The Iraqi people transitioned from one dictator to another and thus their human rights were not upheld or even delivered.

The build up to Iraq war provoked a massive public response in the way of protesting in its conventional manner. Over a million people marched, it was heavily opposed by the public at large and was one of the largest walks out in recent times. The response from the government was complete ignorance and laid down the foundations for governments to declare war without the backing of the public.

Every march since has followed a similar path in which they have been subdued. We are told by the prime minister, corporation representatives and other high-profile people that they fully support democratic rights and what constitutes lawful protest. As a result, the voice of the people has had less impact or influence on those we entrust to make judgements on our behalf. The effect is protester apathy and the diminishing effects of articles 10 and 11 of the human rights act in which we may as well not have them.

The failure of conventional protest

Referring back to the anti-war protest of 2003. According to the French academic Dominique Reynié, between January 3 and April 12, 2003, 36 million people across the globe took part in almost 3,000 protests against the Iraq war.

The result was clear, it simply fell on deaf ears and the government sent our troops to war against the will of the people and without UN backing or mandate.

The effect of that ignorance resulted in over 1.4 millions deaths in Iraq and even today that figure is presumed to be a low estimate.

The people of Iraq lived under a dictatorship in which they were told what to do and what to think and were denied their rights to freely express themselves. From my own observation and experience in Iraq, it was clear to me that there was little change. The Iraqi people endured one dictator, only to come under another. We continued to deny them of their rights, and the ignorance continued.

Since 2003 it has become increasingly more difficult for members of the public to voice their concerns in the traditional and conventional manner. When marches take place, people are met with a heavy police presence and all but criminalised before any offence has occurred.

In Iraq these same situations arose. Public outraged after the so-called accidental bombing of someone’s home (which often resulted in the death of women and children), was met by extreme resistance by those who held the weapons. Security forces criminalised public demonstrations and gatherings and this only antagonized members of the public.

In the UK the banks take your homes, social services take your children because you can’t gain employment to raise the funding you need to support you and your children, you become in the eyes of the state an unfit parent incapable of looking after one’s self.

In Iraq people lost their homes and families on a daily basis, mostly as a result of US/UK bombings in which they too had no control of.

In the UK the paranoia of the system has led to incredible increases in security around buildings related to the establishment. When I went to parliament recently it reminded me of driving through the entrance of the contingency operating base in Basra. The illusion of threat led to a situation in which the government could take away civil liberties. The behavioural insights team which promotes government policy using a variety of tools including media projects, a sense of fear has been created and in response to that, the people look to their governments for protection. This as stated before allows civil liberties to be taken away.

In Iraq those liberties we taken away involuntarily by the system, where house raid were common place. People were criminalised before any evidence was given and sticking to military principles, suspicion was the justification for such acts. Houses were raided, men were taken from their homes, tortured without any prior evidence. These were clear violations of the human rights act and in stark contrast to what we were sent to promote (I.e. Democracy). During this time, the media was used to send positive messages back home to the people to gain support for our soldiers by use of slogans like support our troops, which gained your silent obedience and without your knowledge promoted you to support the war and all the injustices that followed.

Alternate form of protesting

The reason why tents are necessary is because it is the only form of protest we have left and as stated above we can clearly see the consequences of what conventional methods achieve. Like in Iraq the ignorance of our government, the transitional Iraqi government and the US government, led to what could be classified as a humanitarian disaster in which we were complicit in the end because we as members of the public felt that there was nothing we could do. Our voices went unnoticed and the system committed unprecedented crimes against humanity and waged an illegal war.

If the tents are ordered to move by use of forced eviction then I fear that our civil liberties and the application of articles 10 and 11 will truly be lost. The occupation is proving to be an effective form of protest where people can engage in real debate and discussions in a communal structure. It is important to note that any protests that happened in Iraq prior to the invasion were openly supported by this government and this has proven to be the case in Libya, Syria, Egypt and Iran. Our government is willing to support protests regardless of what form they take; as long as it’s not done here.

Further information

It is important that people have their voices heard, and that when people demonstrate; it should not be demonized by those in Power. Boris Johnson’s comment about those staying at occupy, whereby he called us crusties was certainly not appropriate especially as he is a senior politician and I await his apology. Governments, corporations and financial institutions should be openly engaging with its people and actively try to move in the direction that the people desire. It is not up to one person, or a small group of people to make choices for the rest of us.

In Iraq the consequences of this type of engagement with the people lead to open conflict within the country. Muqtada Al Sadr was labelled as a terrorist, I questioned this accusation and after consulting the past I found that he was essentially the voice of Basra. He had an entire city that supported him and yet he was blocked from being apart of the political process because he was anti-American and was highlighting the extraction of the countries resources.

The US quickly blocked him from taking part in the restructuring of the country and the UK and transitional Iraqi government which was put in power by us followed suit. You cannot ignore someone whose voice represents the true voice of the many. The ignorance of our government led to an open declaration of war against us in defence of the nation. Basically the people were ignored and pushed into the ground so far that they were left with no other choice but to take the law into their own hands and actively seek justice for themselves.

Importance of Occupy

Occupy has allowed me and others to actively engage in the political debate by giving us a platform to speak and be heard. It is also important to note that if I was not here, I would be at home still searching for work; whilst slowly loosing my self-esteem. I come from a back water part of the country where the latest job that was available was at DHS which just recently opened; 19 jobs were available and over 2000 applications were submitted. So with a very slim chance of gaining employment I would be left to face my own conscience and question why,? why can’t I get a job?, Is it me? Am I not good enough? And the questions would go on.

This becomes a daily battle and there is strong evidence that indicates strong links between unemployment and mental health issues. Reports from the office of national statistics state that as of December 2011 unemployment figures are 2.64 million, up 128,000 from the previous month. Out of that 1.03 million is the number of youths aged 16-24 unemployed.

Like those in Iraq, the failure of the system has left us in a situation in which opportunity is limited and globally we risk loosing a generation whose talents, needs and desires are being lost. It was not our fault and yet we are expected to pay the price, we will have to battle mental and psychological issues, financial hardship, loss of talent and self-esteem. We have already witnessed casualties of this war, a war in which we could say is a battle about responsibility and accountability.

Samaritans release a press statement and I quote “The deepening financial and economic crises could lead to an increase in suicide rates as people face unemployment, mounting debt and housing insecurity.”

Those who caused this crisis walk free; like those who engaged in declaring war illegally. We may be worlds apart, but regardless of the methods used, we, like the Iraqi people are suffering at the hands of the same system, one which is global. It takes a global effort to bring about real change that will benefit all of us. Where profit is not the driving force of the world.

That is why I argue on the grounds of lawful excuse, because there are much greater crimes being committed, here and abroad and it is the duty of all us to make a stand, and work together for real and dramatic change that benefits all.

The major powers of the world refuse to sign up to the international courts of justice. This would explain why Tony Blair, George bush and other heads of major nations havn’t been brought to trial.

http://youtu.be/rzvbgIoj71U