For various reasons, I feel compelled to publicly critique an emerging trope regarding #ows "problems" with the increasing number of "the homeless" represented in #ows camps. I'll begin with a quote I found particularly disturbing in a recent diary by nyceve about the need for winter tenting in occupy camps: "To those who say, a warm environment might encourage more homeless to come, I say, so be it, that is a small price for protecting First Amendment rights."
A "price to pay"? Is this what #ows is about?
At a very basic level, such statements about "the homeless" are homogenizing and totalizing. The folks who are referred to as "homeless" are composed of lots of different kinds of people--just like all people. Attempts to categorize "the homeless" based on an etiology of "homelessness"--it's "caused" by substance use, madness, criminal records, or plain bad luck, etc.--are always met with shortcomings empirically and politically. Let's get rid of the baggage associated with terms like "homelessness."
But more fundamentally, "the homeless problem" gets at the heart of the #ows movement and what we all think it is and should be about. I work with "the homeless." I spend time with them and have lived in their camps. In particular, I have lived in "homeless tent cities"--encampments that are politically organized and are working toward attaining legal sanction. Indeed, some tent cities have emerged in the wake of #ows protests, using the municipal tolerance of those encampments as a pretext to establish their own dwelling spaces.
Various stories in the media have pointed to the authorities directing purportedly troublesome elements--e.g. "the homeless"--to #ows camps. In my own research, I have found this kind of "policy transfer" (I am citing Fairbanks, I'm not him) a regular feature of the contemporary US welfare state. It may be cynical or provocative on the part of the NYPD. But it also dovetails with the neoliberal logic we're all currently facing.
But regardless. So "the homeless" show up in the #ows camps. In what world is this a "problem" for a movement that is ostensibly against corporate thievery, austerity, income inequality, and the perversion of democracy writ large?
A frontpage entry worries about #ows camps dealing with "drunks." In response, I quote the "homeless" organizer of the primary camp I work with--"there are a lot of assholes in this organization. But we need those assholes. They're our assholes."
I am an anthropologist. I consider the insights of anthropologists with regard to #ows to be particularly compelling. One of the people's librarians in NYC is an anthropologist. And David Graeber, an anthropologist, has been identified as a key activist in wresting #ows from the exclusive influence of "vertical" organizers in order to make it a truly grassroots movement. David Graeber has published extensively on small-"a" anarchism and has foregrounded its emphasis on process--things like the General Assemblies' commitment to consensus. These practical processes are what make #ows truly democratic.
"The homeless" are not unfamiliar with these modes of democratic practice. One might read about the history of American "homelessness" to get a sense of how everyday life in places like "hobo jungles" employed these kinds of collective deliberations to cope with a veritable absence of "the state" in any positive sense. Indeed, I would point to this diary by ZhenRen to get a sense of how #ows camps--camps experiencing relations to the law that are quite similar to "hobo jungles" and contemporary "homeless tent cities"--can, have, and must incorporate any "troublesome" voices, be they "homeless" or not.
The bottom line, I suppose, is this--"the homeless" already know some of the troubles #ows camps are facing with regard to everyday camp life. Learn from them. Do not exclude or ostracize them. The 99% will not herald true change if it merely seeks to revalorize "middle class" norms and values. Listen to your "homeless" brothers and sisters and learn to live with them as they must learn to live with you.