The occupy movement was supposed to be supporting the 99% – the majority they reckon weren’t the very rich.
But those in Auckland obviously don’t include the homeless among the poor they purport to want to help:
Meanwhile, several homeless people have taken issue with the Occupy protesters, for ruining what they say is their home.
Several spoken to by Radio New Zealand say they can’t stay in any of the parks around the city now.
Mount Roskill resident J. D. Simon says he has taken in 13 homeless people, many of whom are now camping on his lawn.
Oh the irony.
The faux homeless who have homes to go to have pushed out the genuine homeless people who don’t.
While on the subject of the occupation, Chris Trotter asks the questions of the day:
. . . Did anyone ever consider asking the Mayor if he and his staff could identify any wasteland in the city that could serve as a camp ground? Or if there were areas that could be turned into community gardens? Did anyone ever think of asking Aucklanders to help Occupy Auckland grow food for families who were struggling to feed their kids? . . .
Practical help, rather than aimless protest – now there’s a radical idea.
It wouldn’t have looked as exciting on TV as resisting police. But it would have made a difference and done it without inconveniencing the genuine homeless.
Homepaddock 
While I’d love to see the hippies get tasered (that would get them out of the van real quick) I have to admit they have a genuine greivence.
Giving huge bonuses while building up toxic levels of debt should not be rewarded with tax payer money.
While it was mainly European and US banks that caused the GFC we all were punished the banks should have been left to fail.
Not sure how camping in a park can fix it though.
LikeLike
‘Camping in a park’ has caused this, and other dialogues.
It has allowed you, Tip, to mention the despicable bank events that occurred.
Until more people engage with the corruption occurring, rather than turning a blind eye or thinking ‘oh they know what they are doing, it can’t be so bad’, finance and corporate behaviour will continue creating a stranglehold in our democratic and capitalist system.
Until we, in numbers, start asserting that politicians don’t cave in to the narrow self interested behaviour of these sectors, we will keep paying the cost for them, socially as well as financially.
Financial and corporate institutions aren’t going to suddenly start behaving themselves out of the goodness of their hearts.
I don’t accept that this is an ‘aimless protest’ how do you arrive at that conclusion?
LikeLike
This has been somewhat misrepresented by the media. The story comes from some heated comments made at one of the group’s meetings last week (I think it was Wednesday night?).
My understanding of what happened (I was there, but it was a bit of a mess) is that one woman, who has been a part of the Occupy protest for a while (and is also homeless, I think her name is Jane), was angry that the non-homeless members of the group had backed down and gone home, leaving only the homeless occupying the square. Her point wasn’t that the Occupy camp was wrecking their home; it was that the camp was their home and now that it was gone they didn’t have one.
Reports from that time setting up a dispute between the homeless and the occupiers were missing the point: the dispute was between homeless and non-homeless members of the occupation.
That said, the quote you’ve got there from Radio New Zealand sounds interesting. Do you have a link?
LikeLike
Blue Leopard, What have the actual occupations achieved? They’ve made people like me who get WHY they are camping to turn against them BECAUSE they are camping. A PR campaign, an “occupy” party (couldn’t think of a better name I’m a dairy farm worker not a political animal) or something of that nature would have won my support.
Watching them fight police and security guards who lets be honest are part of the “99%” just makes the rest of us in the 99% despise them for being rent-a-mob protesters.
LikeLike
This is what really happened. On the second attempt at eviction by Auckland Council the known members of the homeless community were given trespass notices that said they were trespassed from the entire CBD for 3 days. THIS is why members of the homeless community got up and started yelling, this is why 3 news and One News have been able to lie blatantly about there being an ‘occupiers vs homeless’ situation.
The woman who did get up and yell at the meeting, as seen on 3 news footage blamed the occupiers for her ‘getting trespassed from the CBD’ it was later found that the council actually has no right to trespass anyone from the CBD or any such area of Auckland. Only a judge can do that.
Hence why this same woman welcomed the protesters back onto the square with a karanga during a symbolic powhiri 2 days later.
Who ever put this article up. Get your facts straight.
LikeLike
Tip,
As stated in my earlier comment, the Occupy movement has achieved dialogue.
You mention two approaches which require a fair amount of resources, of which many people haven’t got.
I ask you (and all NZers) to question yourself on your being so quick to dismiss the WHY due to the form in which the protest is taking, It is my understanding that the issues that are being protested about are so significant, so in dire need of being addressed, that the form of how the protest occurs pails into insignificance; there would be vast benefits if our worldwide leaders heeded the message of this worldwide protest.
There is a wealth of intelligent dialogue in existence in response to current problems arising in this world. yet one could be excused for believing these bodies of knowledge didn’t exist if mainstream media, and articles such as above, is all one does to inform oneself.
If the majority of New Zealanders (and the Western world) continue to leave themselves uninformed I belived that there is a good chance that the parts of our system with merit will get thrown out along with the bad. Sadly, it appears that the actors on our world financial and political arenas aren’t big enough, without a nudge from us, to call the problems what they are, let alone address them. Or do you consider that it is preferable to go along with the status quo and that they continue to turn a blind eye to the greater good of all, remain influenced by narrow financial interests and continue to enjoy burgeoning salaries while pretending everything is hunky dory?
There may be a better form to protest in, I believe that the protestors are doing vastly more than the majority of New Zealanders who seem to prefer to keep their heads buried, misinformed and live in a make believe, ‘all is fine’ la la land. Ironically most NZers will benefit if the issues being raised by the Occupy movement are addressed.
LikeLike