Earlier today I posted my thoughts on the Occupy movement and its supposedly vague agenda, and Chris continued his exploration of Occupy as a constitutional convention. So I'm interested to see that Rob Hopkins, founder of the community-focused Transition movement that has swept the Globe, has also posted his own musings on Occupy after visiting the protest camp in London. His response is decidedly mixed:
In my first while at Occupy LSX, I confess to feeling a bit disappointed. On first impressions, opening a space for people to voice their discontent and their disquiet with what is happening means that in rush all sorts of assorted issues, campaigns and disaffected voices. There were 9/11 conspiracy theorists, the Zeitgeist movement, Socialist Worker, all manner of single issue groups as well as just some very angry people with a lot of chips on their shoulders. I had been expecting, from what I had read online over the past few weeks, a very focused and cogent common take on the economic crisis, but many of the people I spoke to, while they had a strong sense that the economic system is broken and needs fixing, weren’t able to really explain why, or what an alternative vision would look like other than being fairer and more equal.
Rob does go on to offer more positive insights, including the organizing that is being done to protect vulnerable members of the camp, and argues that as an outsider it is not his place to tell Occupy what it should and should not be discussing. In drawing a parallel with the Transition movement, he suggests that Occupy is about disrupting the system as it stands, while Transition is about applying an alternative in your everyday life.
Both seem to be important intentions. Let's hope the two can get along.