A declaration of safe sanctuary for all criminalized people

[senatorclaydavis]

The following is a joint proposal from Occupy El Barrio, Occupy the South Side, and Occupy the North West Side. Members from each neighborhood occupation will take part in presenting this. In light of the Chicago Principles passed last night, we see this proposal as a logical consequence of this stance of solidarity with other activists and seek to make this stance as explicit as possible.

Proposal to declare Occupy Chicago a Safe Sanctuary for all Criminalized People

Occupy Chicago officially declares our General Assembly and all Occupy events to be safe sanctuaries for those who are unprotected and criminalized by the ruling order of the 1%. This includes, but is not limited to prisoners, immigrants (with or without papers), precarious laborers, the homeless, GLBT communities, the unemployed and all other groups that are routinely and systematically demonized by the State.

In accordance with this declaration, Occupy Chicago will continually strive to exclude agents of the State who are actively engaged in repressing the voices of the unprotected and criminalized. This includes the police (state, local, uniformed, undercover, on duty or off duty), ICE officials, the FBI, Homeland Security, and prison officials. Occupy Chicago stands for full equality for all Chicagoans. We explicitly condemn anyone who suppresses such equality.

All assemblies and events are safe for the free sharing of ideas. To ensure this, personal information of individuals concerned about the possibility of State violence will remain within the movement as much as is possible. We respect the need for privacy depending on each other's particular degree of risk. We do not snitch on each other, we will not require any one to be on the livestream who does not want to be and respect any request for names to be kept out of GA notes.

Furthermore, Occupy Chicago hereby also stands with all social justice movements who seek equality and liberation for those who are most vilified by the 1%. This would include, but is not limited to, standing in solidarity with: those struggling to end racism, those seeking the rights of prisoners, rights for the undocumented, for equal rights for the GLBT community, with those fighting for equal protection and benefits for all workers including those in non-traditional employee-employer work environments, with those who are working for universal housing for all people without shelter and with those struggling to end the criminalization of the poor and fighting to end poverty.

Occupy Chicago already has those facing the harshest State violence within our occupation, and we are dedicated to preserving the safety of these members, expanding our occupation, and providing a space in which those marginalized by the law not only play a role but play a central role. Thus, we strive to adequately represent the progressively egalitarian and anti-racist sentiments of the vast majority in this city. We declare proudly: “We take a stance with those most excluded in our society and believe that humanity is not conditional nor can it be legislated– we are people and we are all Chicagoans. We denounce any division within the 99% imposed and enforced by the State which offers security for some and not for others. We offer a safe, open environment for all. Our space is your space. ”

If this proposal is passed, we request that it be posted on the front page of Occupy Chicago's website.

[marymcmahon@clear.net]

I'm with Occupy the Northwest Side and this is the first I've heard of this proposal. Who has been working on this? You can email me te names if you are not comfortable posting them here. Thanks!

[JaKe]

I like this idea and I will be at the GA tonight to hear it presented.

[senatorclaydavis]

Mary,

Occupy the Northwest side voted in favor of this proposal at their general assembly last Saturday and accepted the request to co-present it with OEB and OSS.

Jake,
we're presenting the proposal on Wednesday and its up for vote on Friday so come on those days if you can

[marymcmahon@clear.net]

That doesn't answer my question. I'd rather not make this a public issue and I do have questions about how the proposal was brought to OCNWS and the fact it was not posted for review prior to the vote. Please respect my inquiry.
OCNWS does not hold General Assemblies.
And I still do not know who you are or what role you have in this effort.

[Dormaphaea]

Let's see if I can shed some light…

OCNWS is teeny tiny right now, at least as far as Saturday meetings are concerned. We haven't been referring to them as "general assemblies" because there hasn't been much, er, assemblage. Just sort of a few people, discussing school turnarounds in our neighborhood and outreach initiatives.

Last Saturday, there were only four people at the meeting. This proposal was put forth in a rush to be endorsed by OCNWS, but as we've had no real need up until now to set up a quorum, or work out any of that (honestly, it seemed pretty odd to do so with only seven or so people who have been there on a regular basis) the four people assembled found the language pretty innocuous, and simply said, er, OK.

Then it got posted, it got noticed and sent round to our listserv. And there was kerfuffle. Still is ongoing kerfuffle. Some of us believe this needs to be re-worked, as the idea that OC can guarantee anyones safety seems like something you don't necessarily want to put into writing. I actually have a few issues with this doc, but since I can't be present to vote, I'm thinking to even go into them here would simply be an exercise in futility and a waste of everyones time. So, um. Good luck? I guess? Peace, love, and apple pie