The 66-day occupation of the Octagon ended a few days before Christmas, drawing to an end one of the more interesting political developments in Dunedin during 2011. Along with occupations in other main centres, the activists played an important part in promoting the issue of inequality as an election issue. The occupation also raised very interesting questions about the right of citizens to protest, even when such activities went against local government bylaws. [Continue reading my monthly DScene newspaper politics column published last week]
Although the Dunedin occupation eventually ended peacefully, by the time that the local movement had pulled up its last pegs, it had dwindled to almost nothing, with infighting and petty quarrels marginalising most of the activists. In the end, the fledging movement lacked the solid purpose or organisation that was necessary to exist. Indeed, right from the start it was full of political contradictions and incoherence. No one could properly explain why the group was actually occupying part of Dunedin’s centre. While the original occupation of Wall St had a very clear point, the copycat versions just imported the tactic without any real reflection.
It was telling that the Octagon protest opened with a bizarre eulogy to the late finance company head Alan Hubbard, and it then continued with support for a wide range of political causes, along with a ‘caring and sharing’ approach, and an almost religious feel. Nonetheless, despite the confused and problematic political nature of the occupation it did express what modern society needs more of: political energy and idealism. It also constituted a much-needed space for Dunedites to discuss politics and the big issues and problems in society.
More recently, the Octagon occupation threatens to re-emerge – activists say that they might put their tents up again if they feel the need. This would be a shame, because it is very clear that the idea is now exhausted, and the group lacks any of its original positive aspects. Certainly the Octagon group is only a shadow of its former self, and they pronounce that the point of the group is to ‘teach people about their food’. Thus the remnants appear to be more akin to a Green Party branch than anything like the New York militants. The issues of economic inequality have fallen by the wayside as the more hippy-like nature of the movement re-asserts itself. So if we see further tents in the Octagon, it’d really just be a few people camping out.
------------------------------------------
