Camp Quixote: What Next?

Mon, 02/12/2007 - 3:45pm — Starwing

I was forcibly stricken with déja vu when the Mayor and the Olympia Police showed up to disband Camp Quixote.

In 1996, San Francisco Mayor Willie Brown (D) ordered the SFPD to "clean up" the Haight-Ashbury district. One December night, the police swept through the area, arrested every single homeless person and confiscated their meager possessions. Additionally, an eight block long, twelve foot high fence was erected which cut off Golden Gate Park from the area which forced citizens and tourists to use a less accessible entrance on Fulton Street in order to get into the Park.

Mayor Brown claimed that he acted in the City's best interests, and while residents of the Haight-Ashbury district cited rampant homelessness as a concern, they were among the first to criticize the Mayor's actions.

At least the residents of Camp Quixote had some warning to "move along", but the method and reasons cited are the same.

Homelessness isn't a problem we can solve by making it illegal. I fathom that parents want to be able to bring their children downtown without having to worry about transients hitting them up for money. It is equally true that the homeless population by in large would rather not have to ask random people for spare change in order to survive.

Having said that, the actions taken by the sitting Mayor and the City Council Members is reminiscent of the kinds of actions taken by the Gestapo in World War II Nazi Germany. Hitler didn't rise to power advocating the genocide of the Jewish people. Persecution of Jews (and Communists) began slowly: blaming them for certain problems and setting up areas in which the Jews and Communists could live without being a burden to the Reich.

This is how tyranny begins.

There are those who will read this and claim that I'm likening homelessness to Judaism. This is not so. I am likening the ACTIONS of those in power in City Governments (not just Olympia) to the ACTIONS of a fascist regime. The majority must rule with the rights of the minority in mind. This is something that has been forgotten in regards to Camp Quixote. We simply cannot herd these people around like sheep.

The City of Olympia claims that crime is the main issue. If this is so, why was there no apparent criminal activity in Camp Quixote while it was downtown in the lot behind the Brotherhood? We cannot blame an entire class of people for all the crime downtown. To do so is to say: "all females who wear Nike shoes are lesbians, and all males who sing karaoke are gay."

Now that Camp Quixote has been relocated to the Unitarian Universalist Church on the West Side, rather than on a vacant lot owned by City, what is next? What will happen when (and if) the residents complain? Will the City simply round them up and force them to find a new lot on private land? What about the Separation of Church and State? Can't the Church do what it would like with its own land?

What about YOUR property? If you had an acre or so and wished to offer a home to Camp Quixote, what would you do if the Mayor and the Police showed up asking you to move them away?

Being a criminal has little to do with one's economic standing. Ken Ley, John DeLorian, Martha Stewart, and Richard Nixon were all fairly well to do people who had committed crimes. My point here is that "crime" has become a simple tactic to sell the public in to treating under-privileged human beings like sheep.

It's wrong, and I am not going to take it any more.

When the first freedom is denied, when the first liberty broken, when the first dignity has been tarnished -- we begin to walk down a perilous road. It's a road we have traveled before: the road that some native peoples refer to as the Trail of Tears. It is a road we cannot afford to walk down again.

We need a new kind of comprehensive solution to homelessness. We can't simply herd these people around any more.

I'm Toren Wilder-Valimir, and I approved this message.

Attachment	Size
camp.jpg	87.81 KB

Starwing's blog
Login or register to post comments

Comments

Tue, 02/13/2007 - 12:29am — Ehver Green

Let's hear your solution.

Let's hear your solution. Tell the voters why you should represent Olympia's interest in the fight against homelessness. You not only get to ask the questions, you are also responsible for the answers to those questions (if you want votes)!

Mon, 02/12/2007 - 8:25pm — Starwing

A solution to homelessness:

If I had the solution to homelessnes, I wouldn't be running for City Council. I'd be running for President.

That said, many things have been tried: Section 8 housing, housing projects, shelters, etc... all of which have failed to resolve the problem. We must realize that some (not all, mind you) of the homeless people actually *choose* to be so. I have met several and they perceive being homeless as being free -- there are no taxes, no bills, no responsibility to anyone except themself.

I may not have the answer, but the answer certainly is not to treat these people like cattle and herd them off somewhere so tourists can see how clean and nice downtown Olympia is.

I'm open to your suggestions.

(See... I'm *willing to listen* to the people I wish to represent. This is something that the current City Council DID NOT DO when it passed the "Sidewalk Ordinance".)

If you have ideas, I'm listening.

--== S T A R W I N G ==--

Tue, 02/13/2007 - 12:02am — jlw

One thing that might help...

...would be an ordinance that prohibits landlords from discriminating against potential tenants based on their source of income. It's currently allowable to advertise apartments or houses for rent with warnings like "No Section 8." Some landlords refuse to rent to people who get Social Security income, thus in effect discriminating against the disabled and the elderly (disability and age are already protected classes, so landlords cannot overtly discriminate against them). I've talked to a couple of homeless people who are very discouraged about getting assistance through Section 8; first, the waiting list is over 4000 people long. Then, even when an individual receives vouchers, they can't necessarily find rental housing where the vouchers are accepted. Ending discrimination against renters based on their source of income would be a helpful step.

Navigation

User login

Who's online

Online users