How naïve was it to think that the Occupy Vancouver protest wouldn't go off the rails? Once those tents were pitched Oct. 15 and left up that first night it was only a matter of time.
You have to figure the cops and the mayor knew it was a distinct probability. It has happened before. That's why the cops moved with such speed to disabuse a relative handful of protesters who wanted to set up a tent site during the 2010 Winter Olympics.
This time though, the cops were trapped. Unlike the Olympic incident that was successfully thwarted, there were thousands of cheery protesters on the Vancouver Art Gallery lawn engaged in an action that started on Wall Street a month earlier and was spreading to hundreds of city across the globe. And the mayor, like many others was caught up in the euphoria of the moment.
In case you've forgotten, the movement started as collective grievances because of growing social and economic inequality, corporate greed, corruption and influence over governments particularly in the financial sector. When it started on Wall Street, filmmaker Michael Moore and Canadian political activist Judy Rebick saw it as the beginning of a great new revolutionary movement.
Meanwhile in Vancouver, amidst the throngs of people, tents popped up as they had everywhere else. The cops were in no position to move in at that point. Besides, there was such broad support of the Occupy cause here. And that was at the heart of the dilemma for Mayor Gregor Robertson with an election a month away.
His NPA opponent Suzanne Anton made a meal of it. And her supporters loved it.
But her solution was as naïve as the mayor's assumptions about this whole thing going along without a hitch.
After railing on about the $500,000 in policing costs, Anton said: Give the squatters a week's notice to move their tents, then send in city staff to help them pack up. After all, they said this was a peaceful demonstration. So, no problem.
Robertson had a constituency that, at first, was mostly on the side of the tent city crowd. Environmentalists such as David Suzuki were down at the site cheering the folks on. Two weeks into the occupation, 2,000 CUPE members marched from their national convention a few blocks away to the art gallery to show solidarity. Armchair liberals in Vision's camp said those people in their tents weren't causing any trouble so why not leave them alone. Up the revolution!
What cracked it was the apparent overdose death of the young woman at the tent site last weekend. At that point, the firefighters and the cops were increasingly concerned about health and safety issues.
Folks were already observing that the nature of the crowd at the site was changing. Increasingly there were homeless, drug addicted, marginalized First Nations folks and fewer of the idealists from three weeks earlier.
In all, it was reason enough for Robertson to set a course to have the tents removed. City staff would seek a court injunction, although the police had ample authority to act; take away the structure and allow the demonstrators to stay.
It was not a decision that was fully favoured by the centre left, although NDP commentator Bill Tieleman thought the mess should be cleaned up. He said it had become "a sad parody of revolution that once promised so much."
Even the B.C. Civil Liberties Association's David Eby said given the health and safety issues, it was hard to imagine a judge opposing the removal of the tents as a charter violation. But there were those you'd expect to be in Vision's camp who still found the strategy problematic, wanting things left just the way they are.
That's not going to happen. And while the whole incident has served to mobilize Anton's support, it remains to be seen to what degree it will cause Robertson to lose any of his.
