, ,  Friends of Austin Neighborhoods View All Reponses >>

How will you resolve policy issues and cases that come before you when the wishes of some incumbent residents in a neighborhood conflict with the interests of other residents and the larger, city-wide community?

“Everything must be viewed through the lens of full-sovereignty and individual liberty. We must recognize that in a free society, all people have the right to do exactly as they please as long as they are not interfering with anyone else’s right to do the same. This principle has been grossly misunderstood and taken wildly out of context, in some cases to perpetuate violations of sovereignty. For example, a company may think they have the individual liberty to melt chemicals together and create plastic products, but in reality that process leeches biotoxins into the neighboring communities air, water, and soil, and when those products are discarded they break down into microplastics that acidify oceans and violate other species’ rights. This is a clear violation, so in this case that company would only have the right to create materials that do not poison the environment and are completely biodegradable when discarded. Another example might be the designation of historic preservation districts. While it may be in the interest of some individuals to preserve certain financial exemptions for neighborhoods considered ‘historic’, this broad reaching designation may actually limit a persons ability to make desired changes to their home, or may exclude certain people from living there. Sovereignty violations can be systemic and unconscious as well. We all need to be very egoless and humble when reexamining every aspect of our lives to ensure we are not participating in systemic sovereignty violation. For example, our federal income taxes might support vital social services on one hand, yet they also might fund the development of violent weapons technology that is used to murder innocent people in Yemen. We are all likely complicit in one way or another. So the only way to move forward is to be honest and seek cooperative methods for mitigating these violations, and whenever possible, modifying codes, ordinances, and protocols to ensure full-sovereignty and maximum liberty.

As it relates to incumbent residents and city-wide issues, we must humbly recognize that just because some people live in a neighborhood before someone else does not give those residents the right to dictate what new or prospective residents can do or not do. Especially given the racist history and legacy we still live with, incumbent residents may be granted privilege as a legacy of oppression.

This is why we need to address all new land, housing, and transportation development with a new perspective of benefitting the maximum vitality for ALL people over many generations, as well as holding true to full-sovereignty and strong environmental protections. We must do our best to honor what is and reconcile that with what equitably should be, and do our best to create an environment that allows for future generations to compound the outcomes of freedom and abundance for all people, and never allow a fragile infrastructure that can ever remove rights from anyone. True resiliency will be when we are not dependent on any centralized mandate for protection of our freedoms, but rather we are economically free and educated to the highest possible point, and our consciousness respect and values all life.