I think it might be short-sighted to try to discern an immediate, concrete plan for change in the OWS movement, and, failing to discern it, decide it is doomed to be ineffectual. Perhaps the Vietnam War protests might provide some historical similarity - when we were protesting Vietnam the mechanism of change probably wasn’t apparent. We did it anyway. But enough public opinion moved in our direction that change did, eventually, occur.
You’ve quoted text which says that the Democrats are disorganized and unfocused, and your conclusion to that is that the issue is class struggle? The only classist argument that could be made from your text is that people who are organized succeed (forming a class) and those who are disorganized fail (forming a second class). Perhaps that is true, but there’s no solution to it but relying on the pity of the organized.
It already has, Guffaw guffaw guffaw. The conversation has changed,. There has been gains, but they have not reached your bunker yet. There were some interesting election results Tuesday.
The occupy movement is far more than a few hundred. there are about 1000 occupations across the globe. I saw an interview with a rock star who just returned from an European tour. He said there was backing for the occupation everyplace he went. There was plenty of people aware and for it.
Sorry it has not reached your neck of the woods yet.
No, it is completely different for the disconnect between most people and the OWS protesters than it was for the Vietnam protesters. It was easy to see what the Vietnam War protesters wanted even if people disagreed with it. The OWS protesters have no clearly definable goals. You can tell the government to pull out of a war no matter how simplistic the reasoning but you can’t just order a restructuring of the economy without breaking it down to much more concrete steps. If they believe that is possible, it makes them look naive, stupid and condescending for believing such a thing. None of those traits are going to attract the true talent needed to bring on bring on change even where it is in most people’s best interest. The OWS protesters may be doing more harm than good just because few truly influential people like to back either neo-hippies or unsuccessful young people of any stripe.
It’s pretty clear that the Occupiers are quickly wearing out whatever welcome they may have had. Tent encampments in our major city centers are turning from curiosities to irritants. Merchants, who are every bit as much a part of the 99-percent, are complaining about a drop in business, and outbreaks of violence are putting pressure on city governments to kick the Occupiers out. I think the fun and games are coming to an end.
Gee, John, you mean the party’s over? Whatever shall we frivolous youth do for entertainment now?
Fuck if I know. Do whatever you want. Just don’t “camp” downtown.
Look, was there ever a successful revolution of any kind, that was not a public nuisance?
Corporations manage it.
You say you want a revolution?
Revolutions do not have to be violent. As you have seen the violence is done by those who work for those who want the movements squashed. But the elections last week showed the people are starting to react.
What nuisance are you talking about? How many people ever go downtown. If you want to get annoyed ,you have to go out of your way to do so. Some of the righties are sitting at home on their computers getting annoyed.
You have to camp in an area that can be seen. When you drive by, you have to be reminded that they are still there.
Yeah, the “righties” on the Oakland city council. Do you know anything at all about Oakland? Even the occupiers in SF (just chock full of “righties”) are wearing out their welcome. This ain’t no revolution. It’s a handful of protestors who, idealistic though they may be, are turning into a circus side show. All the elections last week did is return 99% of the incumbents back into their positions. That’s your 99% for you.
If there is an independent 3rd party to come out of this they can camp out in front of my house and play their drums all year.
I do think it will come to that. Assuming they pull off their convention in Philadelphia, successfully and intelligently hash out their list of grievances and present them to Congress etc. in October, how is that really going to go over? I predict the GOP-controlled House’s reaction will be, “How much did you guys contribute to our campaigns? Nothing?! What, you expect us to represent you for FREE? What do you think this is, a democracy?!?” And it will all be ignored.
So they form their 3rd party. With approval of Congress at 17% and sinking it seems likely they could win at least some seats- heck, if the TPers can do it, a movement with ideas that are actually popular can too. They wouldn’t have to be wildly successful either. 10-20% of seats in both chambers might be enough to end the blockade the GOP has placed on solutions with their filibustering. Then the OWS party could either cooperate with/enable the dems or act as a check on them too, depending on circumstances. Of course to achieve all their objectives they’d need to take full control of Congress, which does seem like a tall order.
I think a 3rd party would be the best thing to happen to the country (at least, most of us) in decades. I’m reminded of an old saying: Those who say it is impossible should get out of the way of those who are doing it.
OWS, like the Tea Party, is more likely to select people on the fringe of the Democratic party (GOP for TPers). These folks won’t do well in state-wdie contests (ie, Senate races). They might be able to get a few folks elected to the House. The TPers did pretty well in the House, but the GOP would done better in the Senate with their “help”.
If they float someone for president, it’s Hello President Romney.
Surely there is another place where you can pursue your hobby of poisoning pigeons?
A lot of their ideas aren’t fringe at all. A majority of Americans view the OWS movement in a positive light. A majority approve of moves like ending the Bush tax cuts. Compare that to, say, ending the estate tax and ask which group is fringe.
Anyway, the plans to form a 3rd party don’t kick in unless Congress etc. refuses to act on their demands, and so we wouldn’t see any OWS candidates until 2014 in any case.
You don’t need OWS to advocate against the Bush Tax cuts-- virtually every Democrat in Congress already does. And yet… they remain.
It is a certainty that Congress isn’t going to act on their “demands”. I guess we’ll see what happens in 2014 with their new party.
That’s complete crap.
A recent poll by Quinnipiac found that by a margin of 39 to 30 Americans had an unfavorable view of the Occupy movement.
http://www.quinnipiac.edu/x1295.xml?ReleaseID=1670
About the best thing you can say is that the Tea Party is slightly more unpopular with a 45 to 31 unfavorable to favorable rating, however, as Will Wilkinson pointed out, it took the Tea Party a lot longer to get so unpopular.
Basically the Tea Part come across as a bunch of old white losers while the Occupy movement come across as a bunch of bitter white losers.
OWL vs. BWL.
Meh. The core of the OWS message resonates with the public. From here:
People generally think corporations have too much influence and ordinary Americans too little- basically that we’re too close to ‘corporatocracy’, awkward as that word is. Unions also have general popular support.
It isn’t really a contest against the Tea Party as far as I can see, but what TPer messages enjoy such broad support?
Call them losers if you want, they reflect Americans’ opinions. Time will tell if they have any impact.
Already had an impact. Here we are. If they were not there, would we be here?