I’ve realized that the Occupy protests seem to have sharply turned from having a message to having no obvious purpose other than just to “exist”. It doesn’t seem to me that there is any real message or specific changes being rallied for, just some nebulous “WE WANT CHANGE! WE WANT CHANGE!”. I truly question wether most of the people on the scene at the protests would be able to explain exactly what they are rallying to change. The whole thing almost has an air of “hipsterness” to it now, kind of hard to describe.
I’ve found that even though I read the news multiple times a day and there are many articles about the actual protestors I couldn’t tell you exactly what these dudes are rallying for any more.
Without searching the web for someone else’s specific answer would you be able to explain the objective of these protests if put on the spot with no warning at some random time today?
Has the whole thing become some sort of hipster type thing? Are the people damaging their own credibility by dragging this out as long as possible without clearly stated end goals?
They’ve already succeeded. They want you, one of the 99%ers, to talk about the situation.
There is no one central complaint or theme or authority. Their message is that 99% of us are being ignored in favor of the 1% who get to make the rules.
And, by extent, their proposal is that the 99% get to have more say in politics and economics.
There’s also the pretty obvious demand that taxes for the rich be increased, to make up for giving the rich money they didn’t use to make the economy better, but rather to line their own pockets.
Oh, and the push for better police, albeit only because of first hand experience since the protest started.
I think they want jobs, or something. I believe they at some point drafted up a manifesto, or maybe it was the scribblings of one angry guy, which I tried to read but couldn’t get past the rambling boringness of it all. I think its main demands were to end home foreclosures and to forgive student loan debts, dismantle the large banks, throw Wall Street thugs in prison, tax the shit out of rich people and corporations, plus bonus unicorns or something.
Granted, I only followed the movement for the first day of protests, but to me it sounded like “Give me my free stuff.” I hope it’s evolved since then.
That’s all well and fine, but they seem to take some sort of pride in being an unfocused group of jobless dudes playing bongos in the park, and can’t decide if they want to become an organization with specific wants and remedies, or if they’re going to remain some nebulous groundswell of generally angsty Arts majors. One of the protesters, who carefully inserted that he was not one of the groups “leaders,” was being interviewed on NPR recently and said its shiftless nature is part of its charm. They don’t want to alienate anyone, he said, and they want to bottle their collective outrage to create a movement against… wrongdoings. Sure, good luck with that. I’m an angry leftist too, and am generally sympathetic to their demands, but these kids really need to get their shit together.
Hmm, Occupy Chicago is (was?) right down the street from me, but I don’t hear their bongos anymore. I wonder if they’re still there, and if so, if they need a Project Manager.
Economic redistribution. The eradication of an elite upper class who can pay to have whatever laws enacted. Occupiers are basically Marx’s proletariat, vs the 1% who are the bourgeoisie.
As far as I can tell, even the individuals don’t even know what they want, let alone the group as a whole. “Throw bankers in jail!” OK, but for breaking what law? “Uh…economic equality!” Fine. How? “Uh…forgive student loans!” But what about all the future students who will have to pay huge interest rates? “Uh…uh…make college free!” But as demand rises, so will the tuition.
And so on. They don’t have ideas. They have wishes.
The 1% not only control most of the wealth but they also control a disproportionate amount of political influence due to campaign contributions and lobbying. Congress is bought and paid for by Wall Street, so they will enact policies that benefit their rich contributors, at the expense of the 99% if need be.
Here in Tucson, AZ, they are picketing and protesting people who are buying forclosed property. They say it is because they are forcing the poor out of their homes. But you could just as well argue that this is allowing poor people to buy bargain priced homes.
They want to bring attention to the issues of economic injustice, expanding income inequality, and a government run for the benefit of the richest.
This is a noble goal in and of itself. Thanks in large part to the Tea Parties, plenty of people believe that our current financial woes are due to high taxes and excessive government spending. If this is what it takes to bring some more attention to the real bad actors in the economy, then I’m glad it’s happening.
Specifics are really beside the point. Nothing meaningful is going to happen in the government until the political will is built among the people.
As these posts make plain, the time has come and gone where “I don’t know what they want!” counts as a valid criticism of OWS. For those who insist on finding it inscrutable, no explanation will suffice, and no OWS member should waste his or her time. (As these posts also make plain, those who complain they don’t know what OWS wants actually do have some idea of OWS wants.)
Instead, let’s understand “I don’t know what OWS wants” to mean “I can’t come up with a good rebuttal, so I’m going to play dumb!”
OK, then it is your contention that those posters are answering the question posed in this thread’s very title in the affirmative? I will be gratified to see MOL and CS say so then.
The purpose of the OWS movement as a whole is pretty plain: stop letting the 1% abuse and take advantage of the 99% through special tax breaks, deregulation, and legal loopholes.
Individuals may or may not be on point with that sentiment or express it in those words. The American left, being strong supporters of social liberty, have never really made strong-willed attempts at getting everyone on a consistent disciplined message. It’s kind of disingenuous to take an individual’s off-kilter ideas and push them on the group as a whole.
I see. Would the OWS movement be ok with the 1% abusing and taking advantage of the 99% through means other than special tax breaks, deregulation, and legal loopholes?