Saturday, October 15, 2011

Occupying This Blog

I have been having many conversations with friends the last few weeks about the Occupy Wall Street Movement, and have been down to take part in Occupy Santa Cruz for a few hours at a time on a couple of occasions, so it seems fitting I should finally post something here as well.

Part of what I have found surprising is that some of the friends who I would have expected to be the most supportive of this movement have been the most skeptical of it, while I see support coming from a few unlikely quarters.

Some of my associates who have been with me through a few decades of protests, from the anti-nuclear movement to trying to prevent and/or end a few wars, are impatient with the "start-up phase" and distrustful of some of the younger leaders of the Occupations. But what gives me hope is the support from people who've never been a part of any mass movement, but who are now ready to take a stand.

I find myself frustrated with those who have bought the mainstream media line that "there's no message." Spend any amount of time at your local Occupation and it's quite clear that this is about economic justice. Within that theme, there are specifics around a fair tax code, re-regulation of the banks and bringing the crooks behind the foreclosure crisis to justice, and the end of corporate personhood.

But, even if it weren't that clear, what does anybody expect from a movement that's barely a month old? On top of that, a movement that's based on consensus and democracy, without clear pre-existing leadership? I'm actually pretty amazed at the success of the OWS movement so far, with over 1,000 local occupations in support of the original in NYC.

I feel the greatest success is simply that people are talking about the protests and economic justice. People have discovered that they are not alone; there are millions of us who are angry but are not represented by the tea partiers. And, they are willing to take to the streets to return democracy to the people.

The media would prefer that there be one spokesperson with whom they are already familiar and whose staff is already in their speed-dial. They don't like the messiness of consensus building among large groups. It takes time, and can be endlessly frustrating. But nobody promised that revolution would be easy or pretty.

Remember, it took the Continental Congress two years to get around to passing that Declaration of Independence. I'm willing to give the Occupy movement a few more months before being disappointed that they failed to change the world.

A couple of obligatory links:
* Who are "the 99%" who are protesting?
* Where can I find Occupy (My Town)?

1 comment:

  1. ditto. there are probably lots of us who started off intrigued but skeptical and have been impressed with the growth and scope of this movement in the past few weeks.

    the media looking for a 'leader' is inevitable. they have done that with other movements--remember how they tried to define gloria steinhem as the leader of the women's movement? and she kept saying, no, i'm not a leader, i'm a feminist. even when there was a real leader, like martin luthor king, they distorted his leadership, treating it like he was THE leader, not one of the leaders. i'm impressed that to date, the Occupation people have so successfully resisted that. in interviews [as in keith olberman's show last night], they have gently and continually reminded us of that. 'well, of course i can't speak for the movement b/c i'm just one of the poeple in it, but my personal expereince has been...'


Twitter Feed