Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
We kick the ass of the ruling class

Reports of Occupy’s Death Have Been Greatly Exaggerated

Posted 2 years ago on June 10, 2012, 8:41 a.m. EST by OccupyWallSt

via Ben Vitelli, Occupy Baton Rouge:

People can’t seem to stop eulogizing the Occupy Movement.

Since the eviction of the protestors at Freedom Plaza last November, it’s become a media cliché to report on the “Death of Occupy.” Articles pop up all over the web, blithely reporting on the failed second wind of Occupy, this lackluster “American Spring,” and the May Day general strike that didn’t quite shut the system down.

It should be no surprise that the mainstream media is eager to report on Occupy’s supposed demise. Even ignoring the fact that the corporate-owned media has a strong desire to never see social movements such as Occupy succeed, the media, as a rule, generally needs to put a dramatic narrative to everything it reports. To them, every story ought to have a captivating story arch with a beginning, middle, and an end.

In the media’s eyes, the story that was Occupy began when the magazine Adbusters put out a call to Occupy Wall Street on September 17. Many people heeded the call, yet, according to the media’s story, the movement only received its dramatic momentum when cops were photographed attacking and pepper-spraying the nonviolent protestors. It reached its early demise when the police violently cleared out the various encampments. Now, except for a few curmudgeons who can’t seem to understand that Occupy is over, all that remains of Occupy is its populist rhetoric of the 99%—which has been dutifully hawked up by Democratic front-groups such as MoveOn.org to help refuel the Obama election machine.

This popular narrative of Occupy, with its clear-cut beginning, middle, and end, has been so successful that even those who are still active within the Occupy movement can’t help but absorb parts of it. Lately, many General Assemblies sometimes border on something closely resembling a public support group. On the internet, vaguely self-congratulatory Paul Krugman-y articles, applauding Occupy for “at least shifting the public dialogue,” are posted and reposted to different Occupy-related Facebook groups to remind each other that Occupy at least had a little bit of an effect.

All that’s left for Occupy to do, then, is to sit around, waiting for the Next Big Protest–where peaceful protestors will, again, be filmed brutalized by all-too-eager to attack police officers. And then, after that, to hold their nose and vote in November, hoping that after Obama is reelected and, once again, dashes away all of his campaign promises about Hope and Change, people will remember that passively investing their hopes in politicians is a death sentence. Then they’ll take to the streets again, starting the process all over.

In the United States, we tend to view history as something other people (usually white, upper class men) did long ago, not something we all actively participate in on a day to day basis. In school textbooks, we were taught that the American Revolution was the accomplishment of a few incredibly enlightened, well-educated men. We forget that it took hundreds of thousands of people—especially young people, women, and working class men–to support and spread the ideas of democracy throughout the colonies.

The problem with how we view Occupy, then, is very similar. We tend to see Occupy as a spectacle taking place at a distance by people very unlike ourselves. Brutal police officers and their photogenic victims, Occupy-friendly celebrities and artists, black block style anarchists, and our cities’ despotic mayors are the characters in this drama who elaborately battle it out for headlines on the stage of our trash-strewn cities. Like most stories we find captivating as Americans, Occupy has become a newspaper story of violence, celebrity and corruption.

By accepting this view of Occupy, we accept at face value much of what Occupy fought against. This popular narrative of Occupy teaches us that only through violence (whether by smashing a window of a Starbucks or by getting smashed in the face by a cop on a rampage) will we bring attention to our cause—preferably the attention of trend-setting celebrities or some not-entirely-out-of-touch politician.

The true magic of Occupy was that it rejected all of these things. No one had any more power than anyone else at the General Assemblies or in the encampments. At the beginning, nobody in Occupy really cared that we were ignored by the mainstream media. We don’t need a bunch of hacks at Time Magazine to commend us for our ability to protest. The only reason we received such a burst of tepidly-favorable attention from the mainstream media and their star politicians, anyways, was because they sensed a loss of legitimacy if they continued to ignore us. And, besides, the goal was never to get them to take a step back and view what their out-of-touch policies have done to the rest of us in the first place. The parasitic 1% couldn’t care less what happens to the rest of us, so long as we don’t openly revolt.

The goal of Occupy was to get together as a community of equals, to claim a future different than the ones they gave us, and to reignite a tradition of democratic progress that reaches back far into our history. The goals of the slowly evolving Occupy movement were something of an experiment. It was a way of exploring new ways of interacting with others. Of showing each other that we can do very fine without the 1%, thank you very much.

Shrugging off Occupy as a momentary fad or a leftist pipedream is to do a disservice to both Occupy and our collective yearning for a more legitimate community. When Occupy began, there was a feeling in the air that another world was not only possible, but that it was possibly inevitable. Our isolation and alienation no longer seemed like an unbridgeable gap:

“Separations are broken down. Personal problems are transformed into public issues; public issues that seemed distant and abstract become immediate practical matters. The old order is analyzed, criticized, satirized. People learn more about society in a week than in years of academic “social studies” or leftist “consciousness raising.” Long repressed experiences are revived. Everything seems possible — and much more is possible. People can hardly believe what they used to put up with in “the old days.” (Ken Knabb, The Joy of Revolution)

Since those days, over 7,200 Occupy protestors have been arrested in the United States. Many have been beaten and tortured. The media has been strong-armed into not reporting on Occupy except in an unfavorable light, and non-participants (but potential sympathizers) are encouraged to sarcastically roll their eyes at those silly protestors who just don’t seem to get it. In light of all this demoralization, Occupy protestors are left wondering what it was all about, grasping at easy explanations for their continued movement such as “shifting the national dialogue” or hoping that this next week’s protest might suddenly convince the powers that be to change their corrupt ways.

While I’m certainly happy that the “national dialogue” has “shifted” (I no longer feel like a crazy person babbling away about economic injustice) [editors note: we support "crazy people" speaking out about economic injustice] celebrating the fact that Obama now has to pretend to give a shit and Romney must now pretend to be human is an incredibly hopeless prospect. This “national dialogue” we speak about is not something that happens when we reach critical mass and the media and the politicians can no longer afford to ignore us. It’s a continued conversation that reverberates among the masses. It’s a process of teaching one another, of questioning the status quo and debating the proper course of action—it’s the sound of agreements and disagreements among individuals who view each other as human beings. It’s the sound of people sharing their visions of a better society and realizing their common goals.

It needs to be remembered that the word “occupy” is a verb. It’s a call to action, not the action itself. The word “occupy” was useful for getting individuals and organizations previously isolated or focused on one-issue grievances out into the streets. Whether the individuals involved wanted to merely overturn Citizens United or overthrow the entire capitalist system itself, Occupy was the first all-encompassing protest movement to occur within many of our lifetimes. Whether or not the word “Occupy” continues to be the word to describe this movement is not important. What is important is that there’s wide community of opposition being formed across many social barriers, and those who hold power are very afraid.

99 Comments

99 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 7 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Dearly gathered, at this time, I would ask everyone to pause for a brief moment of silence to mourn the painful loss of our friends, the Media. Rumors of their death have been swelling for some time now. With each new day it has grown evidently clearer that the heart and soul of the Media, integrity, has been crushed under the heel of corporate influence. Sadly, the Media chose to put "RATINGS BEFORE PEOPLE" and paid the ultimate price. Dearly gathered, I am sad to inform you the rumors are true - the Media has kicked the bucket.

What used to be a dear friend we trusted to tune into, to inform us, to shape our opinions, to keep us in the loop is....no more. On this saddest of sad days, perhaps you would join me this evening in a candlelight vigil to lay the dearly departed to rest.

Rest in peace, Media, you will be missed. Amen.

[-] 1 points by JoeW (109) 2 years ago

The "Media" has always been corporate controlled, its always the underground media that gets the real digs on the story.

(still love whatever literary device you used)

[-] 2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

The "Public" has always been controlled by the Media.

Now do you see why I had to kill the Media.......mw....ha..ha..ha..ha..ha..ha..ha..ha

[-] 1 points by JoeW (109) 2 years ago

Yes, I see. At least I think.

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

It's okay, partner. Art is often misunderstood.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23968) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Good one - also very sad - what would the Cronkite think?

[-] 2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Probably rolling over in his grave.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (23968) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

And shouting WTF - just what the bloody fuck?

[-] 3 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Aren't we all?

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (23968) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Some of us are - we need to wake the others up yet.

[-] 2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Good point. If anybody is still asleep and does not believe media has great power to influence the public, they should be reminded of what happened with 'The War of the Worlds' radio broadcast.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23968) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Good example - the power of suggestion in a well told story if you tune in to late to catch the announcement. Media these days purposely leave off the announcement - Hey Folks - Hold on to your brains - what you are about to hear is total BS - afterwards we will be testing the emergency broadcast system.

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Exactly, they could probably convince people to never take off their own dirty underwear with a good enough cover story.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23968) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Sure - I can hear them now - Folks an important message from the Surgeon General of the USA and the centers for disease control: It has been discovered that wearing old and moldy underwear could well save your life - more to come in further updates - we leave you with the thought - protective camouflage - at ten the sky is actually a hot pink..................

[-] 2 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

OMG. LOL. The CDC actually found it necessary to put out a statement to let people know we are not currently experiencing a zombie apocalypse because of a handful of totally unrelated news stories concerning face-eating and the like.

[-] 6 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 2 years ago

Here's something even crazier. The CDC actually put out a comic book last year that dealt with, wait for it, a zombie apocalypse occurring in the southeastern area of the US:

http://www.cdc.gov/phpr/zombies_novella.htm

Although the comic is mainly about disaster preparedness, it's still pretty bizarre.

[-] 3 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Guys in white coats publishing comic books gives me the willies.

[-] 2 points by JoeW (109) 2 years ago

I actually like that one, though they were a little late jumping on the Zombie bandwagon.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23968) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

CDC: There Is No Impending Zombie Apocalypse

http://www.care2.com/go/z/e/AGQS1/zm8Q/B18Bb

[-] 1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 2 years ago

I like Huff Post to get the latest on zombie news.

[-] 3 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

I usually just tune into the ambient airwaves with my homemade foil helmet.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (23968) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

OH-HAHAhaahahahah - yeah I saw that. People are so far gone - I always knew the inquirer was pure poison and the public got set-up for it with daytime soaps and night time reality shows as well. Too sad - how far from reality people can be persuaded to float. Drug free for many.

[-] 2 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 2 years ago

In the spirit of this particular craziness, check out the link in my comment to Jaded Citizen above regarding the CDC's comic book. Pretty strange coincidence, eh?

Or, . . . is it? heheheheheh.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (23968) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Not a problem - I found the comic interesting.

People living on the edge are not always completely rational.

Fear for tomorrow can really mess you up.


[-] 2 points by gnomunny (3428) 0 minutes ago

Ah, sorry 'bout that, I didn't read your link until after I posted. I just got done reading it, though. Interesting link. I didn't realize the thing had gotten so out of control. It really pains me to say this, but maybe Trashy has a small point in regards to Americans believing some really crazy shit. The reasons, of course, as often-discussed on this site, are many; the chronic dumbing-down of America and rampant distrust of the federal government for two examples. When the youth of this country believe a zombie apocalypse is a real possibility, we're in serious trouble. ↥twinkle ↧stinkle permalink

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (23968) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

Funny stuff - yeah the comic was mentioned in the link I attached above.

They really should know better then to fool around with this stuff.

People living on the edge are not always completely rational.

[-] 3 points by gnomunny (6885) from St Louis, MO 2 years ago

Ah, sorry 'bout that, I didn't read your link until after I posted. I just got done reading it, though. Interesting link. I didn't realize the thing had gotten so out of control. It really pains me to say this, but maybe Trashy has a small point in regards to Americans believing some really crazy shit. The reasons, of course, as often-discussed on this site, are many; the chronic dumbing-down of America and rampant distrust of the federal government for two examples. When the youth of this country believe a zombie apocalypse is a real possibility, we're in serious trouble.

[-] 1 points by JadedCitizen (4277) 2 years ago

Yep, gullible is a natural high.

[Removed]

[-] 7 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 2 years ago

"What is important is that there’s wide community of opposition being formed across many social barriers, and those who hold power are very afraid"

You got that right! Don't pack in the concept of Occupy. It remains very powerful.

[-] 6 points by francismjenkins (3713) 2 years ago

This is a really great article .... to the author, awesome job.

[-] -1 points by bears101 (-37) 2 years ago

Not dead but definitely terminal.

[-] 1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 2 years ago

Out of intensive care and soon to be released.

[-] -1 points by bears101 (-37) 2 years ago

Out of intensive care, but with limited cognitive capabilities.

[-] 1 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 2 years ago

OK this is getting stupid you win

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

but the numbers say we owe everything to someone else

[-] 6 points by Toynbee (656) from Savannah, GA 2 years ago

The important point is that the OWS movement is just beginning. It will continue to attract supporters as long as (a) Wall Street abuses threaten our economy, (b) corporations continue fracking practices that threaten our health, our water supplies, our irreplaceable aquifers, etc, (c) students are treated like profit-centers instead of the human capital resources that are needed to keep America strong, (d) there are sharp business practices that threaten the well-being of consumers, (e) lobbyists promote legislation that undermines the public interest, (f) anonymous Super PACs pour hundreds of millions (billions?) of dollars into propaganda campaigns that undermine our democracy, . . . . oh you get the idea. There are plenty of other issues and so little time.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

OWS number were huge in Sept and Oct, then the media got involved, diced the thing into a pro-Dem movement, FOX attacked it regularly, and the 91% that are tired of congress got turned off.

There will be many more movements and protests, because this situation is only going to get worse, and the people are not going to know who to blame or the real causes.

I can say from personal experience that many people that have been waiting for something like this to come along have been turned off and stop going because of certain things, very limiting things, that have been built into the groundwork/rules of the movement.

[-] 1 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

What are the very limiting things built into Occupy?

[-] 4 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

The no demands thing was a huge obstacle to recruiting people, and a main reason for why so many talented people decided to bail.

Taking parks turned the thing from a growing movement into one that seemed to think nothing could be done until everyone can camp out as they wish.

Horizontal is a good thing until one single person can block something in a GA that had 99% agreement and send the entire plan back to square one.

[-] 3 points by jrhirsch (4714) from Sun City, CA 2 years ago

It seems that many people expected too much from OWS. To singlehandedly lead the charge to eliminate all corruption from the nation. Occupy is the spark that should have ignited a revolution of change, but the vast majority of people remain content in their pan of warm water, entranced before a TV set, unaware that the temperature is gradually increasing.

I don't fault Occupy as much as the people who refuse to stand up and instead choose to be boiled. I know they will be screaming eventually, but then it will be too late.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

I agree that the general apathy of the masses (you would love my post The Masses Are Asses) is the main contirbuter to all this, and the main reason why nothing is changing.

But many people are really wishing something new was going to come along, something non-partisan that says "to hell with all of them".... Many were hoping OWS would be that.

[-] 1 points by aaronparr (597) 2 years ago

The reason why Occupy is still relevant is the "no demands thing". I am amazed that someone can still believe that placing demands before an illegitimate gov't is the way to go.

[-] 0 points by flurp (2) 2 years ago

I also disagree that what made Occupy relevant was having no demands. I believe it was focusing and voicing the anger about Wall Street, corruption and inequality, and popular support for that expression instead.

[-] 0 points by aaronparr (597) 2 years ago

You can't have one without the other.

If the demands are laid at the feet of a corrupt power structure, you legitimize the power structure, and ultimately confuse the message. It is no longer a call to action if you address those in power. Instead it is request for help.

Why would anyone ask our gov't for help? They and the banks are the ones that we need to change. They can not help us.

In other words... protest has proven to be ineffective. So far, threatening revolution has done much more. who knows maybe it will become the real thing?

[-] -1 points by flurp (2) 2 years ago

You can call them goals if you want, and i don't see why they need to be addressed to anyone in power. Without them, however, it becomes vulnerable to hopey-changey vague shit, trying to please everyone, no focus, no direction and you get Occupy being synonymous with people wanting to live in tents in public spaces. There may be a bigger message there, but if you don't actually say it, it just becomes "we want to live in the park" and most people don't support that. Most people don't want to live in communes and read poetry. I say this as a hippy-dippy vegan, so please listen.

I would also like to see people directing their criticisms of "the government" to the actual parts of it responsible for this mess, all the messes, rather than the entire US gov. because you legitimize the idea that having no government (as if a structureless, voluntary participation order would last a day) will lead to peace and prosperity which, again, most people don't believe.

[-] 0 points by aaronparr (597) 2 years ago

A demand is inherently addressed to those that can respond to a demand. It makes no sense to vaguely lay out demands.

Goals are entirely different and have been expressed by Occupy from the beginning.

[-] 0 points by flurp (2) 2 years ago

I didn't use the word demand first. But arguing about the word is more important than listening to or addressing the larger point.

[-] 1 points by aaronparr (597) 2 years ago

The word does matter because a DEMAND is not a GOAL.

If you have a larger point, please make it.

Occupy has had goals since the beginning. Arguing otherwise is mere falsehood.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Im stating that the fact that anyone who wanted to talk about what needed to be done was told either A) "this isnt political" or B) we arent addressing those things...

It chased off anyone who was older and serious about creating real change. Having demands doesnt mean that you are expecting the establishment to address, it was more of a calling for the public to rally and create their own solutions to get to the end point, revolution certainly being one of them.

It was that type of fear of doing anything substantial that has led to the number DRASTICALLY down since its inception in September, and peak numbers in October.

[-] 1 points by aaronparr (597) 2 years ago

Thats a different point than arguing against the "no demands" stance.

I don't find this second argument convincing as my experience is different. But I don't know who you were dealing with so it may have been the case for you. Nevertheless Occupy accepts all actions and strategies. If you want to do something in a different way, you simply do it. You may not be able to take political action with whoever you were dealing with, but you ca still take the action.

Arguing that numbers are down is not convincing either. Thats a talking point, but not supported.

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 2 years ago

Go to your local GA this Saturday and compare the numbers to last October. Its all the proof you should need....duh.

The demand for something new was there, clearly. But something strategic chased people away. Whether is was internal strife, the media, or strategic outlook, something wasnt doing its job, because the numbers should be higher now seems how the problems in the banking sector are still happening.

[-] 0 points by flurp (2) 2 years ago

Occupy needs to demand legitimate government, then.

[-] 0 points by aaronparr (597) 2 years ago

Of ourselves yes. But of who else could you possibly demand legitimate government? Assert your own agency, rather than demand that others act on your behalf.

And therein lies all the reasoning you should need. Think on it.

[-] 0 points by flurp (2) 2 years ago

I do not believe that rugged individualism leads to a just or happy society, nor do I believe that tearing down the entire structure of government leads to anything other than another imperfect structure in its place. Democracy is pretty good, it needs to work, this is what my focus is.

[-] 0 points by aaronparr (597) 2 years ago

If you believe democracy is a good governing principle then you likely also recognize that our gov't should be accountable to us, responsive to us, and composed of us. We are the gov't.

And yet that is not the case in the US.

So you demand legitimate gov't of yourself, and make it legitimate. You can not put all hopes for this in others. When you do, you end up with what we have now. The people must control their own gov't.

[-] 0 points by flurp (2) 2 years ago

You're assuming a lot about me...

I criticize Occupy because I want it to succeed. I have kept quiet for months about the problems I see because I don't want to be demoralizing. But as others say the things I'm thinking, it becomes clear that Occupy needs to correct its direction somewhat. Saying that is not the same thing as demanding that others do all the work or being anti-Occupy.

I also don't see how my going off on my own instead of talking to others is going to change the entire vampire capitalist meltdown.

[-] 1 points by aaronparr (597) 2 years ago

I have not assumed anything about you. I was extrapolating on your statement earlier vaguely in support of democracy, and using "you" figuratively. Lets use "one" instead of "you". Typically if one supports democracy they also support the other things I described. So.. do you disagree or agree with those principals of a democratic form of government?

Nowhere have I told you to go off on your own. Democracy is government by the governed. In that situation citizens must take control of the gov't or you get something else - such as the oligarchy we now have in the US.

Anyway... demands... I'm waiting for you to undermine the argument that a demand to be meaningful must be directed at the power structure, and that doing so legitimizes the power structure thus undermining the movement.

If you are talking about Occupy making demands of other members of the US body politic.... that could be interesting, but I'd like to hear what you think that means, and why it would be effective.

Otherwise you are talking about GOALS which are entriely different than demands.

[Removed]

[Removed]

[Removed]

[Removed]

[-] 4 points by Bighead1883 (285) 2 years ago

The Western Worlds economic serpent has consumed all it can in Europe.Now its consuming it`s own tail by bailing out the banks continually.Those countries hurting most will default,as austerity measures prove no better than to start again with better modelling.History shows us that we have never really had true democracy,it was always government for the elite.This GFC will for the first time bring people power to the houses of parliament but the path will be strewn with much mayhem and angst on all sides.

[-] 3 points by SolidSnake (6) 2 years ago

Most people who read these articles don't even comment but this article was so good that I feel compelled to do so. Mentioning MoveOn.org as front group was the right thing to do. "Celebrating the fact that Obama now has to pretend to give a shit and Romney must now pretend to be human" was also spot on. "Even ignoring the fact that the corporate-owned media has a strong desire to never see social movements such as Occupy succeed..." exactly. People have to understand that protests/general assemblies are just one of the many forms of activism and that mobilizing a country of 300+ million people (minus the 1%) takes time. Get over yourselves, Occupy is not over; it's just the beginning.

[-] 3 points by brooklyn11 (3) 2 years ago

I am struck by your comment stating "The parasitic 1% couldn’t care less what happens to the rest of us, so long as we don’t openly revolt." We have seen evidence of them not caring even when you DO openly revolt. {Do we not remember the video of wall street bankers drinking from a balcony as they view occupy protesters getting arrested? If not, heres the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vAWv9gV8Cxo}. The problem here is not that we don't have enough people revolting and protesting, the greater problem (I believe) is that we are not protesting in the right places. Sure it may have been necessary to start Occupy in efforts to raise awareness on the issue of class overcoming society but what's the next step? Why isn't anyone approaching the feds or the people who corrupted this crime and got away with it directly?! Better yet, why aren't we looking into the faces of the people on these balconies who are still committing fraud and confronting them directly? You obviously know that small efforts like this lead to the end of larger issues but FYI, unless we do this, or Obama wakes up to prosecute these people, occupy will continue to be mocked by the 1%.-L

[-] 3 points by DKAtoday (23968) from Coon Rapids, MN 2 years ago

If I may - I would like to share an open letter that I have sent out to government and the world. It is one of a series that I have sent in this fashion.

I hope that you will pause to consider not just the letter but the act of communicating as well.

Peace :

Sent this day 6/10/2012 An Open Letter Addressed to The President of the United States of America and to all of the currently seated members of Government and to all of the citizens of the USA. Please Handle and deliver/share as you would a letter delivered by the USPS.

Mr. President and all currently seated members of Government and to all the citizens of the USA,

1st let me state that these letters I send to you I also send out on social media to all of the citizens of the USA to read as well - and I suppose it could be considered as open letters to the world also.

Anyway today's subject:

Society fails when the people are removed from the process.

It does not matter the social system that is the chosen society model.

Not one damn little bit.

Every single failed society came about through the removal of the population from the process.

Every single failed society was caused by the segments of those societies that had the money power and influence and excluded their fellow citizens.

Societies stopped working for the good of ALL in the society. And then they failed.

OK - I know this is going to start up trouble - so I might as well jump in with both feet.

There has never been a true communist Russia.

Nope the Czars were thrown down by the people and were replaced by a dictatorship that won it's place by telling lies to the population about communal good and all working to support all.

Then they went and siphoned off the fruits of the peoples labor for themselves at the top and left the population to fend for itself in a police state that kept the population from running wild.

China is much the same - ruling elite siphoning off the fruits of it's people labor.

That being said - there is no place - no form of society in the world today - that does not operate on these same principals. Whether it is dressed up as a democracy or socialism or Aristocracy etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc etc - it is all the same - the few with money influence and power ruling over the masses - largely to their own benefit.

It is - again - when the people are removed from the process - and society stops working for the benefit of ALL society - that then those societies begin to fail.

Hence we come to today and the world wide economic meltdown.

Just one sign of things to come - unless society makes a real change and starts working for the benefit of ALL of the society.

[-] 2 points by stevebol (1269) from Milwaukee, WI 2 years ago

OWS got hit by a truck. The truck was owned by the democrats, driven by the communists and carrying a bunch of anarchists. It lived. A typical hit-and-run.

[-] 2 points by TechJunkie (3029) from Miami Beach, FL 2 years ago

By the last paragraph, the author of this article is already referring to Occupy in the past tense. That kind of contradicts the rest of the article, doesn't it?

[-] 2 points by dchild (2) 2 years ago

I think now is the time to formulate tactics that go beyond "Occupying". But by no means that mean Occupy is over. I think intelligent people generally give information to people in ways that they can handle. Some people can't handle Occupy. Let's give them some other options. People naturally revolt against occupations. Why not make it more subtle?

Anyhow, the needed cultural- and political- tactics are outlined in Citigroup Bank's 2006 letter to investors in which they outline what would be a threat to "Plutonomy", rule by the super-rich.

Here's what it unknowingly tells us to do:

Bust the Myth of Luxury. -Devalue the concept of Luxury Lifestyle. - In what ways are mainstream luxury goods inferior or false (less quality for more money)? - In what ways are Luxury Brands co-opting DIY, Cottage Industry (Authenticity for a Price)? Making us pay for things like natural food, hand-made clothing, alcohol that anyone can make, recreation, sport.

Make it clear that the American Dream isn't about becoming super-rich. It's about being middle class. -Make it clear that middle class isn't the enemy. Middle and upper-middle class people feel demonized by Occupy. But they aren't the one percent. -Also bust the myth that Everyone can become Super-rich. Citigroup's 2006 Plutonomy Memo admits that for the Super-rich to exist, super-poor must exist too.

Higher Taxes -This one is obvious. Tax the rich. If the majority of wealth is passing through their hands, that's where revenue will come from.

Higher Minimum Wages - End all outsourcing and insourcing (using low-wage immigrant workers) - Or at least pay them more. But then they wouldn't be necessary. -Maybe we need a global minimum wage. -New business models like Co-ops might help here. Where all decisions are made by the workers. That doesn't mean totally income equality. Managers are paid more. But the whole group decides how much more.

All energy production belongs to the people. - Oil - Water -Coal -Green Energy

All of this belongs to the people. This would create a lot of revenue.

Last but not least. Money out of politics. And end aristocratic residue such as Congress People and their Heirs not having to pay property tax.

[-] 2 points by Petruk (2) 2 years ago

It may not be dead, but it seems to be MIA right now. And if we can't come up with something more galvanizing than endless consensus building, mic checks and drum circles, we might as well pack it in. How about occupying the Hamptons? How bout renting a Blimp? How bout something bold, creative, funny? Because I don't need any more DSLR Vimeo documentaries showing picturesque protesters.

[-] 2 points by shadz66 (19985) 2 years ago

Thank-you & me like lots !!! Occupy Everything !!! Viva Los Indignados !!!

per aspera ad astra ...

[-] 2 points by beautifulworld (22057) 2 years ago

I wish you didn't use the word "was" so much. But, regardless, the kind of change this movement seeks to bring will take a very long time. Watershed change in history never happens overnight and it's always complex.

[-] 1 points by theressomethinghappeninghere (3) 2 years ago

"the revolution will not be televised"--gil scott-heron

[-] 2 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

"bank crimes will be legalized"

[-] 1 points by Sethdood (1) 2 years ago

Occupy isn't dead because it's not getting media coverage or because the movement if losing numbers all the time. That's just why it doesn't have very much power.

Occupy is dead because it's now comprised mostly of anarchistic conspiracy theorists who are disgustingly new-agey. The realistic goals of not letting Wall Street fuck the country up have been replaced with ridiculous "kill the system" nonsense which nobody can get behind. People show up set to riot and then over-react when cops try to do their jobs. According to occupiers, everyone who doesn't like Occupy is either an undercover cop or a republican? Could it BE more immature? Nobody else is calling for overthrowing the U.S. government- Occupy's current views are shared by a fraction of a percent of the population, far less than the 1% so frequently demonized.

[-] 0 points by flurp (2) 2 years ago

There has been a "mainstream" movement that has been calling for "drowning the government in a bathtub" for more than 30 years now -- why do they receive popular support or acceptance?

I agree somewhat with your larger point, that Occupy has strayed too far from what gave it popular appeal.

[-] 0 points by Misaki (893) 2 years ago

why do they receive popular support or acceptance?

http://www.gallup.com/poll/149543/Americans-Say-Federal-Gov-Wastes-Half-Every-Dollar.aspx

Creating jobs without government spending: http://jobcreationplan.blogspot.com/

[-] 1 points by flurp (2) 2 years ago

After 30 years of the "government can't do anything right!" rhetoric, yes, people believe it. It doesn't mean it's true, even though those in power are trying very hard to make it so.

[-] 0 points by Misaki (893) 2 years ago

http://jaredbernsteinblog.com/saturday%E2%80%99s-pape%E2%80%99s-muckraking-and-personnel/

Army forced to pay $17k for a drip pan that a competitor makes (for another military helicoptor, even) for $2.5k.

Millions of unjustified "temporary duty/travel" expenses for scientists paid by the government, who had "1~2 year contracts" that were continuously extended with no explanation.

You can keep deluding yourself into thinking the government doesn't waste any money, but it won't convince the fanatical right. Support the accelerated work week if you want any actual progress to occur.

[-] 0 points by flurp (2) 2 years ago

Where and when did I say that the government doesn't waste any money? It's to the benefit of government haters in power to waste as much money as possible, give as much to their friends (Haliburton/Blackwater), run up debt, and prove that we need to "starve the beast". The fact that we have already starved most of the good gov. sectors doesn't matter to those who want to live in a lawless society.

[-] 1 points by Misaki (893) 2 years ago

Ok... so does this mean you support reductions of government spending on wasteful projects and agencies?

[-] 1 points by flurp (2) 2 years ago

Of course. I have never met a real person (as opposed to a politician) who believes in government waste. But the definition of what is wasteful has become twisted as well, so it's totally subjective at this point. Oil subsidies? Not wasteful at all. Feeding poor people? Horribly wasteful.

[-] 1 points by Misaki (893) 2 years ago

Well, wouldn't it be nice if poor people all had jobs and a high wage?

This is why in the population as a whole, unemployment is seen to be the most important issue. I do not know why OWS cannot understand this.

[-] 0 points by Sethdood (1) 2 years ago

This is another thing I think which has really hurt Occupy- transitive rationale which doesn't always pan out, arguing from ignorance, and a decent amount of anti-government paranoia.

I don't think wasteful spending is good =/= overthrow the government

I read a chart about how people could be payed more =/= I am as business-talented as any corporate CEO or economist, and get to be mad about Starbucks employees not making $30/hr

Some elected officials do corrupt things for their own benefit =/= the entire government is horrible and needs to burn

Occupy sees no middle ground. They go for the latter of all the above statements. It's a massive turn off.

[-] 1 points by flurp (2) 2 years ago

Occupy can reinvigorate support by pulling some Robinhood moves.

[-] 1 points by fiftyfourforty (1077) from New York, NY 2 years ago

I believe that OWS will reach that "critical mass" (it was just about there for a while and will exceed those heady days again I believe) not so that now the media and pols can pay attention but so that the people can overturn the whole rotten stinking mess and build something better.

[-] 1 points by localtravesty (5) from Eberswalde, BB 2 years ago

Occupy for President.

[-] 1 points by huevosrancheros (21) 2 years ago

You seem to be writing a death certificate here. What you say about the corporate media's reasons to demonize the movement is right on. But the narrative they initiated about Occupy you start out to expose it as an invention, "cliches," yet you leave the reader waiting for the true narrative. Should we continue to give Adbusters (a group of careerist writers) credit for "originating" the movement? Or for the smart propaganda move to make the first shout out?

You began with, "In the media’s eyes, the story that was Occupy began..." and just left us with their narrative. Your take on Occupy's real story, the true significance behind it, the vitality it still has, and the glorious future it can have, is what we want to hear.

You also said, "This popular narrative of Occupy, with its clear-cut beginning, middle, and end, has been so successful that even those who are still active within the Occupy movement can’t help but absorb parts of it." I guess you are one of them.

Uniting the workers and their organizations and all of the revolutionary left we can only go forward from here.

[-] 1 points by RichZubaty (37) from Wailuku, HI 2 years ago

Sorry...Occupy is not a philosophy, much as you would like to think it is. Without an occupation the juice has gone out of the whole thing. It has meandered off into corollary issues like GMOs and individual foreclosures, and allowed attention to be taken off the big banks who are behind everything. Don't be silly. Occupy something in NYC. You had the whole world listening 9 months ago and now you are preaching to the choir. Light it up!

[-] 1 points by GarrettConnelly (4) 2 years ago

We are the information-age still in the first minutes of dawning Aquarius. Our atoms are waves born in the hearts of stars, waves that add together to make us and then add again, playfully, to make civilization, a living being.

We are surfing Big Bang at life speed, far faster than the speed of light. We occupy our place in the cosmos; consciousness as equal partner in creation with stars, gravity and the vastness of spacetime. Those who attempt to own and guide the human spirit are missing a good ride and will be left behind unless they learn to enjoy the fun.

[-] 1 points by writerconsidered123 (344) 2 years ago

This was a very well written piece thank you, I just wrote to the president among other things that for every 1 protester in the street there was a 100 people just as disgruntled behind the scenes. I'll finish later I think I have a virus. funny how that happened a half hour after bitching out the prsident

[-] 1 points by airplaneradio (50) 2 years ago

Occupy isn't over but it has seen its zenith already. As the world continues to spiral slowly into lower standards, controlled decline, and slow helplessness, Occupy will serve its function as a group of the mostly angry left. That is its useful function. Every empire must have a designated outlet for which its enemies can cry, for it is better to build opposition (Tea Party included) than let the people build it on their own for it may disrupt the status quo. Occupy, like any other, will never do such a thing. It a merely a punching bag for those that want that want it and need it to express their frustration and indignity. Not all the street theater and pot banging in the world will rip down this mutli-faceted cyber-empire that we alll benefit mostly from. It's why our kings are also philanthropists. Piss people off enough but only to beg for a bit of reform or smash a window that tends to get repaired the next day. The empire now weaved into even within warring global factions that would rather maintain each other's power legitimacy than allow the unelite, miseducated, low-level gene masses of people like us to run anything. (Coke and Pepsi would rather shake each other hands in their domination than allow smaller men to threaten either of them.) Hopeless you say? Sort of. I mean, without the masses collectively changing en masse disrupting everything. What slays me about both the left and right is that they don't realize that both sides are needed to maintain all of this. Hell if I was a king, I would do the same thing. Fund religion and patriotism and military in one hand while funding non-religion, peace, and lack of nationalism on the other. A divided people with well groomed spokesmen is the best way to maintain order. Occupy, like the Tea Party are the perfect and well-timed organizations to appear at this point of global decline to serve as the punching bags for the people.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by Misaki (893) 2 years ago

(I no longer feel like a crazy person babbling away about economic injustice)

"Since the recovery began in June 2009 following a deep 18-month recession, 
“<b>corporate profits captured 88 percent of the growth in real national income</b> while 
aggregate wages and salaries accounted for only slightly more than 1 percent” of that 
growth."
<a href="http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/06/30/the-wageless-profitable-recovery/">
The Wageless, Profitable Recovery - NYTimes.com</a>

"18. Which comes closer to your own view? 1) The federal government should spend 
money to create jobs, even if it means it has to borrow the money to do so, OR 2) The 
federal government should not spend money to create jobs and should instead focus on 
lowering the country’s debt."
6/24-28/11
Gov’t should spend money - <b>42%</b>
Gov’t should not spend money - <b>52%</b>
Don't know/not applicable - 6%
<a href="http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2011/06/30/business/20110630poll-
full-results.html">NYT/CBS opinion poll</a>

"Most employees, about 76 percent, said they are willing to take a pay cut . . . And among 
those who are out of work, 88 percent said they would take less in salary in order to 
land a job."
<a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36141641/">Most workers willing to take a pay cut: 
poll - Business - Personal finance - Careers - msnbc.com</a>

http://pastebin.com/SrWHNFxS

The revised solution that would create jobs and fix inequality without more government spending: http://jobcreationplan.blogspot.com/

[-] 1 points by MattLHolck (16833) from San Diego, CA 2 years ago

der

[-] 1 points by Misaki (893) 2 years ago

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=der ???

So the evidence was there, even without protests.

[-] 0 points by shainzona (23) 2 years ago

I suggest this article be revised to stop using the past tense as in "The goal of Occupy WAS" or The magic of Occupy WAS..."

The goals and magic still exist. This article does a disservice to the Occupation.

[-] 0 points by dakota (62) from Canton, MI 2 years ago

If OWS isn't strategic in how it manages the media, then they will continue to become increasingly irrelevant. For example, the interview that Harrison Schultz conducted with Shawn Hannity demonstrated that OWS is not strategic at all. Harrison Schultz should have been coached for the interview with key talking points that he needed to communicate, and on how to respond to Shawn's provocations. Instead, Shawn Hannity made him look foolish. Just ask the Rev. Al Sharpton why he doesn't see the movement as being news worthy. He wants to support the movement with news coverage, but when OWS makes it look like the press is shooting carp in a barrel, it becomes a pathetic cause. The press is actually doing OWS a favor. You should thank them for giving the movement some time to think and develop a strategic focus!

[-] 0 points by PetadeAztlan (113) from Sacramento, CA 2 years ago

6/10/2012 Comment: #OWS has mainly gotten as far as it has because of the personal participation of the protestors, especially the youth of America at many Occupy locations across the country. Naturally, it will continue to change, evolve and develop as times goes by. Plus, let us not forget the many who did not openly protest but whose enlightened eyes were opened up more than ever. It has given many Americans something to think and ponder deep about. Who actually are the 1%? Am I actually among the 99%?

The Occupy Wall Street has become more of a matrix of interconnected occupations or centers of protests. It needs to naturally grow and spread into the creation of liberated power bases of operation. The important factor to remember if that this is a relatively new phenomena, though the people's longing for liberation is ancient.

We need to understand the ebb and flow process of liberation forces. Sometimes coming closer to our subjective calculations and at other times receding further way from anticipated results. It is a flux, a flow and involves ever changing dynamics and mechanics. We need to be open to constructive criticism and engage in our own personal self-criticism. All tactics must be considered, including electoral politics, but not necessarily as any kind of Occupy Party trying to ape the Tea Party. The progression of historical events will unfold in ways we cannot always predict. Go with the flow and never ever give up!

I am blessed to now be 60-Earth years of age. I was arrested for inciting a riot and disturbing the peace at 17 years of age, when I was still a teen and at the time faced five years in prison up. Back then we had what was called the Indeterminate Sentence. Google it. I got a hung jury. I remember with the Grape Boycott of the UFW when we had actual paper petitions for folks to sign, not the online petitions that folks groan and fill out because of a moral obligation or to assuage a guilt complex. I knew back then that I was involved in protracted war, not an easy quick fix. Back then the concept of global near instantaneous global communications via the Internet was not even heard of. We were lucky if a heavy house phone worked and we could get an open line! Times have changed and continue to change constantly.

Thus, I have seen the rise and fall of some historical movements in my lifetime, yet in a way it has been the same basic movement in support of basic humane rights and thrusts towards whatever it takes to assure our humane rights. Liberation is a protracted process, not a fixed set of conclusions. Liberation is creative and creating.

Do not embark on any revolutionary undertaking unless you are prepared for the long haul, a long distance marathon. In a revolution, quite simply, one wins or one dies trying to manufacture a revolution in light of actual circumstances. It is not for the faint of heart, those with a weak indecisive mind or a confused inner spirit.

Stick to your guns. Stick to your basic principles, never compromise principles for political expediency. Do not allow yourselves to be corrupting by 'things' when there are worlds to win.

Venceremos Unidos! We Will Win United! Peter S. Lopez AKA @Peta_de_Aztlan Sacramento, California, Aztlan AKA USA c/s

[-] 0 points by dakota (62) from Canton, MI 2 years ago

What tangible change has the Occupy 'Wall Street' Movement Accomplished? What changes have occurred in our government, in our nation's policy and laws, or in how Wall Street operates? From what I can see, NOTHING!!! I truly want to support this movement, but if it isn't bent on accomplishing something, then it truly isn't worth anyone's time. Sorry. It really is that simple. Accomplish something or become irrelevant.

[-] 0 points by PetadeAztlan (113) from Sacramento, CA 2 years ago

It is not for the faint of heart, those with a weak indecisive mind or a confused inner spirit.

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by jackthemaniac (0) 2 years ago

Listen to Bill Maher - if I thought you were serious, you'd be getting time & $$$ from me

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/09/bill-maher-mocks-occupy-wall-street_n_1583616.html

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by cJessgo (729) from Port Jervis, PA 2 years ago

Time is on our side.Keep on keepin on.

[-] 0 points by littlebiggygirl (26) from Hesperia, CA 2 years ago

every successful protest movement needs a leader; a strong, passionate, articulate, visible face and voice of the movement. occupy has no chance without one. http://littlebiggy.org/4660547

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by cmoylanc (32) 2 years ago

The word "occupy" is useful and will continue to proliferate. The movement is on the verge of a momentous evolutionary change, similar in importance to the decision to set up an encampment. I say just hold tight and get ready for September.

[Removed]

[-] -3 points by cjruhol (1) from Brooklyn, NY 2 years ago

"All that’s left for Occupy to do, then, is to sit around, waiting for the Next Big Protest–where peaceful protestors will, again, be filmed brutalized by all-too-eager to attack police officers. And then, after that, to hold their nose and vote in November, hoping that after Obama is reelected and, once again, dashes away all of his campaign promises about Hope and Change, people will remember that passively investing their hopes in politicians is a death sentence. Then they’ll take to the streets again, starting the process all over."

Is this really how we expect to create change? By sitting and waiting? I thought Occupy was about getting up, taking charge, and creating change, not waiting for someone else to do it for us. Obama should not be reelected. If we want change we need to get the movement to elect an official into presidency who actually cares about what we are saying.

If the entire movement and their friends and allies take to the polls, we can attempt to elect someone who can change the world, someone who wants to change it.

The peaceful protests are great for morale but if we want change, we need a leader, a voice in the government we so desperately want to change who can speak for us and who can change it.

RON PAUL is our Leader, Let's work to ELECT him

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KK5X4dYl7Bw&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=33FsSsSdIRw