Forum Post: Some Thoughts I Have: Most Notable; Occupy the Mailbox

I have been following the movement since day 1, especially as it has affected some friends of mine who live on Wall Street (they're 99%... yes people live on Wall St. who are far from 'rich'). Originally, I found the movement disorganized, unfocused, and adhered to the negative stereotypes that are still being propagated by the media, members of the public, and even some of the government officials (inferentially). As much as it was a pain at times to dodge crowds near Zuccotti Park and Wall Street to get to my friends' places so we could do work for school; I have come to appreciate the movement for what it stands for.

I think the momentum OWS has picked up is remarkable and it will continue to grow... especially as police continue to arrest protesters in large numbers and conduct 'raids': within a crowd (picking off leaders) or at movement home-bases. I think the values OWS stands for when aggregated are a true representation of the frustration so many (I didn't say all, don't nitpick) Americans (as well as internationals) feel towards their societies. Thousands of people do not risk arrests, violence, and reputations for the sake of mere griping... If our politicians listened to the griping and appropriately responded; this would not have happened.

Which brings me to my biggest qualm about OWS: The targeting is currently too narrow and is not effectively focusing on those who are most accountable. While the Tea Party movement attacked government's inefficiency; OWS primarily targets corporate America. Occupying Wall Street is an excellent symbol of WHO is currently leaching off the losses of the 99% of us--but the people on Wall Street are not going to be substantially harmed by getting to work a few minutes later. Also, there are many people who live (as my friends do) and work in that district (such as the numerous retail/food outlets) who are harmed by street closures.

If there is anyone or at least any institution to be targeted... it's our government itself. Both state and federal governments should be targeted because it is our politicians who ultimately accept the campaign donations which influence them toward corporatism. This is not to say that OWS should strictly change its focus toward governmental 'occupation', but it should certainly incorporate it as a significant portion of the protests. City halls should be protested; legislatures; and any administration that the local leaders find appropriate to 'occupy.'

I would call for an 'occupy the mailboxes' at some point. Every single person should write their local, state, and federal representatives and tell them them their expectations regarding representation; concerning conditions; and anything else they feel their representatives should know about. Ideally, pictures/scans should be taken of those letters and should then be posted on a site like OWS (if not OWS itself) to show the vast demands and concerns raised by America's citizens. Then mail 'em in... a $1 or $2 at the mail box with thousands (potentially millions) of letters means a lot... and would take a very little amount of time.

The same can be said for occupying town/city hall public meetings... Not for the purposes of disruption but as an appropriate location to voice concerns to appropriate governmental authorities. In my opinion, OWS needs to continue to exhibit its 1st Amendment strength--as it has-- but also show the civil inclusion of its members as they can also interact within a governmental framework that has been the historical operation of our country.

We, the people, are the body of an incredible nation that leads the world in many respects (militarily, charitably, multi-culturally, etc.). We are at a time where as a nation we are acknowledging that there is something sickly--something cancerous--within out societal framework that needs to be addressed if we intend to progress as a uniting global leader in the 21st century. Europe and other nations are in the same position. Us, as a global people must reform the wealth imbalance while still maintaining respectability and a fair distribution of wealth.

The United Nations International Covenant on Economic, Social, and Cultural Rights says under Article 11, section 1: The States Parties to present Covenant recognize the right of everyone to an adequate standard of living for himself and his family, including adequate food, clothing and housing, and to the continuous improvement of living conditions. The States Parties will take appropriate steps to ensure the international co-operation based on free consent.

It's important that we, as a people, continue to strive to "improve[]... living condition." That's what OWS is really about at heart; despite the various messages that come across. [I acknowledge that the U.S did not ratify the Covenant; but its stance is important as it may influence Supreme Ct. decisions and its message transcends all national differences.]

Continue to Occupy.