Seems to me the new debt collectiobn thing is working pretty impressively

By its own self-reporting, the original Wall Street incarnation of OWS is richer, whiter and MUCH better educated than the national average. I analyze what that means (perhaps MBAs and JDs mad that Wall Street didn't hire them and more) here: http://socraticgadfly.blogspot.com/2011/10/ows-young-white-well-educated-latte.html

A true left-liberal, Alex Cockburn, said the same before he died. That said, neither he nor Frank, unfortunately, went as far as I on questioning the myth of "leaderlessness." (When you have a security force guarding not your whole encampment, but a select inner circle ... you got leaders!)

direct help to Staten Island might herald some good things.

I look forward to see what happens.

the debt collection could be huge. I did make a donation.

From what I've read they've done good things in New York. Very happy to see this.

'austerity that' (usually meaning the working class would get fucked up the ass one way or another).

After OWS, I didn't hear 'austerity' much any more and all of a sudden the 1% was having to worry it was going to take the ass fucking.

So it seems to me you're the farce, not OWS.

It shattered the austerity scam that everyone in power at the time was trying to pull off, and it changed the narrative to the 1% and 99% dichotomy.

but so many of the assumptions don't seem to play out at this time since Sandy and the outcome of the elections - tho, no doubt, the Occupy movement has been romanticized (by those within and without.)

Occupy brought attention to the corruption on Wall Street as something the US WON'T tolerate
Occupy has stopped foreclosures and now they are doing Rolling Jubilees that should help draw down personal debt.

They have brought people together from diverse backgrounds and created new ideas.

How is that ANYTHING like the Tea Party who seeks to keep a party in power that lies to them held together by the glues of racism and law of the jungle independence?

"They have brought people together from diverse backgrounds and created new ideas."

I believe Frank shows that to be a demonstrable myth.

Clark Kent is a wimp.
Clark Kent is Superman.
Thus, Superman is a wimp.

The Tea Party WISHES it were Occupy at this moment because Occupy is still vibrant even if it's still not really as organized as anyone would want it to be.

The thing about REAL DEM ideas and progress is that they don't happen in a linear fashion.

There are the elements you describe in the Occupy movement, but there is MORE to it as well which is why it hasn't failed. It's diverse and unpredictable, like our electorate.

and actually the Tea Party hasn't failed either. They just lost a big battle. They won't lose until they have become completely obsolete. They are still a viable enemy.

Let's see:

Occupy: leading recovery efforts on the east coast after deadly storms, working to purchase and eliminate personal debt, leading the discussion against capitalism and capitalists run amok, bringing people together for humanitarian purposes.

Tea Party: rabid. gun-toting, racist sign-carrying, threat-making, Koch-sponsored mules for corporate deregulation ("smaller government&quot . Elected several governors who took to busting unions, creating draconian laws, etc.

Yep, just the same. Indistinguishable. Even to me, an Occupier. I cannae change the laws of physics, Captain!

Great reference...I'm still laughing.

Have you heard of the Madrid model?

No.

I guess this was some lazy ass reporting.

The Tea Party was created by billionaires. The Occupy movement pointed to Wall Street for blame of the economic collapse and corruption. Hard to get anymore opposite.

If they say so then it must be true even though a reality check would say otherwise.

Sid

Riiiiight.

snerk

IIRC, Frank was a hero of the DU back in 2004. How times change.

All of the language such as "the 47%" and Paul Ryan's comment about the 30% wanting a welfare state are all variations on the 99% theme. Never heard percentages being used before to this extent.

nor the inclination to waste their time consuming media by-products like this pre-packaged shit-in-a-box from another media whore that had one interesting idea 8 years ago and has been living on it ever since.

Oh well, I guess they'll just go on doing something about problems, never knowing that they failed years ago...

Occupy doesn't hand out press releases and doesn't negotiate with elected officials so it's had for someone lazy and who wants to pontificate not to make an ass of himself.

Yes, but we're not talking about you. Try reading Frank's review, or if that's too many words for you, here's a shorter interview with Frank on Salon.

Which is just one thing Frank says about Occupy -- which you'd know if you'd have read his review before commenting.

the rich and extremist elements and twisted to their desires. They might not want everything the Tea Baggers wanted but the Tea Party served them in so many ways, just pulling the party to the right so they would have to exhibit or embrace the extremist positions that the rich and powerful might agree with to ousting the moderate/sane republicans who might or have worked with the democrats. From there once elected those tea party people would follow the stupidity of their beliefs sabotage the government forcing dems to pull right which is just where the rich and powerful want them to go.

OWS wasn't taken over or converted by the 'extremist left' (meaning anarchist more than anything else I'm aware of) to screw up the system by getting democrats to pull left so they couldn't be elected and install extreme left candidates who'd stall the government over getting anything done.

You can argue that is a failure, it didn't kick out the moderate dems that people don't like but it also didn't put in people willing to shoot the hostage to get what they wanted like the tea baggers. Say what you will I don't think having two sides with their own super crazy extremists would have done much if anything good for the country. It would certainly lend credit to the BS 'both sides do it' and probably depress voter turnout on our side with any that might be coaxed into voting (young people) or people who just see two crazy parties doing the same crap.

OWS can still be more than the tea party IMO if it works on getting progressives elected where they can win, not everywhere and anywhere. If it doesn't work to purge the party of any democrat who remotely betrays the position or thoughts of what it means to be a democrat, liberal, progressive etc by whoever's definition. Or even by going after democrats who might work with a republican to get something done, heaven forbid. I'd much rather have progressives doing the work that progressives want done but our world isn't one where we get everything we want never has been never will.

I disagree that OWS constitutes the American Left or that their 'failure' to counter the Tea Party means the American Left has been destroyed as if OWS somehow created the American Left then destroyed it.

...where they can win"

Occupy is strictly non-partisan/political and supports no candidate or political party. It is a populist movement against unfairness and corruption, and is for building a better future for the 99%.

including a "progressive" Jean Quan in Oakland. Two Veterans came close to death from police assaults, and the city told many easily refuted lies against Occupy, including hiding from the city a report that crime in Oakland had fallen 19% during the Occupy Oakland encampment. The police chief Jordan and Quan, who were well aware of this report, still repeatedly attacked Occupy Oakland with militarized riot police and chemical weapons forbidden by the Geneva Conventions (tear gas). Quan literally chose a path which would return Oakland to its former crime rate. She chose to raise crime by 19%. "Progressive".

Oakland officials caught in lies about attacking Occupy

http://occupyobservations.blogspot.com/2012/01/oakland-officials-caught-in-lies-about.html

I don't speak for the entire movement but I would imagine some members (7400+ arrested, many of them brutalized and bloodied by police, zero zero zero criminal banksters arrested) may have a sour taste in their mouths regarding "politics" and "politicians", and favor the power of the people, in participatory, horizontal democracy. "Democracy" of course meaning "the will of the people".

the world. Cops just got grabby during an LA march this week against a bank (an action against foreclosure fraud). I'm not going to get teary-eyed and forgive Bloomberg and Quan and Villaraigosa and Denver PD and Pheonix PD and Seattle PD and Austin PD and Chicago PD and on and on and on (just naming some of the worst, not directly correlating it to "democrat" although they're in there) because they have perpetuated violence and crime against our movement while we are being peaceful.

It would be really nice for the riot police to leave us alone as we exercise our 1st Amendment rights against criminals and criminal acts. Noting that the same people who were harassed and nearly grabbed this week in LA as they marched on a bank, were also earlier in the week protesting at a major LA intersection not near a bank, and zero cops were present. It is obvious where the power lies in this country, and who will and will not do anything to support the 1st Amendment. Zero banksters arrested and charged, 7400+ Occupiers arrested... Those of us who have been arrested and/or beaten...would like for it to stop. For the Constitution to be present and respected. Portland Occupy was just grabbed and pepper-sprayed (Portland PD loves pepper spray) for having an anti-austerity march in solidarity with Europe. Check the Occupy Underground forum for video of this. Five Chicago activists are being charged with terrorism for the No NATO action earlier this year. There is much more.

Just because we're doing good work on the east coast does not mean we're not being screwed on the west and elsewhere. The reason lots of people stopped showing up at Occupy is because they didn't want to get beaten up by cops who toss around felony charges on a whim. The mayors responsible for outrageous violations have not really backed down from their stance regarding us or done a thing to repair their crimes.

Listen to LAPD chief Beck and mayor Villaraigosa discussing OccupyLA's use of water-soluble children's sidewalk chalk, after LAPD shot up a crowd with rubber bullets, who were irate and in disbelief at members having been arrested for chalking:

If only they had cable TV, they'd realize it.

the dumbest fucking things I've ever read.

Occupy wasn't against the state, they were fighting for the state to use its power to help people. And with that his entire argument falls completely apart.

Completely predictable that our resident right wingers and authoritarians loved this, though.

astroturf.

It's easy to accomplish things when your events are funded nationwide by billionaires and you have your own cable news channel. It's hard to get anything done when police are continually assaulting your gathering places.

Occupy Wall Street ?@OccupyWallStNYC

While we do good works let us not forget that the real solution lies in a world in which charity will have become unnecessary. CHINUA ACHEBE

A big tent, apolitical movement without central leadership or a platform is a waste of time.

The best things they have accomplished are charity, foreclosure stoppage, debt erasing, and the recent activity in Long Island.

They, however, do not deserve the label of a movement.

A social web or relations that keeps on moving, changing and evolving.

Centralized "vanguard" (e.g. EZLN) can succesfully serve some purpose occasionally and for limited time, but more often than that they fail to be movements in any way and get bogged down in sectarianism, internal struggles and the usual authoritarian garbage. And authoritarian left is no better than authoritarian right.

It is no surprise that this post soviet global revolution against neoliberalism and capitalism, of which Occupy is one manifestation, is mostly and at core decentralized and horizontal networks.

Occupy is alive and organizing.

I have some criticisms of Occupy too, but this is silly. Even the facts are wrong, since the Tea Party was always corporate funded fake grassroots.

Thomas Frank?

Not so much.

Another self-impressed fucking nobody, that has done squat to better the lives of the 99%.

Kindly, go fuck yourself, Frank.

His book What's the Matter With Kansas was all the rage with progressives in 2004. If you've never heard of him, you might be living in a bubble.

"It is as clear to me today as it was last year, however, that the conservative era will be brought to a close only through some kind of mass social movement on the left. But what kind of movement might succeed?

Well, for one thing, a movement whose core values arise not from an abstract hostility to the state or from the need for protesters to find their voice but rather from the everyday lives of working people. It would help if the movement wasn’t centered in New York City. And it is utterly essential that it not be called into existence out of a desire to reenact an activist’s fantasy about Paris ’68.

Try Mississippi in the fifties instead. Reenact Flint, Michigan, circa 1937 and you could get somewhere. Look to Omaha, 1892, and things could work out differently."

************

Note that Frank mentions neither Europe of 1848 (and the 'Communist Manifesto') nor Paris of 1870 (and the Commune). Those two strike me as far more relevant models than any Frank mentions.

The Paris Commune failed; and the 1848 revolutions were part of a change in power that took decades to happen. But I have to ask you to demonstrate why they are 'far more relevant'; they happened in another continent, which had far different conditions (while the Industrial Revolution was still happening, and monarchs held real power; and the Paris Commune happened after France had been invaded and defeated).

with anything relevant.

Emmett Till was murdered there in 1954, but no great revolutionary change occurred in MS in the 50s. The lunch counter desegregation campaign was centered in North Carolina, IIRC, and the bus boycott was in neighboring Alabama. First time I can think of where MS hits the national scene in any significant measure is 1964 with the contested seating of the competing slates of Democratic Convention delegates.

Frank introduces the final 3 paragraphs with this question: "But what kind of movement might succeed?" So why is 1848 more relevant than Mississippi in the 1950s?

1848 happened in multiple countries simultaneously; OWS happened in multiple countries simultaneously. 1848 cracked the foundational ideology behind monarchical absolutism; OWS cracked the foundational ideology behind 1% exploitative capitalism. Most important, imho, 1848 and 2011 each trained a cadre of future leaders and thinkers.

Why is the Paris Commune more relevant than the Flint, MI sitdown strikes of 1936 (37?)? Because the Flint sitdown strikes were narrowly focused with limited aims, while the Paris Commune, while it may have failed, was the first foray into modern industrial socialism ever and its transformational aims were larger than simply securing a national labor organization.

Flint is far more relevant to OWS, imo, than Mississippi in the 50s. Frank has clearly not kept completely up to date with Occupy since the 'crackdown,' or he'd know of Occupy Foreclosure where sit-downs (or their current manifestation of 'Occupations') are regularly occurring (albeit not on the scale of the Flint sit-down strike yet).

It's about relevancy, which is a major theme throughout Frank's review. Part of the problem as he sees it is that Occupy was far too concerned with Theory (notice the capital T) and not enough on practical efforts which might have a profound impact on not just the lives of the protesters but of all workers.

Of course, you might say Frank is engaging in the same sort of irrelevancy by publishing in a small literary magazine. It is however his literary magazine, which happens to regularly feature one of the original organizers of Occupy, and an anarchist -- David Graeber -- on its masthead.

BTW: Thanks for actually engaging with the substance of Frank's review.

gotten me thinking, that's for sure.

I would blame drum-circle hedonism and latter-day Dionysianism long before I would blame Theory for Occupy's initial stumble. (That based upon my personal observations of Occupy Los Angeles from Oct 1-Nov. 30, 2011.)

No offense to drummers or Dionysians intended, but Jeesh, when it's time for GA, it's time to stop your mindless banging!

You can call Social Capital vs. Authoritarian Hierarchy Theory if you want, and identify Occupy movement with the academic jargon which is natural part of it (and of anything and everything "lefty&quot .

But look at the Practice and compare authoritarian hierarchy of FEMA and social capital of Occupy Sandy: FEMA camp for Sandy victims is highly militarized, no media allowed, taking pictures not allowed, charging cell phones forbidden - concentration camp mentality. One of the first pictures of Occupy Sandy was row of BioLite stoves charging phones of Sandy victims without electricity, they are eagerly using all forms of media for practical purposes of getting more volunteers and aid - people working with people for mutual benefit.

The Springtime of Nations, which was over by 1849? The result: the old despots almost everywhere still in power, thousands of revolutionaries dead in battle, executed, imprisoned, or in exile. But a couple of those soon-to-be exiles wrote a famous pamphlet, so I guess it was all worth it somehow.

About the only place where the old monarch didn't hang on was France, where the Second Republic emerged and quickly repressed the crowds in the streets. But they weren't able to repress the rise of Louis Bonaparte, who within a few years followed his famous uncle and founded his own tyranny, the Second Empire. (Marx put his prolific pen to that subject as well.) And the downfall of Napoleon III leads us to the next stop on the Roll of Glorious Defeats, the Paris Commune. Several weeks of a beacon of liberty, equality, fraternity; followed by firing squads for all those not quick enough to evade the bloody clutches of Thiers.

On the other hand, we have the great Sit-Down Strike of 1937, the Civil Rights Movement, the foundation of the Populist Party. Not as huge a bodycount as the European examples, perhaps not quite as profound in shaking the relationship between Man and Capital. But each of them empowering, achieving actual goals. Goals which may have fallen short of a totally revolutionary transformation of society, but real achievements none the less. More real than just another glorious sanguinary chapter for the history books.

will grant you that the Flint Sit-Down strike has more relevance than Mississippi in the 50s which, to my mind, seems almost non-sequitor to the issues raised by OWS and other revolutionary moments. Other than Emmett Till being murdered in MS in 1954, nothing of great import transpired there until 1964.

What a steaming pile of horseshit.

So there.

Last edited Mon Nov 12, 2012, 09:51 AM - Edit history (1)

Many OWS adherents cannot conceive of criticism without resorting to 'Fuck you, Thomas Frank!' Or 'Fuck you, fellow DU-er!'

The Tea Party was born of millionaire and billionaire anger, only it was a protest by proxy.

OWS was born from a similar well of anger but more closely associated with Progressives.

Both were born of anger so to say they are nothing alike is to ignore reality.

I've felt this same sentiment every time I see a new twenty page 'manifesto' by someone with OWS:

My heart dropped like a broken elevator. As soon as I heard this long, desperate stream of pseudointellectual gibberish, I knew instantly that this thing was doomed.

“Don’t fall in love with yourselves.”

I thought it was against the rich and bankers. The state cracked down on their behalf, but that doesn't mean that they were protesting against the state.

but an inclusive one, not dogmatically anti-statist.

Really??????

there's no way anybody can get me to believe they are akin to OWS. These people openly bring guns to their protests and hold hateful signs against the president, yet I never see any of them get arrested.

Because they didn't have an organization as national and choesive as the Tea Party did for a pretty long time, and yes the Libertarians and Anarchist had a part in that in that they felt doing so would "ruin the spirit of the protest", they didn't tailor make an image to project to the Media ether which is important.

It was an Organizational and public relations failure that stalled Ocuppy.

Occupy Sandy Does Not Signify Occupy Wall Street Has Found ‘New Purpose’

http://dissenter.firedoglake.com/2012/11/12/occupy-sandy-does-not-signify-occupy-wall-street-has-found-new-purpose/?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

The media as a collective has never understood the Occupy movement.

From November 2011 to the movement’s one-year anniversary, various outlets pronounced the movement dead. The pronouncements ignored the various reasons why the movement appeared to be dead, such as less media coverage and the fact that it has never had a national organization at the top. It has always been decentralized.

To pronounce it dead is to say that all the small groups spread out through the nation are no longer organizing. Now, with the success of Occupy Sandy, the media is drawing conclusions about the Occupy movement that again shows it does not understand this social movement.