Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

xchrom

(108,903 posts)
Mon Sep 16, 2013, 07:27 AM Sep 2013

Thoughts for the Second Anniversary of Occupy Wall Street

http://www.alternet.org/activism/thoughts-second-anniversary-occupy-wall-street



***SNIP

Weighing the Meaning

Those who doubt that these moments matter should note how terrified the authorities and elites are when they erupt. That fear is a sign of their recognition that real power doesn’t only lie with them. (Sometimes your enemies know what your friends can’t believe.) That’s why the New York Police Department maintained a massive presence at Occupy Wall Street’s encampment and spent millions of dollars on punishing the participants (and hundreds of thousands, maybe millions more, in police brutality payouts for all the clubbing and pepper-gassing of unarmed idealists, as well as $47,000 for the destruction of the OWS library, because in situations like these a library is a threat, too).

Those who dismiss these moments because of their flaws need to look harder at what joy and hope shine out of them and what real changes have, historically, emerged because of them, even if not always directly or in the most obvious or recognizable ways. Change is rarely as simple as dominos. Sometimes, it’s as complex as chaos theory and as slow as evolution. Even things that seem to happen suddenly turn out to be flowers that emerge from plants with deep roots in the past or sometimes from long-dormant seeds.

It’s important to ask not only what those moments produced in the long run but what they were in their heyday. If people find themselves living in a world in which some hopes are realized, some joys are incandescent, and some boundaries between individuals and groups are lowered, even for an hour or a day or -- in the case of Occupy Wall Street -- several months, that matters.

The old left imagined that victory would, when it came, be total and permanent, which is practically the same as saying that victory was and is impossible and will never come. It is, in fact, more than possible. It is something that participants have tasted many times and that we carry with us in many ways, however flawed and fleeting. We regularly taste failure, too. Most of the time, the two come mixed and mingled. And every now and then, the possibilities explode.
7 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Thoughts for the Second Anniversary of Occupy Wall Street (Original Post) xchrom Sep 2013 OP
Weigh the meaning, indeed. randome Sep 2013 #1
Occupy didn't change the world in 2 weeks, so obviously it was an utter failure. KG Sep 2013 #2
No, occupy was a failure because... brooklynite Sep 2013 #3
Change doesn't happen 'within our governing structure' until massive pressure comes from outside it. marmar Sep 2013 #4
+1 xchrom Sep 2013 #5
No, but it chose to try to influence those offices. brooklynite Sep 2013 #6
+2 MuseRider Sep 2013 #7
 

randome

(34,845 posts)
1. Weigh the meaning, indeed.
Mon Sep 16, 2013, 07:50 AM
Sep 2013

'Occupy' is a passive verb. It does not inspire. If anyone wants to truly inspire change, you need to start with a name that makes people want to get up from their keyboards.

Names matter.

But for those who think nothing ever needs to change about any group with the letters OWS attached to it, go right ahead and do what you've always done. With the same results.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Rules are made to be broken. Including this one.[/center][/font][hr]

brooklynite

(94,657 posts)
3. No, occupy was a failure because...
Reply to KG (Reply #2)
Mon Sep 16, 2013, 08:23 AM
Sep 2013

...it essentially chose to withdraw from the world.

The movement brought back to public attention issues that needed to be addressed. But, Occupy never chose to address them. Protest is one step; change is another. Occupy never tried to change the Banking rules, or overturn Citizen's United, which would involve engaging in the political process as it actually exists. Instead, because of their unhappiness with the political process, they developed their own "leaderless" model, which might well be more Democratic but proved useless at decision making. And because they were disenchanted with the social structure that tainted the political process, they appeared to withdraw from society by creating their own idealized community within their camp sites.

The bottom line is that, for better or worse, change happens within our governing structure, and unlike with the Tea Party, no politician feared opposition from Occupy in getting re-elected, and no candidate felt that its support would help get elected in the first place.

marmar

(77,084 posts)
4. Change doesn't happen 'within our governing structure' until massive pressure comes from outside it.
Mon Sep 16, 2013, 08:29 AM
Sep 2013

The Civil Rights Movement wasn't born in some congressional office, n'est-ce pas?


MuseRider

(34,112 posts)
7. +2
Mon Sep 16, 2013, 11:16 AM
Sep 2013

I think it is way too early to write off the impact it had on a lot of people. It is still going, just under the radar which is not hard since the only way they are probably going to be in the media for people to see is if they are getting blasted by riot squads and thrown out of places they are staying.

I am not privy to much of what is going on with them but I hardly think we have heard the last of them. I would give them credit for some, even maybe a lot of the rise of the "new left" and am certainly willing to wait and see with hope and interest about all that.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Thoughts for the Second A...