Why OWS Can't Succeed As A Protest Movement

When the occupy protest movement began, I was a big supporter, because I was well aware of all of the corruption within our government. Seeing the documentary Inside Job should be enough to show the average person that hardcore corruption and dirty business practices (among other things) led to the financial collapse that caused millions to lose their homes and jobs. Those responsible weren't held accountable, and kept raking in tens of millions of dollars.

So when I saw that people were protesting the government, and corruption was one of the main themes, it gave me hope that maybe we could put a stop to it. Time went by, and slowly some of the main occupy campsites started to get shut down.

It's been about 3 months now, and the government is still the exact same. Nothing has changed. I think this can be blamed on a number of things, but primarily, the lack of a clear, defined message. Seeing as how we haven't really accomplished much on a large scale even though it's a nationwide movement, I went to the occupykc GA last night and tried to steer us in the right direction.

I talked briefly about how one of the main criticisms of the movement is that there isn't a clear, set of grievances or problems within the government that we are trying to solve. And without an easy to understand set of goals, the protest movement has little hope of accomplishing anything. So I made the proposal that we have an event where all of the people involved with the occupykc protest get together, and write down on a slip of paper their top three reasons for being here or main three problems that they want to see fixed with the government/society. Then we total them up, and find out what are the top 3 things.

This way, everybody could still have a voice, but we could have 3 main grievances that we want to see fixed. Unfortunately this didn't pass, because people were concerned that since everybody has their own reasons for being there, less people would show up if they felt that their specific issue wasn't important. One person even told me that there are always going to be problems, so this occupy movement realistically will be permanent. :shk:

So the proposal didn't pass, and that basically sealed the deal for me. I haven't really been showing up there for the past couple weeks because I was concerned about the lack of direction and failure to acheive anything substantial, but seeing that we can't even decide on why we're there showed me that there is literally no hope of changing the country or the government through the occupy movement.

What's supposed to happen, will the President come down there, and listen to the demands of each and every person? It's incredibly impractical to think that since we all have our own reasons for protesting, that we shouldn't even establish the main reasons that we're there. Nothing can change if we don't decide on what it is that we want to be changed.

So although early on, I was more motivated and optimistic about it, I've basically lost all hope for the occupy movement to change anything. Lately my energy has been going towards trying to gain support for Ron Paul and getting him elected. My reasoning there is that we actually know what his grievances are, and we actually know what he wants to do to fix the problems with the country.

There is an actual easy-to-understand set of issues that he is addressing and plans to fix. So if he were to get elected, we would know what things he would try to change and how. With the occupy movement however, there is little chance that things will change, because the people there can't agree on what the issues are, and how they plan to fix them.

reply to post by TupacShakur


great post... you summed it up nicely.. I'm glad you got out of there!!!

Stay safe and would love to hear more!

There might be different messages coming out of the movement, but would they be any stronger if they divided into different camps?

reply to post by satron


I don't really understand what you mean by that, can you elaborate a little more?

He means, what if you had 30 occupies with different "Top 3's"? They're meant to be a kind of local force that can lend support to each other on a national level if necessary, you know. So far our local one has been a pretty huge presence in politics here and done some good.

You seem to have missed the point in that the local encampments are designed to be local forces for change. Now, if you had a specific greivance with the local city government, for example, and brought it before the GA with a plan of action to deal with it, I imagine the response would be entirely different. Or, say, a declaration of support for another Occupy having problems, maybe a pledge to send a liaison. That sort of thing. There's a REASON they don't issue a "Top 3" because if they did and tried to do anything else, the media would bitch that they were "straying from their message" or some other kind of bull#. It's not only a protest movement, it's a political organization for the purpose of creating real change.

When specific things need to be done - Like protesting SOPA/NDAA, for example, on January 17, which is the next major planned action, they get done.

As it were, there *is* a specific list of greivances passed by the NYC GA that is rather general, but even so.


www.nycga.net...

I respectfully disagree. I believe it has already worked. There are things (short of a full blown revolution) that just wont change. We all know this. However all the big corps and TPTB HAVE flinched or maybe I should say blinked and see the muscle that flexed. They really do not want OWS doing anything. In reality the things that need to change are the things that CAN change which is the MIND SET. Corps. will do things to prevent an uprising and what works really well is to do things in the interest of the people. Will they do it? will it work? Well it's a small step so far but the right step and a very very important one. We will still get screwed but this has opened their eyes which is the single most important step period. See, let's say we have all these laws made to protect us the people...etc. TPTB will still know and think that they could and should screw us bad BUT they actually fear us now and WILL work with us.

reply to post by zanysami


It's good that the occupy wall street drafted up that list of grievances, that's definitely a huge leap in the right direction. I guess my next question would be what do we plan to do about those things? What steps have been taken or plan to be taken in order to resolve those issues within our country?

Has that list been taken to every elected official? Are flyers being handed out en masse with those grievances listed? What are the plans to fix things is basically what I'm getting at?

I don't know, maybe I'm just a little too impatient. I'm sure making change on such a large scale would take much longer than 3 months, but I'm just concerned that there isn't much of a solid plan of action to solve those things.

But then again, if Ron Paul doesn't get elected, then what? The problems will still be there. Then how will they get fixed? Maybe the occupy movement will be the place to try to fix those things. But the clock is ticking...

You know: It's analogous to having Really good intentions to help people; Bear with me here:

So you go down to a bus station in the "mission district". Lock the doors behind you and and start "sorting it out" at random person#1:

Person #1
"well what's your complaints???"
"I'm broke,Drank too much, lost my job,lost my house,my wife threw me out" and the govt won't give me any relief..."
"I see."

Person #2"well what's your complaints???"
" I'm hungry, I've got too much invested in college to ever see a return, and my feet hurt"..
"I see"

Person #3" well what's your complaints???"
" I'm busted too! I'm too effeminate" people think I'm gay; so I can't get an interview"..
"I see"

Person#4" well what's your complaints???"
"I lost my job;Sleeping on the street; Now I've got "chiggers". They itch like a "b*tch"...Oh yeah how come rich people don't have "chiggers"?

"my feet still hurt!"
"I'm hungry!"
"My wife threw me out!"
"LGBT'S face discrimination based on their "difference"! "
"I itch something fierce"!
"Rich people aren't infested with vermin. Its unfair"!
"I can't find an apartment I can afford!"
"I don't have a Mercedes"!


"we all have a multitude of complaints and" situations"".
Not all are "actionable"or solvable, some are SYSTEMIC; some involve personal responsibility and choices.
Put 'em all together in a mass and you have a bunch of uncomfortable people demanding to each be heard..each ones' problem(issue) takes precedence.

Part of the problem from day one is that it became a national movement as it was heavily supported and organized by the Unions, which does not share the same contempt as most everyday Americans.

Unions by the way, throw large amounts of cash at elections to influence the outcome. So it is a bit hypocritical to state that Wall Street shouldn't do it, but if the Unions do it its perfectly ok.

reply to post by thehoneycomb


Yeah I should mention that a few people at occupykc organized an event where we went down there and picketed with some union at Honeywell, which I believe was one of the main contributors to the Democratic party in the 2008 election.

The obvious difference here is that corporations do it to influence their bottom line, and unions do it to (supposedly) help their workers.

In reality, I think all non-personal campaign contributions should be eliminated, but that's my personal opinion. This is why we have general assemblies, so we can talk all this out and decide what the majority actually wants, rather than one union leader or some politician pushing some goddamned agenda. (See: Tea Party)

As for having a specific plan, as I said, this movement was *never* intended to be a short term quick fix. Raising awareness, picketing politicians and holding events to change things might take years. There IS no short term thing we can do to help other than perhaps the election of Paul or Huntsman.

reply to post by TupacShakur


Not to mention that the corrupt bankers who were charged were contributing the the democratic party and the Obama campaign. Then Obama stated his support for the movement.

Then the OWS registered as a non-profit and received funds from the Alliance for Global Justice, funded by George Soros. In which many of the proceeds have been used in a very questionable manner.

reply to post by TupacShakur

Originally posted by TupacShakur


It's been about 3 months now, and the government is still the exact same. Nothing has changed. I think this can be blamed on a number of things, but primarily, the lack of a clear, defined message. Seeing as how we haven't really accomplished much on a large scale even though it's a nationwide movement, I went to the occupykc GA last night and tried to steer us in the right direction.

Civil Rights Movement..1955–1968

The nationial movement for Women's suffrage started in 1872 (UK).... . Universal suffrage for all adults over 21 years of age was not achieved until 1928.

Apartheid 1948 - 1994



I could go on...


The point is 3 months is not a long time.... most movements take YEARS to get things done.. but you know what? They ALL started somewhere... and they ALL faced opposition and ridicule and bad press and violence.

reply to post by blupblup


Good point, I'm being impatient it seems. Maybe things will change through the occupy movement over time. But I'd rather only have to wait until the 2012 election than ten years through protesting. If Ron Paul doesn't get elected, I guess things will only change through either peaceful protest or violent revolution.

How do you think things can change through the occupy movement?

But also, think about the messages and goals for those previous protests.

Civil Rights: Equal rights whether you're black or white.

Women's Suffrage: Equal right to vote for women.

Apartheid: End apartheid.

Occupy: We are the 99%.

It seems to me that those other ones had fairly simple and easy to understand messages and goals, while the occupy movement has tons of messages and tons of goals. Am I wrong?

Yes, I think you are starting to see the flaws in a movement like OWS.

Although...I still don't think your proposal of coming up with three main issues would help. You would have to come up with three main issues and OWS's proposal on exactly how to fix those issues. Many people agree on what problems we face...but most don't agree on how to solve those problems. For me to say I "support" OWS...you would have to have a clear solution to clearly stated problems. Not just "we want the end of corruption"....great...I want a billion dollars...but neither is going to happen just by stating it.

Screaming loudly that there are problems doesn't help anyone...speaking calmly and logically on how to fix problems does.

Another thing that is just 100% wrong with OWS is the way they are organized. The GAs are the dumbest idea I have ever heard...especially coming from a group protesting organizations influencing things with money. The idea behind these General Assemblies is that anyone who wants to shows up, people make proposals, everyone votes, and it either passes or fails. Now...if OWS did happen to gain traction, which it didn't, it is the easiest movement to infiltrate and influence simply by hiring people to attend and vote how you want them to.

In short...whoever organized this unorganized movement is an idiot...and the method is full of flaws, open to corruption (more so than our government) and will never be an effecitve movement.


But hey....I'm sure some people had some good parties...and felt like they were "rebels" for a few weeks.

Originally posted by thehoneycomb
reply to post by TupacShakur

 

Not to mention that the corrupt bankers who were charged were contributing the the democratic party and the Obama campaign. Then Obama stated his support for the movement.

Then the OWS registered as a non-profit and received funds from the Alliance for Global Justice, funded by George Soros. In which many of the proceeds have been used in a very questionable manner.

This is absolute bull#. OWS can't "receive funds". SOMEONE registered a non-profit called "Occupy Wall Street" and received funds from a ton of different places, but it certainly isn't OWS or the New York General Assembly. They have very meticulous accounting..

Yes, Obama 'stated his support', which is another bull# because it's out of context. The Democratic Party has tried to co-opt the movement as the Republicans co-opted the Tea Party. They failed *miserably*. There are just as many conservatives and libertarians in OWS, and most OWS people despise the Obama administration.

While the original starters of OWS were organizations trying to create a 'Democratic Tea Party' (see: Adbusters) they quickly backed down when they realized what was actually happening and that they couldn't control it.

Also, the General Assembly system is the exact reason that it has *not* been coopted. You shouldn't be so quick to criticize it. It's effective in its' own right. Also, you realize that if you have a proposal, you have to draft a very detailed paper about it and give everyone the chance to read it before it even gets anywhere near being voted on? Emergency general assemblies in the middle of a crisis are different, since, you know, they're not going to stop and draft a resolution when there are police a block away with LRADs.

Seriously guys, do a little research before spewing from the mouth.


"Screaming loudly solves nothing."

I disagree. Wouldn't you say most Americans are 'asleep' to the problems at hand? Won't informing people help? OWS has the capability to do that, and actually has specific phases in mind in the initial declared plan by the NYCGA. We're in the first one, that is, awareness. Then, in theory, all the OWS groups will come together and draft a declaration of intent this year sometime.

Oh, by the way, that resolution will be ready by.. July 4, 2012.

articles.businessinsider.com...


Basically, if this is carried out, Occupy Wall Street could shift the course of American politics at its highest levels.

Here are the steps:

1. The Occupy Wall Street movement, through the local general assembly, should elect an executive committee comprised of 11 people or some other odd number of people that is manageable for meetings. Ideally this committee should represent each city in the U.S. that is being occupied.

2. The executive committee will then attend to local issues such as obtaining permits, paying for public sanitation and dealing with the media. More important, the executive committee shall plan and organize the election of the 870 delegates to a National General Assembly between now and July 4, 2012.

3. As stated in the 99% declaration, each of the 435 congressional districts will form an election committee to prepare ballots and invite citizens in those districts to run as delegates to a National General Assembly in Philadelphia beginning on July 4, 2012 and convening until October 2012.

4. Each of the 435 congressional districts will elect one man and one woman to attend the National General Assembly. The vote will be by direct democratic ballot regardless of voter registration status as long as the voter has reached the age of 18 and is a US citizen. This is not a sexist provision. Women are dramatically under-represented in politics even though they comprise more than 50% of the U.S. population.

5. The executive committee will act as a central point to solve problems, raise money to pay for the expenses of the election of the National General Assembly and make sure all 870 delegates are elected prior to the meeting on July 4th.

6. The executive committee would also arrange a venue in Philadelphia to accommodate the delegates attending the National General Assembly where the declaration of values, petition of grievances and platform would be proposed, debated, voted on and approved. The delegates would also elect a chair from their own ranks to run the meetings of the congress and break any tie votes. We will also need the expertise of a gifted parliamentarian to keep the meetings moving smoothly and efficiently.

7. The final declaration, platform and petition of grievances, after being voted upon by the 870 delegates to the National General Assembly would be formally presented by the 870 delegates to all three branches of government and all candidates running for federal public office in November 2012. Thus, the delegates would meet from July 4, 2012 to sometime in early to late October 2012.

8. The delegates to the National General Assembly would then vote on a time period, presently suggested as one year, to give the newly elected government in November an opportunity to redress the petition of grievances. This is our right as a People under the First Amendment.

9. If the government fails to redress the petition of grievances and drastically change the path this country is on, the delegates will demand the resignation and recall of all members of congress, the president and even the Supreme Court and call for new elections by, of and for the PEOPLE with 99 days of the resignation demand.

10. There will NEVER be any call for violence by the delegates even if the government refuses to redress the grievances and new elections are called for by the delegates. Nor will any delegate agree to take any money, job promise, or gifts from corporations, unions or any other private source. Any money donated or raised by the executive committee may only be used for publicizing the vote, the National General Assembly, and for travel expenses and accommodation at the National General Assembly ONLY. All books and records will be published openly online so that everyone may see how much money is raised and how the money is spent each month. There will be no money allowed to "purchase" delegate votes as we have in the current government. No corporate "sponsorship".

Originally posted by TupacShakur
How do you think things can change through the occupy movement?

Well just by highlighting the issues and getting people aware of the issues and discussing them.
I would imagine most people before these movements and many even now, don't quite know the extent to which they have been ****ed by the government and banking sector.

The more people become aware the more the more something like this is possible..

readersupportednews.org...

At the end of the day, the convulsion to come won't really be about Wall Street's derivatives malefactions, or its subprime fun and games, or rogue trading, or the folly of banks. It will be about this society's final opportunity to rip away the paralyzing shackles of corruption or else dwell forever in a neofeudal social order. You might say that 1384 has replaced 1984 as our worst-case scenario. I have lived what now, at 75, is starting to feel like a long life. If anyone asks me what has been the great American story of my lifetime, I have a ready answer. It is the corruption, money-based, that has settled like some all-enveloping excremental mist on the landscape of our hopes, that has permeated every nook of any institution or being that has real influence on the way we live now.

Civil Rights: Equal rights whether you're black or white.

Women's Suffrage: Equal right to vote for women.

Apartheid: End apartheid.

Occupy: We are the 99%.

Well although I used the American Civil rights Movement as my example, the more broad term of "Civil rights movement" can be applied to many things and is still at work today.

en.wikipedia.org...

There are many civil liberties issues and I think the Occupy movement may be a mixed bag and may be multi-pronged, but that's not necessarily bad.
If they had one guy... who could be essentially the boogey man and people could dish up dirt on, this movement would never have gotten off the ground.

I think essentially the message of the global occupy movements is basically one of fairness and responsibility.
It can't be fair that the banks lost all their money and lost lots of the people's money and caused many to lose jobs and homes and businesses.... and yet the banks get bailed out... with OUR (taxpayers) money.. and yet the very taxpayers whose money they lost are left to pick up the bill and the pieces of what's left of their lives.

If people can't see that then I guess these guys (banks, governments etc) can literally just do whatever they want...

It seems to me that those other ones had fairly simple and easy to understand messages and goals, while the occupy movement has tons of messages and tons of goals. Am I wrong?

Well as I said, the civil rights movement (in the broader sense) also has many different objectives and goals and issues it's working on.

As does Occupy... but like the civil rights movement, it can be simplified in that the people just want justice, fairness and equality.... business should not have free reign over people and their money and people should not have to suffer just because banks are screwing around with toxic assets and debt and also creating a giant ponzi scheme.

Hopefully some safeguards will be put in place.

Who knows.

But discussions and organisation are the first steps to any change.

As a great man said.

"“First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.”

Occupy's most productive role is as a single place for the exchange of information. You had people from a lot of different backgrounds getting together and swapping information. This led to things like the Free Network Foundation, and other things which probably should have happened years ago, which haven't.

As a protest, however, it is almost completely irrelevant; contrary to the fairytales which many on the Left unfortunately insist on telling themselves. Occupy's propagandists will talk about attendance of less than 200 people, out of a population of millions in a given city, as though it is something to be proud of an excited about. It's a sad joke.

The other reality which Occupy insists on keeping its' eyes closed to, is that the political and corporate worlds are both the domain of complete psychopaths, who are not subject to either emotional or moral appeal. Said psychopaths simply do not care about how many people die; they literally do not have the neurological capacity to do so.

The only thing Occupy is going to accomplish as far as *protest* is concerned, is to render very public and visible, just how far gone the contemporary police are, with regards to militarisation and brutality. That in itself is useful; it might result in a couple of the more lucid leaders of the pigs, realising that if they want to continue bashing and/or falsely arresting people, they need to work harder at keeping it on the down low.

reply to post by TupacShakur


Protests...in their current form are anemic and quite frankly pointless. This of course is my opinion. I commend your actions of getting involved though; for that provides much more weight to what you have said in your opening OP than what many people (including myself) could ever say.

I look upon the Occupy movement from an outsider point of view -- it is my choice after all -- yet feel alienated...similar to how you described how you presented a focused mission and it was rejected. I believe this is where many draw the line when it came to the occupiers.

On one hand they were saying they were all inclusive yet the voice heard was through democratic means...pure democratic means. Which means if your beliefs were unpopular than they were that of the minority and thus deemed unworthy of the majority.

From accounts here on ATS and also through a multitude of other accounts (including mainstream media), it seems that the collective does not welcome an outside voice that presents different ideas that may disrupt the norm (or established majority if you will)....

That is what I have perceived from your post.