Occupy Wall Street; Internet-Era Movement or Bellyaching Loiterers?
Saturday, November 12th, 2011
By Sorilbran Buckner, exclusively for www.mcchad.com
Since its first public demonstration at Zuccotti Park in Manhattan, September 17, 2011, the Occupy Wall Street movement has garnered media attention, solicited intrigue and provoked controversy. Occupy Wall Street has spread all over the country and crossed the Atlantic to become a worldwide movement bent on calling attention to the financial greed and corruption that exists in the absence of political integrity and social accountability.
For Occupy supporters, the call to action transcends To Do Lists and bullet-pointed schedules of executable demands. Supporters have likened OWS to a waking giant. While it is difficult at this time to rightly determine if the multiplication of General Assemblies around the globe is proof that the movement is gaining momentum, one thing is certain – the whole world is watching and listening. Detractors point to the movement as the haphazard communion of disgruntled Democrats and angst-ridden liberals who are looking for a scapegoat for their current financial woes. Perhaps they are searching for a cause to support, irrespective of purpose. The primary complaint amongst critics is that the movement has no official agenda, no list of demands to be met. Without such a definitive set of goals and objectives, people wonder how Occupy Wall Street can be taken seriously or facilitate any kind of significant change.
Origins
Occupy Wall Street originated with Culture Jammers HQ at Adbusters, a non-profit media firm in Vancouver, British Columbia. “Culture jamming” is a term that describes the use of mass media to issue sub-cultural messages, many of them containing strongly anti-capitalistic themes. Inspired by the protests in Egypt and Spain during the winter and spring of 2011, Adbusters issued a call for 20,000 concerned citizens to occupy Wall Street for a period of two months or more, to stand as a unified front against perverted “corporatocracy” perpetuated by the richest 1% of people who are dismantling democracy in favor of a system wherein banks and large corporations are more powerful and more important than people. OWS calls for individuals to have more representation in both government and economy.
“Democracy has never been a spectator sport, and Americans have an obligation, particularly if we claim to love our country, to build serious and meaningful change from the bottom up.” – OccupyWallSt.org
What began as 1,000 people collecting on Wall Street in the middle of September has spread nationwide – to major U.S. urban centers like Atlanta, Chicago, Oakland, Detroit, Seattle and Washington D.C. – and around the world, showing up in places like Vancouver, Puerto Rico, Mexico City, Munich, London, Paris, Rome, Manila, Seoul and Tokyo.
A Direct Democracy
One of the more intriguing aspects of the Occupy Wall Street movement is the way in which it is organized. The movement identifies no single leader, but each member of the movement is expected to actively interact with other members of the assembly, thereby crafting mass assemblies in a way that is productive. The structure is referred to as a direct democracy, a horizontal organization in which no single voice or opinion is provided the opportunity to be more important than any other voice or opinion. While the constituency of each mass assembly changes daily, the assemblies themselves are methodically organized in accordance with OWS’s open source organization guide. Therefore, city to city, each manifestation of OWS contains several subgroups that have specific roles and functions:
· The Logistics Team is at least three members that are responsible for handling the equipment of an Assembly. Responsibilities include creating a site map, drawing up a site footprint, providing water for and umbrellas for hot, sunny days and even securing adequate seating for participants with disabilities.
· Assembly Participants are thosewho participate in the assembly by overseeing groups and offering subjective evaluations based on the interactions within the groups.
· A Floor Time Team of twoto four people is responsible for taking down the names of participants who would like speak during the mass assembly.
· The Coordinators of the Floor-Time Team work as a two-person team in charge of organizing requests for floor time. This team works as a liaison between the Floor Time Team and the Moderators. The coordinators serve as filters, minimizing repetition by finding out the specific topics on which participants plan to speak and making determinations on which speakers go up to address the assembly.
· The Facilitating Team is made up of two or three people who assist the moderators and help them maintain focus and impartiality.
· The Rotating Team of Moderators can be one person who steps in to replace the moderator, which can be helpful in minimizing emotional outbursts, particularly in groups where a heated topic is being discussed. In a perfect world, there would be no need for the rotating team. Without perfection, however, rotating team moderators help to ensure meetings run smoothly.
· The Interpreter Team is made up of one or two people who can translate interventions into sign language.
· The Minutes Team is comprised of two people who are charged with keeping a list of unscripted interventions.
Communicating
The Occupy movement adheres to the strict core belief that each person should have a voice within government and the economy. The movement is organized in such a way that core beliefs are upheld, proving that the means of operation must reflect the end result. Within the context of group interactions amongst mass assembly members, the importance of being respectful of the views and opinions of each participant is stressed. The result is the creation of set of common communication gestures used in demonstrations throughout the world.
Source: New York City General Assembly
At the movement’s inception, the city of New York prevented OWS from using electronically amplified equipment during demonstrations. Groups can take advantage of megaphones or use a system called the “people’s microphone” whereby speakers speak loudly in short fragments that are echoed by the crowd in waves so that within seconds a speaker which may not have otherwise been heard by participants in the back of the crowd or on the fringes is heard and understood by a crowd of possibly hundreds of people.
The Mission
Some contend that part of the confusion with Occupy Wall Street is that in general, people do not know what the organization is about. That, however, is a misnomer. From the beginning, Occupy Wall Street has been very vocal about its focus. The following quote was pulled from the website of the New York City General Assembly. “Occupy Wall Street is an otherwise unaffiliated group of concerned citizens like you and me, come together around one organizing principle: We will not remain passive as formerly democratic institutions become the means of enforcing the will of only 1-2% of the population who control the magnitude of American wealth. Occupy Wall Street is an exercise in ‘direct democracy’.”
The 4 Key Issues
The conversations swirling around the Occupy movement have been consistent. Mainstream media has erected pundits to discuss the relevance of the movement, freely proposing objectives upon which the movement should act. Has Occupy already used up its 15 minutes of fame? At which stage of development is OWS as a social movement? Can the organization focus its efforts long enough to develop a list of demands that can be discussed and attained? More often than not, media coverage of Occupy Wall Street centers on four key topics – organization and leadership, the movement’s relevance, the movement’s demands and OWS as a social change agent.
The Issue #1: The Occupy movement’s unorthodox horizontal structure and stripped down democratic process reflect the movement’s belief that a democratic system should value the importance of each member of the community. The process, however, seemingly slows down and foils any potential progress.
Detractors – Occupy Wall Street employs an open source organization system in lieu of engaging in the process of contemporary politics. Detractors insist that for a movement with the widespread influence OWS has had in such a short period of time, the refusal to designate (or identify) their leader and conform to democratic political norms indicates a bit of naiveté on the part of the Occupy movement. Within the day-to-day operations, OWS’s processes are slow-moving and tedious. Issues that come to the assembly for a vote are passed if it can win a 90% super-majority of the mass assembly. Spinning your wheels addressing objections makes it near impossible to really push for progress. Unanimity slows down the organization’s ability to quickly mobilize efforts.
Supporters – Occupy Wall Street is a clear example of what Democracy looks like. While the process requires patience and necessitates an unending supply of tolerance, the process is open, accessible and transparent. Decisions are taken by consensus and in a system where every voice counts, there must be allowances made for people to express their thoughts and concerns, even if it results in an issue being blocked and re-thought. As a matter of daily process, the innovative People’s microphone employs one of the most effective active listening techniques around – repetition and according to Huffington Post contributor, Benjamin Barber, offers two democratic virtues: it forces relatively simple, straightforward speech that enhances clarity and communication; and it requires that in dealing with naysayers and “blocks” the majority must mouth and voice the actual words of those who disagree.”
Issue #2: Occupy Wall Street has been called a “white people’s cause,” the rehearsal of gripes and injustices minority groups have endured for decades. Is Occupy limited by its inability to bridge the gaps caused by lingering social ails like racism?
Detractors – Post-racial society or not, African Americans were noticeably absent from the New York City demonstrations. Activist and writer Kenyon Fallow points out in his article, “Occupy Wall Street’s Race Problem,” the idea that white progressives who are participating in the Occupy movement feel a rightful sense of entitlement, a belief that their efforts will help them to reclaim their rights and take back their country. African Americans, on the other hand, have been bombarded throughout American history with the [spoken and unspoken] idea that this is not their country and their rights are relative. In fact, the New York Police Department is notorious for its continued use of the stop-and-frisk policy, focused on urban communities that are predominantly African American and Hispanic. According to the New York Civil Liberties Union, the NYPD carried out 600,000 stop-and-frisks in 2010, half of which were conducted on black citizens. It becomes very difficult to invest in something that one cannot truly see as rightly one’s own.
Cultural relevance plays a huge part in the effectiveness of the OWS movement, particularly in an urban area as diverse as New York City.
Supporters – The conversation about cultural relevance could have come to a head during Bill Kristol’s recent attack on supporters of Occupy Wall Street. The Fox News commentator ran ads accusing OWS of perpetuating anti-Semitic ideas . The accusations were put to rest when a group of 15 influential Jewish liberals issued a statement in support of Occupy Wall Street . Amongst the signatories was former New York governor Eliot Spitzer, former Vermont governor Madeleine Kunin and former congresswoman Elizabeth Holtzman.
The push for more diversity within Occupy Wall Street is one promoted by Reverend Gary D. Simpson of the Concord Baptist Church of Christ in Bedford-Stuyuvesant . Rev. Simpson hopes that the presence of African Americans and other minorities will make the movement more effective. The movement, he says, is now a class issue and not a race issue. Smaller fringe organizations like Occupy the Hood, founded by Malik Rahsaan and Johari Uhuru have emerged as branches of Occupy Wall Street, providing a way to bring the OWS message to areas which may not otherwise get involved with OWS’s 68% white NYCGA demonstration .
As well, protestors against New York’s stop-and-frisk policy have found a powerful ally in Occupy Wall Street. In an article in The Guardian UK , Dr. Cornel West, philosopher intellectual said, “I think this is one of the ways in which we can deepen and expand the Occupy movement into communities of color. The issue of arbitrary police power has always been the central issue in poor, black and brown and red and yellow communities.”
Issue #3: While the organization has been very vocal about its values, Occupy Wall Street has said very little about finally producing a single executable action plan to accomplish what the movement sees fit to accomplish.
Detractors – The lack of a formal list of demands or a stated call, the absence of a policy agenda is indicative of the fact that the assemblies – however far-reaching – don’t really stand for anything. The individual agendas of participants touch every conceivable aspect of political and economic dissatisfaction. Shaping an agenda from the personal woes of participants is too broad and all-encompassing. What’s being seen is something akin to a left-wing Tea Party, but lacking the organization. Occupy Wall Street borders on Socialism, smells a bit like Communism and amounts to class warfare. In the grand scheme of things, the entire movement may fizzle out and simply disappear.
Professor Costas Panagopoulos, a political science professor at Fordham University in New York took part in a survey conducted by 15 researchers to find out the ideologies and demographics of New York’s Occupy Wall Street movement . By and large, the participants were Democrats and liberals who voted for President Obama. The various backgrounds of the participants surprised Dr. Panagopoulos, spanning from students to middle-aged professionals with advanced degrees. Their backgrounds and incomes varied greatly. Nearly 40% of those surveyed said that they didn’t align themselves with any particular political party and even more startling, a surprising number of the participants had no intention of even voting in the next election. After interviewing 300 participants, he was not able to draw any conclusion on what their agenda is other than coming to the conclusion that Occupy Wall Street was nothing more than a group of “disgruntled Democrats.“
Supporters – Supporters like Eve Ensler contend that there’s something beautiful about the process. “In a culture obsessed with product, the process of creation is almost unbearable.” The movement itself exists as a fine paradigm of the horizontal structure that democracy should perpetuate. As such, its’ not nearly as important what will be said as what has been said. Slovenian philosopher and culture critic, Slavoj Žižek insists the key right now is tha the Occupy movement has precipitated a space wherein the public at large is questioning the economic system . As Occupy is in its infancy, the sentiment is, “We know what we don’t want. We don’t yet know what we do want.” As this is the movement’s early phase of development, one cannot yet articulate concrete demands This is just the starting point. From this point forward, says Žižek, “is the long, hard work of thinking and organizing.”
As they are shaped, the demands will come.
Issue #4: As a social platform, Occupy Wall Street has its strengths and weaknesses. It has garnered worldwide attention – support and opposition. Can the movement leverage its current position to serve as an effective catalyst for social, political and economic change?
Detractors – As long as the movement remains a campsite tourist attraction, it will forever be relegated to a lowly street protest. At the individual level, participants are still essentially talking amongst themselves. The power of any movement is its ability to mobilize people to act. In this case, political change is effected through the process of voting. As such, OWS participants, young people and minorities need to exercise their right to vote if they really want to see things change. They aren’t, so they don’t see change. Mayor Bloomberg was right when he said, “It’s fun and cathartic — it’s, I don’t know, it’s entertaining to go and to blame people, but it doesn’t get better by complaining about; it doesn’t get better by disrupting commerce (and) vilifying people.”
It’s easy to point the finger and express dissatisfaction. The real work is in identifying solutions and methods for creative collaboration. Currently, the Occupy movement exists as liquid – shapeless and malleable. Critics are dismissing it as simmering anarchism.
Supporters – Occupy Wall Street has evolved to become more than a group of people camping out in Manhattan. Instead, it’s an intimate fellowship of people who are striving to maintain transparency and accountability while demanding the same of government. The community that OWS has been able to build is its strength, not its weakness and together, participants are working to activate a significant paradigm shift. To watch a worldwide movement successfully institute self-government can cause us to re-imagine our way of life and our understanding of politics. The movement is attempting to charge the public not with creating a list of demands, but for orchestrating methods to meet demands.
“First and foremost, we are calling upon ourselves, and upon one another, to wake up and employ our power as citizens: to participate rather than observe, to raise our strong voices together, rather than complaining feebly in isolation… We must take responsibility for our own futures – and here at Liberty Plaza, that is exactly what we are doing, by modeling the kind of society in which everyone has a right to live… We seek an end to the collusion between corrupt politicians and corporate criminals… As such we must see major advances in the arena of the relationship between corporations, and people, on par with the amendments which outlawed slavery and assured civil rights to all people regardless of race, sex, or class” – Occupy Wall Street
What do you think?
References
Barber, B. (2011, November 7). Occupy Wall Street: “We Are What Democracy Looks Like”. Retrieved November 8, 2011, from Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/benjamin-r-barber/occupy-wall-street—we-a_b_1079723.html
Devereaux, R. (2011, October 24). Occupy Wall Street puts spotlight on police stop-and-frisk tactics”. Retrieved November 8, 2011, from The Guardian UK: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/24/occupy-wall-street-stop-frisk?newsfeed=true
Ensler, E. (2011, October 10). Ambiguous UpSparkles From the Heart of the Park (Mic Check / Occupy Wall Street). Retrieved November 8, 2011, from Huffington Post: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/eve-ensler/ambiguous-upsparkles-from_b_1003908.html
Koenig, B. (2011, November 3). Survey Examines Politics of Occupy Wall Street Movement. Retrieved November 8, 2011, from The New American: http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/politics/9622-survey-examines-politics-of-occupy-wall-street-movement
Liberal Jews Blast Critics of Occupy Wall Street. (2011, November 1). Retrieved November 8, 2011, from The Jewish Daily Forward: http://www.forward.com/articles/145375/
Olivennes, H. (2011, October 25). Occupy Wall Street: The Missing Demograhic . Retrieved November 8, 2011, from The Brooklyn Ink: . http://thebrooklynink.com/2011/10/25/32956-occupy-wall-street-the-missing-demographic/
Spitzer, E. (2011, October 24). Bill Kristol’s Appalling Attacks on Occupy Wall Street. Retrieved November 8, 2011, from Slate: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/the_best_policy/2011/10/bill_kristol_and_occupy_wall_street_his_despicable_tv_ad_tars_ow.html
Žižek, S. (2011, November 4). audio interview on Smiley & West. (S. &. West, Interviewer)
About the Author
Sorilbran Buckner - Writer. Musician. Nerd. Mama. Champion.
An Atlanta-based writer and serial entrepreneur hailing from the marvelous streets of Motown. Her job is to get and distribute information. That’s her gig. She believes people would do better if they knew better. So she strives to provide people everywhere access to, and a clear understanding of, information by ascribing meaning and relevance to what would otherwise be random facts. Thanks for your contribution to McChad.com Sorilbran!
