 |
| "Occupy" Protesters' Encampment in Oakland |
And...
I believe state and local governments are charged with keeping the peace and ensuring public safety. I believe the Occupy movement lacks the kind of structure and leadership that might make it more palatable to cities and to the general public. I believe Occupy protesters have a mixed bag of motivations, and while many are genuinely committed to an important cause, others are simply seizing a convenient moment to be public fuck-abouts. I believe protests don't have to have unsafe and unsanitary conditions to be effective.
In light of the news that cities around the nation are losing patience and beginning to crack down on Occupy protester encampments, I find myself with surprisingly mixed emotions. Despite the fact that I fully agree with the overall message of the movement, I would not likely choose to participate in the style of protests I see portrayed in cities around the country. I want to participate but I'm not sure how. I think if this movement is going to have a worthwhile impact, then it is incumbent on the Occupy "leaders" to find a way to inspire more ordinary middle class people to join them, and the movement must develop meaningful ways for those of us who are not able or willing to camp in public spaces to contribute.
Hey Jeff, I agree with you for the most part, however, I do think we have to remember that this political event is still in its infancy and very amorphous. I do think cities and local government have the obligation to protect the peace and when necessary, they should. I stand by OWS still.
ReplyDeleteI have been thinking for weeks that OWS is going to burn itself out, but the protesters have shown surprising staying power. I'd like to see some galvanizing leader (Jon Stewart?) or some seminal event (of a peaceful variety) come along to mature the movement and push it beyond its infancy.
ReplyDeleteI support 99.999% of the Occupier's reasons for being out there. [I'm still gonna eat beef, sorry vegans.] I am completely behind the underlying message: stop economic injustice. The 99%.
ReplyDeleteThe catch is that the 1% seems to have a tight grip on the mechanisms of society: the money, the laws, the police, the military, the government. And most of all the 1% entrenched and patient. That's what worries me.
I would not camp out for weeks like the Wall Street group. I can't- I have a job and a mortgage and kids to feed. Yet, I can't even motivate myself to go to the local Tampa protest that only seems active on weekends. Where does that leave me on the spectrum?
Chris - I think that leaves you right where most of us are.
ReplyDeleteI've heard arguments that say the OWS movement needs better definition and more specific goals (there is some articulate commentary from Chip White on my FB page about this). I've also heard others say...the point of OWS is perfectly clear (as you said, Stop Economic Injustice).
I have to say I agree with the former and not the latter. The lack of crystallized objectives and the movement's inability to better articulate the specifics of what it opposes are in large part the reason that some of us are on the fence, or unmotivated to participate.
If there is going to be a meaningful OWS movement that brings about change, they need to get their shit together, clarify the message, and work harder to inspire the rest of us to get involved. Otherwise, the whole movement risks coming across as just a bunch of unclean, drum-banging liberals who are looking for a reason not to go to work.