The Triumph of Occupy Wall Street

[ksen]

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2015/06/the-triumph-of-occupy-wall-street/395408/

Nearly four years after the precipitous rise of Occupy Wall Street, the movement so many thought had disappeared has instead splintered and regrown into a variety of focused causes. Income inequality is the crisis du jour—a problem that all 2016 presidential candidates must grapple with because they can no longer afford not to. And, in fact, it’s just one of a long list of legislative and political successes for which the Occupy movement can take credit.

Until recently, Occupy’s chief accomplishment was changing the national conversation by giving Americans a new language—the 99 percent and the 1 percent—to frame the dual crises of income inequality and the corrupting influence of money in politics. What began in September 2011 as a small group of protesters camping out in Manhattan’s Zuccotti Park ignited a national and global movement calling out the ruling class of elites by connecting the dots between corporate and political power. Despite the public’s overwhelming support for its message—that the economic system is rigged for the very few while the majority continue to fall further behind—many faulted Occupy for its failure to produce concrete results.

Yet with the 2016 elections looming and a spirit of economic populism spreading throughout the nation, that view of Occupy’s impact is changing.

OWS was not a failure. It changed our political focus and helped focus our attention on some real problems that need addressing.

If not for OWS things like income/wealth inequality, burdensome student debt and the move to a higher minimum wage would not have the strength they have today.

But while OWS may have successfully moved items like those into the national policitical discussion I think it's too early to call OWS a real success until actual legislation (or even private movement like we're seeing with companies like Wal-Mart upping their starting wages) is passed to help address concerns.

Talk is cheap.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

OWS did crap. "Income inequality" is just a modified buzzword that has been hanging around electoral speeches for a long time.

The general public would agree with what OWS thought, but the movement came across as a bunch of unemployed college students whining because the media decided to treat the movement almost with no care at all. Neurotic Tea Party protestors received a lot more quality attention from the media despite their absolutely ridiculous positions, including being against most government spending, just Medicare, Social Security, and the military.

The Tea Party got lunatics elected into power and the best the liberals have got is Bernie Sanders making a run for President, a person that will help create the diversion to get O'Malley the nomination by playing the center of Clinton and Sanders.

 

[ksen]

OWS did crap.

wrong

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

OWS did crap.

wrong

It is nice that you think so. I'll let the number of arrests regarding the malfeasance of the '08 crash speak for itself. Oh, and the ratio of radical right wingers elected since the Tea Party movement verses the Progressives elected since the OWS movement speak for itself as well.

OWS has had no influence on anything anywhere. If anything, it may have been counterproductive thanks to a media that rather have right wing idiots get lime light.

 

[barbos]

OWS did crap. "Income inequality" is just a modified buzzword that has been hanging around electoral speeches for a long time.

The general public would agree with what OWS thought, but the movement came across as a bunch of unemployed college students whining because the media decided to treat the movement almost with no care at all. Neurotic Tea Party protestors received a lot more quality attention from the media despite their absolutely ridiculous positions, including being against most government spending, just Medicare, Social Security, and the military.

The Tea Party got lunatics elected into power and the best the liberals have got is Bernie Sanders making a run for President, a person that will help create the diversion to get O'Malley the nomination by playing the center of Clinton and Sanders.

I agree. Of course the the only reason why tea party did better is because their idiots (mostly older folk) tend to vote, whereas OWS idiots (young unemployed) do not vote.

 

[dismal]

OWS is why a 1%er like Hillary can not be elected.

 

[Trausti]

OWS did crap.

wrong

No, no. Correct. In Seattle the OWS crowd wasn't much into cleanliness, crapped wherever they wanted. So glad those stinky fucks are gone.

 

[barbos]

wrong

No, no. Correct. In Seattle the OWS crowd wasn't much into cleanliness, crapped wherever they wanted. So glad those stinky fucks are gone.

You have not smelt maidan crowd in Kiev.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

OWS did crap. "Income inequality" is just a modified buzzword that has been hanging around electoral speeches for a long time.

The general public would agree with what OWS thought, but the movement came across as a bunch of unemployed college students whining because the media decided to treat the movement almost with no care at all. Neurotic Tea Party protestors received a lot more quality attention from the media despite their absolutely ridiculous positions, including being against most government spending, just Medicare, Social Security, and the military.

The Tea Party got lunatics elected into power and the best the liberals have got is Bernie Sanders making a run for President, a person that will help create the diversion to get O'Malley the nomination by playing the center of Clinton and Sanders.

I agree. Of course the the only reason why tea party did better is because their idiots (mostly older folk) tend to vote, whereas OWS idiots (young unemployed) do not vote.

... in mid-term elections.

 

[coloradoatheist]

OWS did crap. "Income inequality" is just a modified buzzword that has been hanging around electoral speeches for a long time.

The general public would agree with what OWS thought, but the movement came across as a bunch of unemployed college students whining because the media decided to treat the movement almost with no care at all. Neurotic Tea Party protestors received a lot more quality attention from the media despite their absolutely ridiculous positions, including being against most government spending, just Medicare, Social Security, and the military.

The Tea Party got lunatics elected into power and the best the liberals have got is Bernie Sanders making a run for President, a person that will help create the diversion to get O'Malley the nomination by playing the center of Clinton and Sanders.

I agree. Of course the the only reason why tea party did better is because their idiots (mostly older folk) tend to vote, whereas OWS idiots (young unemployed) do not vote.

Definitely sounds like more of an excuse. A political motivating message couldn't get people out to vote? And it's a political movement that supposedly needs positive media light and support? Or maybe the issue was to the people it was just a ho hum message.

 

[ksen]

wrong

It is nice that you think so. I'll let the number of arrests regarding the malfeasance of the '08 crash speak for itself. Oh, and the ratio of radical right wingers elected since the Tea Party movement verses the Progressives elected since the OWS movement speak for itself as well.

OWS has had no influence on anything anywhere. If anything, it may have been counterproductive thanks to a media that rather have right wing idiots get lime light.

Patently not true.

Without OWS we would not have a Senator Elizabeth Warren or a Mayor Bill DeBlasio or a City Councilor Kshama Sawant and maybe not even a candidate Bernie Sanders.

That there were no arrests for the crash of '08 isn't indicative of the success of OWS, rather it's the reaction to there being no arrests that shows that the message of OWS is resonating with the public.

And as for the rise of the Tea Party you know as well as I do that if Obama were a white man there would be no Tea Party, or at least not one as strong as it is now.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

I agree. Of course the the only reason why tea party did better is because their idiots (mostly older folk) tend to vote, whereas OWS idiots (young unemployed) do not vote.

Definitely sounds like more of an excuse. A political motivating message couldn't get people out to vote? And it's a political movement that supposedly needs positive media light and support? Or maybe the issue was to the people it was just a ho hum message.

Actually, the majority of America agrees with the OWS movement. The problem is, the majority of America have jobs and shit they have to work on and don't have time to be picketing about how ratings agencies screwed the pooch or how investment groups built investments designed to fail or the whole grossly unethical and illegal mortgage practices by companies.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

It is nice that you think so. I'll let the number of arrests regarding the malfeasance of the '08 crash speak for itself. Oh, and the ratio of radical right wingers elected since the Tea Party movement verses the Progressives elected since the OWS movement speak for itself as well.

OWS has had no influence on anything anywhere. If anything, it may have been counterproductive thanks to a media that rather have right wing idiots get lime light.

Patently not true.

Without OWS we would not have a Senator Elizabeth Warren or a Mayor Bill DeBlasio or a City Councilor Kshama Sawant and maybe not even a candidate Bernie Sanders.

The only thing that matters is Sanders as he may be what keeps Clinton from getting the nomination.

That there were no arrests for the crash of '08 isn't indicative of the success of OWS, rather it's the reaction to there being no arrests that shows that the message of OWS is resonating with the public.

Still waiting to see those '12 and '14 House results resonate with the impact of OWS.

And as for the rise of the Tea Party you know as well as I do that if Obama were a white man there would be no Tea Party, or at least not one as strong as it is now.

Not true. While there are some that do hate Obama because of his race, more of them hate Obama because of his party. Look at Bill Clinton and the reception he received from the Republican Party during his Administration. They couldn't even agree with him on Osama bin Laden.

 

[dismal]

Actually, the majority of America agrees with the OWS movement.

Really?

I'd have bet on: the OWS movement doesn't even agree on what the OWS movement believes.

 

[Nice Squirrel]

Actually, the majority of America agrees with the OWS movement.

Really?

I'd have bet on: the OWS movement doesn't even agree on what the OWS movement believes.

Gotto go with this.

 

[barbos]

I agree. Of course the the only reason why tea party did better is because their idiots (mostly older folk) tend to vote, whereas OWS idiots (young unemployed) do not vote.

... in mid-term elections.

True, they don't vote for president less than in in mid-term.

 

[coloradoatheist]

Definitely sounds like more of an excuse. A political motivating message couldn't get people out to vote? And it's a political movement that supposedly needs positive media light and support? Or maybe the issue was to the people it was just a ho hum message.

Actually, the majority of America agrees with the OWS movement. The problem is, the majority of America have jobs and shit they have to work on and don't have time to be picketing about how ratings agencies screwed the pooch or how investment groups built investments designed to fail or the whole grossly unethical and illegal mortgage practices by companies.

Or that the movement lacked leadership, vision, and organization. How many OWS candidates were on the platforms in 2012 and 2014?

 

[Togo]

I've seen a fair bit of influence stemming from the Occupy movement. People are still talking about the issues they raised, and some of the groups that were formed at that time are still in existence and still fighting for specific causes locally. We've seen a huge uprush in membership of and votes for non-traditional left wing parties, mainly at the expense of groups that try to combine social and economic liberalism.

I think it's going to follow the same pattern as so many other protest movements. There will be an attempt to play down the impact at the time, the protests themselves will end, the ideas raised and discussed will persist, the influence will carry on, eventually the number of people claiming to have 'been there' will be well in excess of the recorded numbers, and people will be talking about it as a cultural and historical milestone.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

... in mid-term elections.

True, they don't vote for president less than in in mid-term.

Huh? Turn out is usually good in the general election.

 

[fromderinside]

I've seen a fair bit of influence stemming from the Occupy movement. People are still talking about the issues they raised, and some of the groups that were formed at that time are still in existence and still fighting for specific causes locally. We've seen a huge uprush in membership of and votes for non-traditional left wing parties, mainly at the expense of groups that try to combine social and economic liberalism.

I think it's going to follow the same pattern as so many other protest movements. There will be an attempt to play down the impact at the time, the protests themselves will end, the ideas raised and discussed will persist, the influence will carry on, eventually the number of people claiming to have 'been there' will be well in excess of the recorded numbers, and people will be talking about it as a cultural and historical milestone.

It'll be faster than the gay rights wins or the mary jane wins. It'll probably be the death of Billy Bob Clinton's move to the Center for democrats. The interlinking net of interest groups for democrats is back.

Yes interest groups haven't figured out how to capture the seniors yet. But, with interest groups supporting health care and social security and with republicans trying destroy both with their privatization ploys seniors may vote with democrats this election cycle, perhaps causing a tectonic shift toward democrats in midterms.

Occupy wall street has put the young solidly on the side of democrats. If Democrats really ramp up loan support, both college and home ownership, there may be a shift in voting patterns in midterms there too.

OWS or the 99%, whichever works best, will be felt as much as populism was back at the turn of the last century IMHO. Similar times, similar trends, similar fervor, all of which now seem to be trending away from the hand wringers and toward humanists.