Tuesday, March 20, 2012

Op-Ed: Occupy Logic


Posted at: http://occupywallst.org/forum/occupy-logic/

Occupy Logic

The front of the camp is covered in protest signs, “We are the 99%” or “Stop Corporate Greed.” Hundreds of tents are set up one or two main tents that house the food and cookware, several porta-potties have been set up. Hundreds of people have gathered around a speaker as he talks about the injustices that our society and government have allowed to happen.

Since The Occupy Wall Street movement got started in September 2011 the movement has gained many followers and has many goals. “Some protesters want, in part, more and better jobs, more equal distribution of income, bank reform, and a reduction of the influence of corporations on politics.” (3) These goals lead to the trend setting slogan of “We are the 99%.” They decided to make themselves heard by organizing a long term protest to sit outside on Wall Street in hopes of making a statement that would be heard everywhere. It was widely publicized and reported on, and with the increase in popularity the Occupy Movement spread across the nation, even branching into our own backyard of Missoula, MT. Once it reached smaller cities like Missoula, people started camping outside of city halls and libraries to protest, since they didn’t have anything so consequential as Wall Street, to show their support. Whether you agree with the movement or not I believe we can all say that it was not as big of a success as It could have been if they had changed their methods of protesting.
The movement has lost support, funding, protesters, and attention of the media and general public. Occupy Wall Street is running out of money because they have spent too much on things that they shouldn't have needed if they were protesting in any other kind of way. “[Occupy Wall Street] had $44,828 for the week ending of March 2nd in their general fund; and an additional $90,000 set aside strictly to bail out protestors during their planned 'American Spring' protests. The group only raised about $1,500 in the same week while spending about $45,000 on the group's kitchen, street medics, New York bus and subway passes, and printing costs.” (1)
Instead of staying there indefinitely, and just making our city hall look like a hobo hut, the entire movement should have protested for a short amount of time. Even if it was a week long protest, finish the protest, but promise to return next month and the month after that, until things have been changed. That way the news and social medias could actually do a story about it every now and then instead of just letting it die. A news report loses interest if it is always the same. “Sure enough Bob, they are still here, and they still support the same causes. Now back to you in the studio.” The movement also loses support and validity when their camp starts to look like a vagabond safe haven. A lot of people were driven away from helping because they didn't want to have to deal with the place the protest was happening. The movement could have also focused on mobility instead of staying in one spot to protest. If the movement was mobile then they could have protested in a lot more places and could have possibly had a larger impact, because they would be reaching more people. Mobility would have allowed for a more sustainable protest. Instead of setting up long term camps, and spending too much money on supplies to function in a single spot they could have traveled to other places around the city and protest there.
If the movement had done this they could have avoided the financial issues they are in right now. They would not have to pay for food, or the kitchen, because there would not be protestors living there constantly. They would also not run into the much more important issue of losing steam with the public, the media, and other protestors. Along with the loss of support the movement also lost a lot of financial backing from donors. Without a sustainable way of protesting, you are almost guaranteed failure, especially when you decide to take on a project, that even if started a year ago, would still not be done for several more years. Choosing which battles to fight is one of the most important things a protester can do, and I believe that the Occupy movement has chosen an impossible task.
What the Occupy Wall Street movement really needed to do was to choose a more reasonable goal or two, and then protest every now and then, speeches, picket lines, and general assemblies, but not the continual living in front of a city hall that it has become. Having mobility could have also been another tool they could have implemented to succeed in their goals. Instead they were stationary and became background noise. It was almost like a fad in a way. People jumped on the band wagon, and then when it was no longer getting the attention it was before people bailed. Some could argue the reason it wasn't as a big of a success was because people jumped ship but I don't think that is the case. They were unsuccessful because of the tactics they decided to use to protest.

















Work Cited

  1. Claudio E. Cabrera (2012, Mar 11). The Root. Retrieved from http://www.theroot.com/occupy-wall- street-no-money-left


    (2) anonymous. (2011). Occupy wall street. Retrieved from http://occupystreams.org/


    (3) Wikipedia. (2011, november 19). Retrieved from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Wall_Street

(4) The Associated Press (2011, October 27). Occupy wall street protesters worry about hygiene, disease. Retrieved from http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.ssf/2011/10


No comments:

Post a Comment