OccupyWallSt. should "have demands" and "be on the lawn of the Whitehouse"
OccupyWallSt. should “have demands” and “be on the lawn of the Whitehouse”
Yves Smith at Naked Capitalism describes misgivings for policy prescriptions (demands) becoming central to the OccupyWallSt. movement at this time. Co-option of the energy and emotion of people taking the time to be involved is a real danger and cautions not to cave to media demands to suit convenient reporting or the apparent need for ready ‘expertise’ in spokemen positions.
I’m the first to admit I don’t have a good solution, but being aware of dangers increases the odds of navigating them successfully. Frankly I’ve been disconcerted at the calls for OccupyWallStreet to put forth demands. I’ve been party to extended e-mail exchanges among media types where a query regarding how OWS should deal with the demand that they put forth demands quickly devolved into most of the recipients trying to put forth proposals, rather than answer the question that was put to them. So I may be unduly sensitive to this issue.
…
Krugman and fellow economists like Stiglitz, as well as other members of Obama’s initial finance team who favored aggressive financial services industry reform like Paul Volcker, may finally be in a position to exert real influence. But for every one of them, there are at least 50 members of the hackocracy. I think OWS is best served on building on its current momentum, getting more followers and extending its reach, since the dangers of elite capture are serious. There is nothing more that the orthodoxy would like to do than neuter the aims of OWS via inside the Beltway dealings and negotiation of hard to understand legislative fine print.
Others have insisted the focus be on the Whitehouse (not Congress??). At some point of course. But we can’t ignore the actual sources of policy prescriptions currently offered by either party.
Lawrence Lessig in his new book Republic, Lost: How Money Corrupts Congress — and a Plan to Stop It (reviewed here and here.) describes a culture for our representatives in Congress that demands 30% to 70% of their time, and national party organizations that demand significant money from each Congressman over and beyond their own re-election needs.
Given the pressure to make decisions based on the need for large sums, Lessig suggests that policy does not dominate:
1. While elected officials are dependent now on donors who command large amounts of money, they also play the partisan game of who gets the money by concentrating on issues that will bring in the most money from industries that spend on their own issues (he uses bank swipe fees versus unemployment issues as an example. Guess who won the lion’s share of the time spent.) He tells us this is deliberate and planned.
2. The end result is a loss for either right or left so to speak…better financial regulation, addressing the broad array of employment, trade, a smaller and perhaps less intrusive government, a reasonable look at taxes…these are really less important than the carrot/stick routines described in the media as party issues or policy debates.
So where to start when you are the little guy?
http://econospeak.blogspot.com/2011/10/occupying-occupying-wall-street.html
Here’s a post in Econospeak that takes a different tack on OWS. NancyO
To #HEADSUPYOURBUTT otherwise known as #OCCUPYWALLSTREET…
I spit in your faces.
Big bad protestors. Occupying the smallest square in New York, the way I’ve heard it. An organized kitchen and nursery? Yay! And with your quaint call and response chants! Oy! Tell me. When one policeman’s club goes ‘bonk’ against your skulls do 100 people shout ‘Bonk!’?
How are you going to achieve your ends? What are your ends, fergawdsake! What are you threatening to do? Cut up the button tree into buttons? You’re pathetic! You think you can bring down the largest and most powerful malefactors in this country with LGBT theater? The big CEOs can barely conceal their laughter long enough to down their scotch without choking. Why is it, do you think, that their response is to send out their cheapest clowns to deal with you? Don’t you know that they are certain (and they are right) that when the cold comes you’ll all go home. They think it because, since you don’t really stand for anything, you will go home.
If you want to effect change then you have to DEMAND something! These people move billions of dollars every day to various nefarious destinations. Do you think they care because one of you may have belonged to a Union in Wisconsin?
No.
They don’t.
You have to DEMAND something. Just gathering in the street won’t change anything except your arrest status.
But Bobby, you say, we’re just a bunch of out of work doofuses. We don’t know what to ask for (whine, snivvle). It’s not our fault that we’re stupid; it’s because we’re morally superior.
I’ll tell you what to ask for.
You tell the powers that be that you’re not going anywhere until Congress passes and our chicken-shit president signs the following legislation:
“Resolved that (a) any person or organization who offers any inducement, monetary or otherwise to someone for the purpose of conducting a campaign for Federal office shall be guilty of a Class A felony and subject to a fine of 100 times the amount offered and a prison sentence of at least 5 and no more than 15 years to be served in a Federal penitentiary.
(b) any person or organization who solicits any monetary or other good for the purpose of conducting a political campaign for Federal office shall be guilty of a Class A felony and subject to a fine of 100 times the amount solicited and a prison sentence of at least 5 and no more than 15 years to be served in a Federal penitentiary.”
There are a lot more laws like this which should be passed but that will do for a start. The reaction of the Powers that Be will be furious; not just ‘no’ but ‘FUCK NO!’ They’ll try to scare you with fairy tales that only rich men will be able to run for office, that it won’t keep the money out of politics, that the Roberts Court will overturn it, that campaign contributions are something Americans have done for hundreds of years (like slavery), etc. […]
Bobby
your tone does not help. i don’t like the sound of “demands.” it sounds petulant and adolescent.
i do agree that something like public funded campaigns might help… at least free time on the public airways. but i can see how that can be subverted easily. money always finds a way to talk.
and i do agree that the protesters need to be offering policy solutions (commercial message: there is an easy “fix” for Social Security that you never hear the “defenders of Social Security talk about. they may think … and be right… that pity the poor poor works better as politics), but I think Tom Jefferson thought that an “informed” electorate would not be an especially good idea… too easy to to go from “informed” to “indoctrinated”… while a howl of pain or rage from the masses should be sufficient word to the wise that something’s gotta change here.
They say that all mankind are slaves but it’s a bit more obvious on this blog
Did you just leave yourself out of the realm mankind Bobby, or slavery?
Well yes coberly…but how does that address the post? If memory serves me this movement is three weeks old. And the post suggests that over time particulars will be forthcoming. Maybe by the fourth week is soon enough?..quite the maturation process.
As far as I can tell people are working on it. But the drive at the moment is visceral and people are finally saying ‘I got your back’….
Peter Dorman says: “What I’m suggesting is that the occupards need to develop enough of a collective voice to distinguish their movement from generic populist rhetoric. This is not at all the same as agreeing on a list of demands. The point to bear in mind is that the fundamental problem is not that there aren’t good ideas out there, but that finance and allied wealth-holders who see the world through their portfolios have too much power.”
Robert,
Solid and passionate stuff.
I am a petitioner and a political activist who just happens to have been recently circulating a petition to get the Americans Elect ‘Party’ a spot on the California Ballot in the coming presidential election. As it turns out, an Americans Elect candidate will be on the ballot here in California and several other states have also ‘hit’ the required numbers of signatures as well. We will it seems have a viable third party candidate in the coming election and one who could conseivably win with a campaign on the web at a cost that is almost nothing.
Americans Elect though is not a Party in the traditional sense, it is instead a facilatator. The idea is to provide a website where an internet convention will allow any registered voter to chose any candidate. These submissions will then be narrowed down to a field of 6 nominees who will then be voted on via this website. The winner will then be the candidate who will be on the ballot as the Americans Elect candidate.
But, the Americans Elect ‘Party’ has no platform other than to stipulate that the final 6 nominees must choose a running mate from a Party other than their own. So, this is an attempt to minimize the power of the 2 dominate Parties while also making campaigns cheap… thereby also minimizing the need for big-money backing. This is a brilliant way to move the system toward an actual democracy, initially, it creates a centerist Party but one that should encourage the 2 dominate Parties to shift outwardly to accomidate their fringes.
http://pleasecutthecrap.typepad.com/main/2011/10/its-only-a-movement-if-everyone-understands-supports-it-we-need-to-focus.html
Then again, here is a supporting view of needing a rallying cry.
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/spotlight/occupywallstreet/2011/10/2011107172820297149.html
And here
Rdan
it addresses the post by agreeing with you that a list of demands might not be the best strategy at the moment.
it was unfortunately sidetracked by a need to address Bobby Consoli whose sneer was not helpful.
love
interesting. how do you prevent voter fraud on the web?
We were just saying that we’d fly into Seattle, or even NY, if they had a “Bring back the Wall to Wall Street” rally in support of Glass-Steagal, the Volker rule, or some other firewall legislation.
Even more focused would be a rally to get the jobs bill through with the 5% (or higher) surtax. It’s actually being debated right now. We probably wouldn’t fly cross country for this, but we’d haul into Seattle which is a major production.
I can get behind this… somewhat.
In our democracy our change begins in Washington. If they are the ones accepting bribes, and we empower them to serve us, they are the first problem here.
As for campaign finance… banks are cetainly up there among big donors but it would be dishonest if we pretended that labor unions are not also significant political players.
Matt
ah, there’s the rub.
the system can’t work without what you are calling “bribes.” congressmen need money to run campaigns, and “interest groups” need to help those who help them. also the groups themselves need to publicize their message.
even with fully government funded… besides the fraud that would emerge, and the problem of “who is a viable candidate”… money would still find loopholes…
In 1776 We the People threw off the English crown.
In 2011 We the People need to throw off the corporations’ owning corrupt politicians like weeping Boehner.
I defer to FDR.
I am of the opinion the the biggest benefit from OWS not making specific demands yet, or maybe ever, is that people are running all over pointing up all the different broken spots and we are getting “serious” discussions and public awareness brought to issues that have been swept under the rug up until now.
I don’t think that there are silver bullet solutions to the problems we face but I see a growing consensus about one slice of the problems. It is best summarized by words from a 30’s Blues song:
“You may call me crazy but at least I know right from wrong.”
The global inherited rich may be legally turning us into slaves but there is an emerging definition of moral turpitude that sees rule-of-law different than the fascade of such we have now.
The kids of today deserve a better world and from what I have seen of the Portland, OR Occupy movement they do know right from wrong but are struggling with conveying that to the system they oppose.
That said my silver bullet phrase of the moment is:
Laught the global inherited rich out of control of our society and into rooms a the Hague.
I think after 2012 people will wake up and find that the money going into the campaigns directly is nothing in comparison to the money spent on propaganda and advertising that is outside the party and candidate budgets. Anyone can buy access to the American people and they can say anything they want with their dollars. I am awaiting a vast amount of last minute innuendo disguised as performing a public service. It will have no direct link to a candidate whose interest it supports. Public financing of campaigns is one part of the puzzle but nothing prevents the dollars that would have been spent on the direct campaigns from being spent on the same campaigns but indirectly. The dollars will win.
Another link from the economist and soe other links:
http://www.economist.com/node/21531481
http://articles.ocregister.com/2011-10-07/news/30258805_1_debt-forgiveness-steve-jobs-iphone
Best comment from INstapundit:
UPDATE: Reader Eliot Picard writes:
In observing the Occupy protests, including milling about the crowds in Boston near my office, it is quite apparent that the student loan debt bomb is probably the main impetus for these actions. It goes without saying that the students and former students facing non-bankruptable debt and minimal job prospects have a legitimate grievance although we may certainly disagree on what needs to be done. One question that keeps occurring to me is whether the colleges and universities that encourage degrees in various useless humanities disciplines bear some significant responsibility for this crisis.
One can only assume that presidents, deans, provosts, etc. know fully well that there is a limited market for degrees in Wommyn’s Studies, Language Arts and the like. My mother, ever the incisive wit, G-d bless her, called the graduates of such programs “unemployable at a higher level”. Indeed, when I finished a double major B.A. in Biology and Philosophy (Rensselaer Polytech, class of 1990) and expressed interest in graduate level philosophy I was told that the school had shut down the Ph.D. program to discourage students from doing much more in the field that I had done already. Clearly RPI knew that allowing and encouraging such a path of study was tantamount to academic malpractice. This sort of sane pedagogical judgement, from which I benefitted in my impetuous youth, has been missing across the rest of academia.
Is there some room for legal action to “claw back” arguably misspent tuition dollars from the universities (IANAL so forgive my obvious misuse of that term). I cannot but think that there has to be some sanction against those universities and their officials who were more than happy to take the big tuition checks while failing to look after the interests of the students in their charge.
I agree that it’s important for the OWS/99 percenters/whatever movement to avoid focusing on one specific magic bullet solution. Let the pols figure out what they need to do (Krugman is correct about this) by proposing and doing things, prompting boos and cheers from the protesters until they feel they’ve accomplished as much as they can on the streets. If the protesters get overly specific, they will split their ranks, drive away some supporters, and stir up some powerful opponents. After that, they might get to boo or cheer only once before going home as losers or victors.
“ the system can’t work without what you are calling “bribes.’ ”
Ummm, I thought that was the point.
“If you think the system is working, ask somebody who isn’t.”
I would think that the proposal to stay unfocussed would come with a critique of how badly Santelli’s Tea Party has done by having them.
AFAICT, tothether with a little co-opting by the Koch Bros, the Tea Party has managed to take over effective control of the party that controls the House, and might soon control all Congress plus the White House.
And the opposite of that strategy is the Smart Thing To Do ® ?
French
I agree with you the system is not working in THAT sense. But I don’t see how “democracy” is going to work at all without letting people pay to publicize their issues. Granted I don’t like the lies and the stupidities… or the “bribes.” But that seems to be the way it has always been done. And I don’t see any fool proof ideas to improve on it.
Thanks Anna.
Rush Limbaugh anyone?
French
the tea party is insane. you can almost always win elections with mass insanity.
i would think the wall street occupiers were hoping to come up with something that actually solved real problems, not just elected a new class of creeps.
buff,
Out on a Sunday!
Ah, RPI reknowned when I was looking in the 60’s for always winning “College Bowl” quiz show and highest per capita consumption of Budweiser. A rather long losing streak in Div III football.
Good school, lots ot techies to build the IT for the wall st casinos.
Glad their conscience won’t take money from kids expanding their minds to figuring out why wall st is crooked.
I have Irish Whiskey on Sundays!
wall st will change
But who will be the big money doors for election campaigns for OccupyWallSt. as happened for the TEA party…where are the buses even? And the reporters? Dems counted on national legislation while a well financed coordinated push at local and state levels has been going on for years, and in the courts as well. The money spent is staggering and does not come from populist sort of sources.
I understand that our political system has balooned to a state where you need a billion dollars to run… but that doesn’t change the fact that if we consider our elected leaders *COMPROMISED* then we should recycle our leadership.
It’s up to us to hold them accountable. That’s our responsibility at citizens.
Rdan,
The OWS movement is getting absorbed by the Dems just like the Tea Party got absorbed by the Reps. They just need to find an objective to coalase around thatisn’t a direct attack on Obama and his money supply for re-election.
As for money, you already have the Unions involved, big money there, plus Soros and company (the lefts Koch brothers). And don’t forget Hollywood, with such Lefty notables as Susan Surandon and Michael Moore jopining the fray. So money shouldn’t be a problem for this budding political movement. They have already been busing people into LA and passing out money in NYC.
BUt they have only 14 months to morph into something to back Obama, you know ‘the man’, for his re-election. Plus help all the Dem pols in Congress and the Senate that helped pass every single bill that regulated Wall Street exactly how the Dem Pols wanted it.
So what again are they protesting about? Or are we back to the same old privildged white kids that seem to want someone, ANYONE to pay off their debt they got on some worthless studies degree? I wonder how many STEM grads are part of OWS?
Or maybe we see the start of a actual third party, like the highly successful Socialist for America party (who have been in attendence at OWS for weeks now), or the Libertarian party. It will be interesting to see how this translates into political power.
And if they last past the first snow fall…
Islam will change
My friend buff…………………..
Kent State took place in spring 1970, the anti Vietnam movement kept it up for another three years.
Who got the Church amendment passed?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PXeYrZLMaWw&feature=player_embedded
Listen to Patriot Game by Judy Collins.
If you love your country
Occupy Wall Street.
Practice Non Violence.
wall st will change
ilsm,
Well I finally made it to the big-time. A stalker. Mow can you be a little more coherent? That would help my cred.
Islam will change