Do you think the Occupy movement will make positive changes, or quietly fade away? for Questionland Seattle

Reputation: 1892

Do you think the Occupy movement will make positive changes, or quietly fade away?

I work in the mountains with no TV. I don't get news/radio coverage of these things, and I can't attend them in person. I don't have any idea how much of a splash these people are making. My only knowledge of them is online.

While I'm sure that part of the intention of the protests is to inform and energize the 99%, every article I read just makes me sadder...not because of the protests, but because most of the articles do a great job of summarizing how financially screwed most of us are, and the more educated I am, the more depressed I get, and the harder it seems to fix anything.

Do you (personally) think that these protests are actually going to have some positive effects, and if so, what? Or how? Because right now, protests or not, I can't see how any multi-millionaire on Wall Street will give a damn what we think. It certainly hasn't mattered up to this point.

The one effect I think we have a good chance of seeing is with voting in the next election. I'm not trying to be a pessimist about public protests (I marched in the WTO rallies, left before the riots), I just really want to know what measurable change people think this will make.

Am I just jaded? Or am I missing out on something awesome that's going to succeed brilliantly?

Sorry to be a downer. It's been that kind of a day.

Sacrelicious asked in Whatever 7 months ago | Report

Answer this question or share it with a smart friend:

Type your answer here…

Asker's Favorite

Reputation: 1421

Follow 0

asteria

1 0

When people shut down the streets of Seattle during the WTO, we succeeded in the goal of disrupting that meeting - I remember how awesome it felt to be a small part of that as an individual. But there was a least one year of serious organizing before the protests, both here and in other cities. Also there were people working within the WTO trying to reform the structure. Afterwards, everyone thought change was really going to happen because so many lefty groups had successfully worked together, and it blew up when people from different groups came together and tried to define more specific goals for future organizing.

I guess I'm jaded, but I think Occupy Seattle is going down the same path with much less organization. It seems like a lot of people are on a "protest high" and are just totally focused on staying in Westlake to spite the mayor and the cops. I can't see how this is going to help bring about affordable health care, for example.

I don't think I agree with anything the tea party believes in, but they have been successful in pressuring elected officials to make promises to never, ever raise taxes. I would like to see the Occupy movement hold our elected officials accountable, but it seems like a lot of Occupistas don't vote or want to work for reform within the system.

I'm really hoping an established non-profit will start a related campaign I can do something with, because I don't have time or energy to go to a general assembly every day and bring these issues up.

asteria answered in Whatever 7 months ago | Report

2 comments by Matt from Denver and Mahtli69…

0 0

Don't give the tea party too much credit for the no tax thing; the anti-tax rebellion has been going on since the late 70s, and George H. W. Bush was in part thrown out of the White House because he went back on his "read my lips" pledge.

The tea party is, in some significant ways, the mirror image of OWS - it's comprised largely of those who are furthest from the center, but not over the line into full fledged kook-ville. (Although kooks have turned up in both camps.)

I wouldn't look too much at WTO for comparisons, either. That was a movement without much appeal to the mainstream, or even many liberals. In 1999, times were good, world trade seemed to be a big success, and most of the protesters were concerned about the kinds of things most others ignore or aren't concerned about. (And it turns out that the WTO wasn't quite as big and scary as it was made out to be, either.) The success of the WTO disruption was largely due to the severe lack of contingency planning by local government and police, but the rioting and destruction probably killed the movement more effectively than anything that followed.

OWS, on the other hand, is coming at a time when most Americans, and not just the most progressive, are getting fed up with Washington's permanent genuflection to Wall Street. Ordinary Americans can relate to what OWS is saying. And it helps that the economy is in the crapper - NEVER underestimate the power of the economy to shape popular feeling and opinion.

I believe OWS needs to focus on its message now, in order to get mainstream Americans behind what they're saying. Without that, they won't have any pressure to apply to the politicians. Without that, nothing will change.

Matt from Denver commented 7 months ago | Report

0 0

I agree with Matt about WTO not really resonating with a large segment of the population (though, I think it is really the same movement that is going on now).

Also, the momentum of the WTO was completely derailed by Bush getting elected in 2000, and then 9/11. The entire political landscape changed drastically in 2 short years.

Mahtli69 commented 7 months ago | Report

Enter your comment or ask a new question

Share this answer with a friend:

Latest Greatest

4 Other Answers

Reputation: 25

Follow 0

1 0

I think organizationally Occupy Seattle is just coming together. It's barely been three weeks. What is fascinating is that it isn't the same faces. Families, retirees, even the suits are showing up in the Park. In combination with the global protests that are showing solidarity, I don't know how a politician or the media could ignore what is happening. That may be in reaction to (a la Romney) and there is a powerful force moving people to state their rage and frustration.

I don't think it matters whether it is long lasting. By that I don't mean that we shouldn't have a structure (I make food for that working group, for example). What I am saying is my focus goes entirely to...what am I doing now? I can avoid the pessimism projected onto a future that doesn't yet exist when I stay with what my action is today, this moment.

Sonya Lea answered in Whatever 7 months ago | Report

Comment on this answer

Share this answer with a friend:

Reputation: 254

Follow 0

Matt from Denver

1 0

It's too soon to say. I think I saw some rumblings on the web somewhere about Obama and the Dems beginning to use occupy-like talking points - a sign that they're listening, or campaigning, time will tell. But it has had that effect.

I think it's also had the effect of getting more mainstream folks thinking and talking about things, which is more than I can say for the usual anti-globalization or anti-war protests. I think the spontaneity of the protests, which popped up all over the country and even the world, is a measure of how deeply felt and widespread sympathy for the movement is. That's pretty significant, and something I haven't seen in my lifetime - a truly spontaneous movement NOT inspired by any one particular action or event.

But movements aren't successful in a day, or a month, or a year. The leaders (if they'll allow themselves to have identifiable leaders) will need to coordinate on aims, tactics, and messaging. They'll need to spread the word about how various politicians and police forces are handling them. They should make sure the demonstrators understand nonviolence, passive resistance, and civil disobedience, because it won't take many wrong moves on their part for their critics to have ample ammunition with which to discredit them.

I think social media has tilted the scales in their favor, for the short term. That will help immensely, and probably was key to the organization of all the protests that didn't happen at Wall Street. They should keep being smart about using it.

We'll know it's being effective by the reaction in the right wing media. First, it was to ignore OWS. When that wasn't credible, they moved to dismissing it. They've lately started the name-calling (socialists! They hate America!). I figure they'll move on to full-fledged hysteria when they get really worried.

Matt from Denver answered in Whatever 7 months ago | Report

Comment on this answer

Share this answer with a friend:

Reputation: 650

Follow 0

Bauhaus

1 0

IMHO, a movement isn't successful unless it changes or alters that which is being challenged. My full support goes to those who are drowning in debt because they chose to get an education or chose to "invest" in a house at the wrong time, who got financially screwed out of every nickel and dime possible by corporations who would otherwise look upon someone's life savings as lunch money, who haven't seen an increase in real wages in 30 years.

When banks were local, there was some commitment to their communities - a commitment that was lost after the M&A blood feast of the 80s and 90s. Now, they are answerable to no one...well, perhaps stock owners. The emphasis has changed from doing what is right to doing what is legal and they frequently see how close they can get to that demarcation without going over.

But to answer your question, I don't see those guys upstairs very worried about the Occupy Movement. And politicians won't take real notice until it's popular to do so (weasels that most of them are). And if the boys upstairs aren't worried and the politicians aren't worried, then I don't foresee much change in the future.

All this could change, of course, if Occupy becomes a widely popular uprising (and people stop voting for Republicans).

Bauhaus answered in Whatever 7 months ago | Report

Comment on this answer