Skip to main content

View Diary: The Squandered Potential of Occupy (240 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I think this is probably true (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    gulfgal98, WB Reeves

    However, I wouldn't give up on Occupy.  Everything is a work in progress and there's no reason why the organization can't grow and change with time.  Or perhaps it will simply inspire a new organization that functions more effectively.  Who knows?  I do believe that Occupy has a valuable role to play and has already managed to do great stuff.  They changed the national discussion and I believe that change has led to the reframing of the debates about tax fairness and the role of government.  For that I am quite grateful.

    "You must be the change you wish to see in the world." -Gandhi

    by Triscula on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 10:01:02 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  This is my belief also (0+ / 0-)

      Any movement will have growing pains and may have to adjust to become more effective.  

      do believe that Occupy has a valuable role to play and has already managed to do great stuff.  They changed the national discussion and I believe that change has led to the reframing of the debates about tax fairness and the role of government.  For that I am quite grateful.

      "Growing up is for those who don't have the guts not to. Grow wise, grow loving, grow compassionate, but why grow up?" - Fiddlegirl

      by gulfgal98 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 11:08:29 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Isn't the very term 'occupy' redolent of its (0+ / 0-)

      martial and stridently militaristic etymology?
      I am surprised that this word was used and
      embraced by so many to describe a movement
      that appeared to be its complete antithesis.

      Of course, occupying territory, is subtly different
      from holding such, as it implies taking 'ownership',
      and all of the other classically defined terms of property,
      along with its symptomatic potentials for abuse.

      Unfortunately, most of the places occupy 'chose'
      had long ago been 'owned' by all of us commonly
      as citizens. So were their occupations basically against
      the right of people to collectively own and pay for
      common spaces? Not in my reading, but to many others
      this was somewhat of a logical dichotomy.

      Kind of like the war on ... everything, used as a functional
      descriptor for every talking point and rhetorical flourish
      illustrating each separate and often divergent binary
      issue or policy that may or may not gore your own ox.

      Regardless of the grammar, or venue, I found the effort
      to raise the issues of economic inequality to be heartening,
      even knowing that activists of all stripes were very familiar with
      this concept years before zuccotti captured the eyes of the world.

      I suppose the breadth and depth of our economic crisis
      helped to finally accentuate this long festering discontent
      among the terminally incurious members of the 'media',
      who do not widely share a frame of reference for the 99%.
      And Occupy deserves credit for at least that achievement.

      This movement shared much with others before it.
      Youth, energy, angst, impatience with the status quo.
      If there is one commonality I would choose disenfranchisement.
      When one is jobless, or homeless, or generally feeling
      displaced or discarded from the order of society, what
      other options are available? Were the least of these
      absent from our public commons pre occupy? Not at all.
      When one has the freedom to engage, the freedom to
      do exactly the opposite must also be inexorably granted.

      Like many other assemblages, it was and is not monolithic.
      Like anonymous, there were and are some who
      seek such opportunity to further their own interests,
      all too willing to exploit structural extremities for less
      than egalitarian purposes. This too, is a very old story.

      I found it very entertaining that those who denounce
      the court jester melodrama of government and politics
      as 'kabuki', are only too willing to engage in their own
      street theater of the absurd, to much of the same result.
      It was the perfect spectator diversion for a non election year.

      For better or worse, the Occupy GA failures to remain,
      or forced removals due to a lack of coherent sustainability
      translated into a larger and fuller political engagement is
      fundamentally related to the principals of its founders.

      In other words, this was their desire. I found it refreshing,
      no matter how ineffectual it may or not ultimately prove to be.
      This was clear to me, from its onset, so I did not expect
      much more than media consumable moments I saw.
      The dialogue has been changed. That is more than
      enough to enter this movement into the pages of history.

      There is, however, a clear connection between our very
      own hierarchy-less thought and meme 'creator' and the
      very idea of occupy. The ancient, but recently occupy revived
      biblical concept of the Jubilee is a prominent theme in his definitive
      and thought provoking social history on the 'owership' society.

      What remain to be seen is if the model occupy presents
      can be used functionally to represent and foster the interests
      of the majority in an ever injust and unequal world.
      Probably not the easiest sale pitch to make to anyone
      else who does not already share your distinct outlook.

      It could be argued that the present convergence of global
      environmental, economic, and sociopolitical stress with an ever
      expanding communications ability presents the best
      opportunity in decades to appeal to what may be
      a most receptive and not yet fully engaged audience.

      Thanks for all of your efforts.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site