There can be no doubt the fundamental principles that created the current OWS movement is based on decades of social justice and other direct action initiatives. The crisis at hand perhaps has never been so apparent to the vast majority of Americans (i.e. rampid social and economic inequality, the blatant lack of dignity given to the working poor) but the paths taken to show outrage are in deed of an activist nature. Of course I have nothing but upmost respect for those individuals who take it upon themselves to take this direct action, risking physical and economic retribution by a corporate apparatus intent on dismissing such action as an insignificant belch while engorging themselves on the labor of ordinary people.
This is precisely why there needs to be a much more in depth discussion on the overall strategy moving forward. Even though I mostly have dedicated my life to issues regarding social justice, I have many issues with the overall tone of these protests. First and foremost is the leaderless structure that has emerged and almost a proud feeling permeating from the participants regarding this fact. I understand the natural inclination of imposing an almost radical autonomous structure on the spontaneity of these actions but such lack of focus only serves to allow others, specifically its critics to define the message.
Furthermore it allows the originating principals to be obscured by those who seek to create a different vision of this movement. Recently I read an article on how there was a joint protest in Sacramento between Occupy Sacramento and a local Tea Party group. Such convergence is absolutely antithetical to the movement’s underpinnings and even though some may celebrate bi-partisan outrage over the disenfranchisement of the average American, a profound slippery slope exists here which may ultimately lead this movement to its destruction. As I walked through the protests encampment in Boston recently I noticed some differences emerging in the rhetoric and signs from those who newly join this movement. I saw many more American flags and many more mentions of America; almost an unmistakable nationalist tone taking hold in some quarters regarding the overall discussion on why this movement is being formulated.
Although corporate greed is still the fundamental cry for action, the cry “this is America… where everyone should play by the rules” type slogans are also heard. This may sound ambiguous enough, but it muddles the intent and the basis for action. I would argue that since this is America that is exactly what these thugs did…. Play by a set of cultural values where radical individualism and unbounded greed disguised in intellectually shallow but traditionally rich catch phrases such as “economic freedom” and “free markets” that allowed and gave justification to such rabid inequalities. One could argue that it is the capitalist engorging themselves through these national cultural narratives are in fact being uniquely American. What is then needed to combat the greed that has caused the outrage is a global approach nestled in advocacy for the poor and other marginalized segments of humanity, be it via economic, social, or ethnic. Only then with the conceptualization of real concrete steps toward a radical form of democracy can flourish. Democracy does not solely need to be in political terms, but also mandated equality in economics, social structures and macro interactions can be sustained and not corrupted but poisonous nationalistic tendencies.
If we allow homegrown jingonists (aka Tea Party) to dictate the parameters of action, then the road to dangerous neo-fascists populism is just around the corner. These parameters need to be free of national confines and be based on common human dignity and global equality. It’s definitely a discussion worth having!