This diary expands on claude's using the same reference.
Many people ask what the occupy movements are about. They ask what are the protesters' demands. They ask who are their leaders. They say why don't you all just get a job. They say the protesters are anarchists. They say they are DFH. They want to frame the movement into their own definable box.
George Lakoff published a very lucid and well thought out analysis of what this movement is really about, which takes the context to a new level. This is his editorial for truthout.org and should be read in its entirety.
My thinking on this issue was suddenly triggered when a stranger joined me on the second hole while playing golf yesterday. Very congenial mid 30's male that said he worked for Pepsi-Cola in an advertising or marketing role ( I forget which ) for distributors. We only played six holes together, but we got to talking about the Revolutionary War and John Adams. I segued that to asking him if had heard of the occupy movements. I immediately sensed the disgust in his voice. He said that they should "just get a job" and "I'm sure there are educated people there who could get a job, if they wanted". I told him there are many people there that have a job.
When I was at occupyboston in the initial days, a man walking by on the sidewalk where the signs are being held (on Atlantic Ave), also yelled the same thing. That got me to thinking how so many people either don't get it, or are so misinformed/uninformed, or just ignorant of what is going on around them. But when I read Lakoff's article it suddenly crystallized everything.
He says that, in essence, people are really all protesting some facet of the immorality and resultant corruption of the system. I know I'm not presenting a new concept for many that are ahead in their thinking already. However, I suddenly realized how everything I've heard of people's concerns could fit under that one concise sentence. For me, that sentence provides an umbrella with which to show that every concern, every bit of anger can be derived from the immoral actions of our ruling members. That sentence also allows a simple explanation to people who have never considered the possibility that their system is corrupt (that is hard to believe, but alas true).
It seems to me that the OWS movement is moral in nature, that occupiers want the country to change its moral focus. It is easy to find useful policies; hundreds have been suggested. It is harder to find a moral focus and stick to it. If the movement is to frame itself, it should be on the basis of its moral focus, not a particular agenda or list of policy demands. If the moral focus of America changes, new people will be elected and the policies will follow. Without a change of moral focus, the conservative worldview that has brought us to the present disastrous and dangerous moment will continue to prevail.
That is the message: it's about the morality of America. What has America done, morally, that any of us can be proud of. I am at a loss.