The Occupy Wall Street Movement: its significance and effectiveness - Research Paper Example

?The Occupy Wall Street Movement: Its Significance and Effectiveness The Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement witnessed in recent months is one of the most important socio-political events to have taken place in the history of the United States of America. It can be compared with the Civil Rights movement and the Women’s Rights movement of the 1960s and 1970s respectively. The protests and public discussions of OWS were centered on the flawed policy priorities of the body politic. It also addressed the greed-based actions of Corporate America which put profits ahead of social responsibility. The failures of the political and business establishments have hurt a vast majority of ordinary Americans – the other 99%, as the slogan proclaims. This research essay will argue that the OWS movement is nothing short of a nation getting in touch with its revolutionary spirit. The movement started because of the dissatisfaction over the economic conditions of the country that Wall Street produced and the call for widespread changes in business practices and economic policies, and it is effective because it is based on collective action and attracts the working class and middle class, although it can be taken forward by focusing on similar issues that affect the working class, poor class, and middle class and making sure that the government and private sector are making policy changes and practices that will promote economic development for all. The Occupy Wall Street movement is a crucial reality check for a nation that is on the brink of economic and social disintegration. The movement started because of the 2008 financial recession that many people blame on capitalistic greed that Wall Street promoted and expanded in the nation. OWS is protesting against the actions of Wall Street that produced unfair and unethical practices that damaged the stable economy of America. In “Why Occupy Wall Street? 10 Reasons Protestors Picked the Right Target,” McGhee discusses the reasons why OWS started. She argues that Wall Street directly caused the financial crisis: “Wall Street's insatiable appetite for mortgages that it could bundle into securities, making huge profits, helped fuel irresponsible lending.” OCW members believe that because of greediness in gaining large profits in the short run, financial loan systems and practices became unethical. Instead of using traditional checks and tools to guarantee that applicants have the financial ability to pay their loans, financial institutions allowed people to not only have multiple loans, but permitted securities companies to bundle these financial products and achieve quick profits. Trading securities has no real impact on the lives of ordinary working Americans, and OWS shows how Wall Street is the only winner, before the economic system of the U.S. fell into a recession. In addition, OWS is based on the argument that Wall Street prioritizes profits over sustainable development. McGhee discusses this as the second reason of occupying Wall Street: This narrow focus on the bottom line has undermined American workers and the middle class by justifying any cost-cutting measures that can boost quarterly earnings, including foreign outsourcing, eliminating benefits, and busting unions. With Wall Street controlling the economy, no one is looking after the welfare of the middle-class, the working-class, and the poor anymore. Companies focus only on profits, at the expenses of both people and the environment. The economic and social reasons for the growth of the OWS are connected, particularly when the concern of poor positive outcomes of the free market economy are analyzed. Author Amy Dean’s journal article “Occupy Wall Street: A Protest against a Broken Economic Compact” (first published in Harvard International Review, 2012) studied the reasons for the mass movement. She interviewed OWS participants and supported her claims through statistics and poll findings. She argues that the root of the problem is “broken economic compact” (Dean 12). She states: “the Occupy movement is a protest against a broken economic compact that reaches into the very middle of America and that is resonating in other parts of the world as well” (Dean 12). Free market economics promises that with open competition in the market and giving more freedom to businesses to run their companies with little government intervention as possible, the economy will be better off than when government control and ownership of industries is higher. This promise is broken, since the 2008 financial recession proves that Wall Street only makes the rich richer, the poor poorer, and the middle class poorer as well. Because of broken dreams, OWS aspires for changes in the economic system. If Wall Street has corrupted financial markets and systems, OWS calls for a transformation of Wall Street and the nation’s financial markets and systems (McGhee). People generally want to see changes in Wall Street, where they no longer focus on short-term profits, but know how to balance social, environmental, and economic interests. OWS carries an economic agenda that many people want to see in the future- a future where companies are smaller in power and people have better lives. Another reason that OWS gained importance among the American masses is the rise of political power of Wall Street, which ensured its economic strength too, a phenomenon that OWS wants to stop. McGhee underlines that Wall Street supported the campaigns of politicians so that the latter will also support their interests: Spending nearly $5 billion in political donations and lobbying over the past 15 years, the financial industry largely succeeded in writing its own rules, at the cost of protecting investors, consumers and -- ultimately -- the broader economy. (McGhee). When the rich use their money to influence politicians, who in turn, will create policies that will increase the former’s wealth, the people learn to rise up and to remove the connection between politics and the rich. OWS gains support because people want to see changes in how their economy is run. They want to change politics and economics together, where fair and democratic power affect development. Aside from the broken compact and the desire to change policymaking and economic and financial systems, the movement gathered pace because it appealed to the poor, the working class, and the middle-class who believe that their main power in the capitalistic society is the power of numbers. “We are the 99%” is an attractive slogan for the movement because it highlights that the majority of Americans have one thing in common- they are either poor or getting poorer and they have less power in the kind of world that Wall Street made. The principle of the majority is that it is democratic, which serves to attract people from different social classes: Everyone was invited to participate directly in the process of determining what Occupy Wall Street was all about, through the democracy of the "General Assembly," daily meetings at which collective decisions were made in an open, participatory manner.” (Kunstler 991) When people have their interests being promoted, they tend to join the movement. In addition, when it is clear that they could only make their voice heard through collective action, they were attracted to OWS. This movement allows them to be unified and stronger, and to use their numbers to impact Wall Street and the government. Having power when conditions seem hopeless is an important magnet for OWS. The symbol of modern day finance is the giant bronze statue of the Charging Bull. OWS wants to take the bull at its horns to control it: “To occupy Wall Street was an empowering way to give voice to this outrage. It was also an assertion of control over Wall Street as a symbol, and the power of the people to change its meaning” (Kunstler 990). The bull is not a bad symbol because it means growth and power. OWS wants to make it sure that Wall Street is not the only one benefitting from the bull. The movement aims for equality in the control of the economy because this control will help them have better lives. Another way of saying this is that OWS shows that the bull is better when ordinary people are on top of it, controlling and leading it to social and economic equality. OWS is successful because of its leaderless approach in making decisions and ways of encouraging people to join them. OWS does not have any political affiliation. They invite all kinds of people who believe that Wall Street has caused the financial recession, and that it must be transformed to change the economy of the U.S. Because of the lack of political connection, OWS becomes a party for all kinds of people. It invites diversity and maximizes the positive effects of diversity, such as new and creative ideas and proposals to the nation’s different social and economic problems. Moreover, OWS is successful because of its democratic approach to leadership. In “What is Occupy Wall Street? The History of Leaderless Movements,” Gautney compares and contrasts leaderless movements. For her, OWS is successful because it has no leaders. It has a democratic way of making decisions, which appeals to many people: Proposers must field questions, justify the hows and whys of their ideas, and engage a large-scale group discussion. Votes are then cast via an innovative system of hand signals, and proposals are revised until a nine-tenths majority approves. (Gautney 2). Every member is invited to make proposals and justify and defend them. With the idea that everyone is a leader, the focus becomes on the process of empowerment and ensuring that every person gets heard. In addition, the democratic approach has its benefits. People can introduce changes in areas of human development that are not usually considered. Together, they can discuss these problems and find creative solutions. The strengths of OWS are in its democratic structure and appeal to all. OWS is not without its weaknesses, however, because the focus on consensus delays decision-making and makes it harder for it to produce fast decisions when needed, and it has unclear goals, which can also frustrate its members. First of all, OWS has members with different goals. They might agree that Wall Street produced the recession, but they can have very specific and different objectives. Some of them want to forgive student loans, while others want other changes in how Wall Street companies operate their businesses. With so many goals, the priorities of the movement are unclear. In real life, an organization must have specific priorities and start from there because of limited resources and time and because people can only handle one or several issues at a time. In a way, OWS appears to be a mess of goals that might be good in recruiting many members, but it cannot retain them in the long run. People need something clear and specific to look forward to in the long run, and OWS does not offer that. In addition, OWS has a consensus decision-making style. This style is part of the strengths of the OWS but it has its downsides. Sometimes, too much cooks spoil the broth, as the saying goes. When important decisions have to be made quickly and there is no consensus, the absence of specific leaders can delay the developments and activities of OWS. Despite these weaknesses, OWS is important to American history because it affirms the growing demands for social equality through economic equality. Income distribution in the United States shows the large gap between the rich and the poor: “By definition, practically all of us are in the "99 percent" of Americans with annual incomes below $506,553. Of that 99% of Americans, about 6%--or one out of fifteen--live in extreme poverty, defined within the United States as having income of less than half of the official poverty line. The number of Americans with incomes at or below the national poverty line is even greater, at fifty-one million….The remaining two-thirds of Americans, labeled "other" in the reports, are above the 33% identified as poor but below the 1% defined by the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) movement as excessively wealthy.” (Davis 931). The statistics prove that America has a serious problem. It is one of the richest and most powerful nations in the world, and yet 99% do not have economic security. The worst fact is that only 1% is extremely wealthy and they control the economy and politics of the nation. OWS wants to change social inequality. It claims for the greater economic power that ordinary people can have, if only Wall Street will stop being greedy and mind the effects of its unfair actions on the majority of the nation. OWS will affect American history by strengthening the ideals of unity and democracy, which present and future generations must be reminded of. Present young generations need to be reminded that with freedom and democracy come responsibilities. They cannot expect to be free without showing responsibility for their actions and without calling for others to do the same. OWS helps people remember to fight for their rights and to fight for social equality. Moreover, the movement emphasizes that unity remains powerful. People may have different personalities and lifestyles, but they can have common issues and interests. These interests will help them improve their socioeconomic conditions and ensure the continuing leadership of the U.S. in promoting democracy all over the world. To take OWS forward requires strong democratic leadership and emphasis on common interests. OWS should have a strong leadership that remains democratic, but also can make fast decisions when needed. Leadership includes access to important information and being able to motivate people to support organizational decisions. Furthermore, good leadership uses old and new media to support its agenda. OWS supporter Mike Daisey stresses the role of art in expanding OWS’s leadership in American society: Art and theatre is actually a very effective way to connect with other humans in a space. Art and cultural resistances have to be part of the movement to help make that point. These theatrical images create an urgency that helps people understand issues on a visceral level." (Daisey, as quoted in Wallenberg 28) In other words, OWS must use the arts to form deeper emotional bonds to its members and to recruit new ones. The principles of solidarity, equality, and progress for all can be critical to uniting people and keeping members interested in the movement and these principles can be spread through artistic works. The new media, in addition, is critical to sustaining the drive of OWS. Facebook and other social networks can be used to constantly update people of the goals, activities, and milestones of the movement. This way, people realizes that OWS can make things happen and they will continuously support it. OWS can reflect in the public policy of the future by reducing the ability of Wall Street to create systems and tools that focus on profits only, without having enough risk assessment measures. First, Wall Street should stop predatory loaning. As McGhee explains: Wall Street banks like Wells Fargo, Capital One, Citigroup and Chase all had subprime lending arms that targeted working-class communities with high fee and -interest mortgage loans, often just to refinance -- and strip wealth from -- existing assets. Wall Street should support loans that can be paid by ordinary people. It should stop focusing on high interests and be content with enough profits that it used to make before. Second, the government should enforce risk assessment policies that will stop Wall Street from being risky traders for the sake of money. Wall Street makes huge profits from speculation in securities markets, but speculation only increases prices of goods and services. These companies should stop being greedy through the controls from the government. Third, Wall Street should be held accountable for its illegal behaviors: Three years after the financial crisis, not a single top Wall Street executive or trader has been accountable for criminal actions that help cause the crash. For example, while civil suits have turned up evidence that Wall Street firms knowingly deceived investors about the risks of mortgage-backed securities -- a form of fraud -- the U.S. Justice Department not pursued any criminal cases against these firms or the executives who ran them. (McGhee). Justice applies to all, including Wall Street. American policy should reflect equal justice that includes, most especially, people who have deliberately used legal financial systems to defraud ordinary Americans. OWS has its roots from the Civil Rights Movement and the Women’s Rights Movement. It has expanded because people feel that their basic rights and freedoms mean nothing, when Wall Street can do anything it wants without any respect for the effects on people and the environment. OWS has gained ground because of its democratic principles and practices. It recruits people without looking at their backgrounds and affiliations. OWS is successful because it promotes and depends on democratic principles and behaviors. However, it cannot remain strong without clear goals and leadership. To move forward, it requires a clear vision and mission, as well as a strong democratic leadership. OWS can affect public policy by gaining political power. It is a movement that has improved democracy in the nation and helps people think about the quality of their lives because of Wall Street. OWS shakes up the status quo and shows Wall Street that it can ride the bull. The golden bull of development should not be the pet of Wall Street. The bull of wealth and development should serve the interests of the majority, especially when financial conditions are worsening for many people. OWS demonstrates that the golden bull can be a tool for equal development. It can go onward through massive collective action and unified interests. It will grow stronger, if it can trample the roots of socioeconomic inequality and charge with full strength toward true sustainable development. Works Cited Davis, Martha F. "Occupy Wall Street and International Human Rights." Fordham Urban Law Journal 39.4 (2012): 931+. Print. Dean, Amy. “Occupy Wall Street: A Protest against a Broken Economic Compact.” Harvard International Review 33.4 (2012): 12+. Print. Gautney, Heather. “What is Occupy Wall Street? The History of Leaderless Movements.” The Washington Post (10 Oct. 2011). Web. 20 Nov. 2012. . Kunstler, Sarah. "The Right to Occupy - Occupy Wall Street and the First Amendment."Fordham Urban Law Journal 39.4 (2012): 989+. Print. McGhee, Heather. “Why Occupy Wall Street? 10 Reasons Protestors Picked the Right Target.” Huffington Post (17 Oct. 2011). . Read More