The Requirements of Occupy Movement - Case Study Example

Occupy Movement As everything in our world, Occupy Movement had both its positive and negative effects. Spontaneous protest Occupy Wall Street (OWS) was firstly mentioned in the media in autumn 2011. It appeared because of the global financial crisis, during which government both of the U.S. and European countries used as the main measures financial injections to affect banks and financial institutions and to combat the crisis. The other reason for movement to occur was growing inequality in society: in 2011 the Congressional Budget Office experts spread information according to which one percent of Americans considered to be the richest U.S. citizens, and in the period from 1979 to 2007 most of them doubled their share of country’s national income (Trudell). In addition, a significant effect on the activation of the protest movement had mass protests in the Middle East and North African countries, which led eventually to the overthrow of existing governments in Egypt, Tunisia and Libya. But despite the fact that there were numerous reasons for this movement and OWS had lots of small victories, I am sure that it had failed as for now. That is why I will start from the investigation of reasons for failure. Among the requirements of Occupy Movement was mentioned a tax on interbank transactions (known as the "Robin Hood tax") and it was stated that the money should be spent on fight with poverty and environmental problems. Another demand was to abolish the existing death penalty in the United States. Moreover, many protesters were not satisfied with President Barack Obama - after his election victory in 2008 the promised changes didn’t occur in society. It was also noted that the protesters tried to draw the authorities’ attention to the issues of unemployment, social inequality, corruption and the dominance of corporations, and were also trying to solve the problems of their cities. The main reason why the Occupy Movement didn`t satisfied its demands are the lack of protest’s concrete ideas and goals. Even a few months after the beginning of the riots participants often could not explain what motivated the demonstrators - whether protest against business in the broadest sense or the fight of the 99% poorest against the 1% richest. Lack of goals inevitably led to a blurring of the shares’ end date. In this regard, particularly illogical was the existence of so-called sit-ins. On the journalists’ questions “What need to be done to stop the protesters share?” they replied that they just do not want to go home. Sometimes they published long lists with conflicting requirements, making them initially overwhelming. So, according to sociologist Charles Tilly, Occupy Wall Street was what we might call a "we are here" movement. By their presence, people were saying only "Recognize us!” (Tarrow). Sure, protest "Occupy Wall Street!", which began with the New York, quickly became a global phenomenon. However, it is not clear whether the movement dissatisfied real impact on the state of affairs in the developed countries, as various protests had different purposes. Those processes not technically but ideologically continued the stocks of anti-globalists that took place in the 2000s. The assistant professor at Columbia University Suresh Naidu, that since being evicted, OWS has blossomed (or imploded, depending on ones’ perspective) into a wide variety of political campaigns, ranging from organizing mass protests for the spring to drafting financial regulation proposals. That is why prevailing in a large American media consensus says that OWS’s best days have already been, as there no future for the riot, which has no clear program of action and, what is the most important, has no understanding of what else should be done when suddenly their goal would be reached. Another reason for the failure of the movement Occupy Wall Street was the absence of leaders, though people who came out on Wall Street were all different. Hardly there you could find a stock broker or bank director, but, basically, there were people who felt themselves unprotected because of the instability in the financial world. Gradually, they were joined by people who felt unprotected in the broader sense over a longer time span. Those were people who believed they were deprived by liberal reforms and globalization processes. Nevertheless, until the last day no leader which had possibilities to head that crowd was found among them, and that is despite the fact that to lead the angry demonstrators was easy. Though, while defending their actions protesters cited the experience of the 1960s and the “Arab Spring” – then the mass riots achieved their goals without any control system (Alessandrini). One of the main slogans of the Occupy movement was "We are 99 percent", which meant that 99 percent of the residents of America are discontent with their social base. They complained that they were on the streets because they could not pay the mortgage or they were unable to find a decent job and feed their families. After complains these people added: "I am one of the 99 percent" (Trudell). But in fact there was the absence of mobilization and real support for OWS in poor African-American areas, the same as there is no mobilization among farmers who bankrupt and "blue collars" who lost their jobs. This layer of society - and this is a kind of an American phenomenon - the majority of Republicans support. And OWS just did not take them seriously. That is why people from these areas see the cause of their misery not in financiers on Wall Street, but in the liberal press, which, as they think, writes about them without any respect. Many people consider that most of those who participated in the "Occupy Wall Street" are spoiled middle-class children, so they are not truly poor Americans who can say that they were deprived of self-esteem. Occupy Wall Street movement is considered to be an act of global solidarity, as the organizers of the movement openly called their inspirers the events of the Arab Spring. But many participants of the OWS still have a lot to learn how a real solidarity can be built, and those who have created it have made it clear that they are planning to stay, and to fight. And in addition here stands an important question of how a U.S.-based movement can stand in solidarity with popular movements throughout North Africa and the Middle East, as well as the less publicized popular movements throughout Sub-Saharan Africa (Alessandrini). Many facts also attest to insolvency of the Occupy Wall Street. For instance, OWS gathered in response to the call of the Canadian Foundation Adbusters, which by its magazine and website offered a peaceful occupation of the Wall Street. But after the movement gathered, no one took the responsibility for its development, thus the movement has no opportunity to follow its main aim, as it seems to change all the time. Another fact which proves the failure of the movement is discrepancy between word and deed. In the "Declaration of the Occupation of New York City", posted on September 30th, was proclaimed: "As one people, united, we acknowledge the reality: that the future of the human race requires the cooperation of its members; that our system must protect our rights, and upon corruption of that system, it is up to the individuals to protect their own rights, and those of their neighbors" (Lang). But in fact the organizers of "Occupy Wall Street" failed to mobilize the people whose interests they are, in theory, were supposed to represent. They do not support any unions or workers. Finally, that movement seems to be a policy platform, but it is not the point of this new kind of movement. So one year after the beginning of the movement, it almost ran out of steam and according to a recent investigation of Ipso/Reuters, only 9% of respondent said they fully share the ideals of the movement. Some people claim that there were some positive effects of OWS movement. "Regardless of what happens to OWS as a movement, it has made opening arguments in a political conversation about the basic structure of the U.S. economic system, one in which economists have much to contribute," - Suresh Naidu says. The only thing that this movement managed to achieve is to raise the issue of growing social inequality and make it a topic for public discussion, but unfortunately no new ideas appear. If the changes of the financial system in the West will take place in the future, that will occur basically not because of the “Occupy Wall Street” pressure. Sure, some of the wishes of this small group of people can be realized in the future, but this implementation will be only indirectly related to the protests. At the same time that was the first time when ordinary Americans (no matter whether they were marginal or middle class) have become concern if they agree to live under capitalism. Judson Berger, the author of the FoxNews.com, admits the shared sense of disconnect and disillusionment with the system. It was fighting crony capitalism and too-big-to-fail policies that propped up the financial industry and was looking to engineer an overthrow of the free-market system (Berger). Moreover, Occupy Wall Street puts forward few policy proposals and has a shifting configuration of supporters as it spreads across the country (Trudell). This is the most important thing that has happened on Wall Street and that is what distinguishes this movement from the pogroms in London and from the European riots of prior years. So to conclude all what was said about Occupy Wall Street Movement, I must admit that despite all the positive effects it had on the development of the modern world society in whole and also on establishment of modern American society, this movement failed in succeeding its stated aims. And I cannot agree with the ideologues and supporters of the movement, who claim that it has a future. Movement "Occupy Wall Street" is evaporated. Works cited 1. Alessandrini, Anthony C. “Their fight is our fight: Occupy Wall Street, the Arab Spring, and new Models of Solidarity today.” Is this what democracy looks like? Ed. Graduate Center Digital Initiatives, 11 May 2014. 2. Berger, Judson. “Wall Street protesters brewing Tea Party of the left? Not yet, strategists say.” FoxNews.com Ed. Fox News Network LLC, 11 May 2014. 3. Lang, Amy Schrager, and Daniel Lang/Levitsky. Dreaming in Public: Building the Occupy Movement. Oxford: New Internationalist, 2012. 4. Tarrow, Sidney. “Why Occupy Wall Street is not the Tea Party of the Left: The United States Long History of Protests.” Foreign Affairs. Ed. Council on Foreign Relations, 11 May 2014. 5. Trudell, Megan. “The Occupy Movement and class politics in the US.” International Socialism: A quarterly journal of socialist theory. Ed. Camilla Royle, 11 May 2014. Read More