Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: Let's Not Forget OWS... [View all]sibelian
(7,804 posts)72. That's a interesting point...
... my own take on which is - everything being political, they really were a political movement even though though they said they weren't (they probably won't like that). There was political capital to be made from their denying their attachment to policy, whether acheived consciously or not. So *I* see them as political.
"You can't be a political movement representing the goals of the many when you are, depending on where you are, representing opposing points of view."
I can see that it's at the very least confusing but I don't entirely agree. Some of their precepts were pretty much universally acknowledged by all members, or at least a sizeable majority, particularly the income disparity problem. They differed as far as I can see, mostly on processes which I would regard as tactical rather than fundamental, and therefore were able to function as a leaderless group, removing any centre of balance that an opposing narrative could upset. It might sound a bit mystical but sometimes it's much harder to oppose a movement whose ideology has what appears to be peripheral incoherence tangentially related to their core values than a movement with a nice, structured, ordered set of tenets. It's very easy to distract disinterested parties that you want on your side with blindsiding. Many of the political points that left wing protest groups in the 80s wanted to get into the public consciousness were smeared over in the media with broad-spectrum character assassination of the protestors and I think the successs of that kind of response is very closely related to how coherent the protest is. It seems to be the case that the more structured the protest, the easier it is to pretend it's something it isn't because human beings are used to having entire coherent structures dismissed by the media. Human beings are *not* used to have interesting ideas that are buried in a wave of loosely related activity dismissed by the media, that stops looking like the media rejecting "bad people" and starts looking more like the media rejecting "ideology you aren't supposed to like". People usually form their political opinions from a wide, muddly range of sources, they make up their own minds and OWS looked to most like a close cousin of their own political opinion formation. Structured, focussed protest and politics isn't always an option for all ordinary people so presenting them with a "brand" sometimes turns them off. I think the sight of people struggling to express themselves but largely adhering to something that they all feel is morally required is in fact often a more powerful message than the sight of a clear-headed, coal-driven politico who has obviosuly decided that it's important you think the same way they do. I you aren't very politically aware yourself, coherent analysis can seem challenging, but a broadly defined sense of injustice is much easier to relate to. I know, it's kind of infuriating.
So, while the message was possibly muddled, I think the audience was more receptive to it through being muddled. People like you and me, who analyse, are in fact a bit of a rarity and, like it or not, we share the political landscape mostly with people who feel their way through things. Also I think it was very appropriate to the times. These days political opinion is sliced up into a thousand thousand tiny issues rather than bought wholesale as a monolithic prefabricated value system. I think OWS managed to highlight a theme without looking like dicks except to the people who are perpetually on the lookout for imaginary dicks (I'm not accusing you of that! .
Sorry, that was a bit of a screed...
What do you think?
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
206 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
I had to start ignoring Occupy stuff due to all the "OBAMA IS JUST AS BAD YOU FOOLS!"
redqueen
Nov 2012
#1
I cant imagine libertarians protesting Wall Street. I just find it sad that some Democrats
rhett o rick
Nov 2012
#13
Yes, I think they wanted the attention. Cant see them wanting more Wall Street regulations. nm
rhett o rick
Nov 2012
#75
Left-libertarian. But I notice everyone on this thread is talking about us in the past tense.
Leopolds Ghost
Nov 2012
#55
This kind of disinformation is why I don't recommend DU to anyone anymore...
Luminous Animal
Nov 2012
#34
Yes, but the written declaration of what OWS stands for makes it clear that they
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#52
I agree. What do you think of Democrats that help spread this disinformation?
rhett o rick
Nov 2012
#76
What a ridiculous and baseless slur on a social justice movement that changed
coalition_unwilling
Nov 2012
#81
Once the saane people stopped going to GAs, OWS was nothing but the crazy people, and no they didn't
roseBudd
Nov 2012
#160
They were never dead they were busy doing things to benefit people. They were only dead
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#26
Don't forget, not every one respects MLK. But thanks for the post, OWS has huge respect
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#50
If you go back through the archives here, to say 2008, you will posts announcing how
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#106
No... What I'm Assuming... Is That Many Voters Thought That That Was Just The Way It Is...
WillyT
Nov 2012
#41
Where was it discussed? On the media? Do you have links to all this discussion
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#113
Yes people did discuss it. And no one, including OWS ever said otherwise. You are
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#186
Once again you try to change the argument. No one is claiming that OWS was the first
rhett o rick
Nov 2012
#117
Be careful painting with too broad a brush. All protests attract anarchists, communists,
rhett o rick
Nov 2012
#182
The truth, however, is that hundreds of millions of people are quite content with Capitalism.
randome
Nov 2012
#158
It seems to me that the OP is referring to the election cycle and the campaigners...
Luminous Animal
Nov 2012
#23
So where are all these people you are talking about? What did they accomplish? Did
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#110
Often, it's a Third Way thing. The Third Way values profit over people, and is trying to move the
Zorra
Nov 2012
#30
The Third Way is not a label. They exist, they have a website. They have an idealogy and
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#112
Are you really saying that Third Way, who are very proud of their role in the Dem Party
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#138
'Rapturous idolization of BBI', 'sacred cows, Greenwald, Assange and Occupy'
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#191
Seriously, I'm flattered you remember our first encounter, I did not frankly. I knew
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#204
Yes... I think the "common voter" is pretty damned stupid, or has been living under a rock.
WillyT
Nov 2012
#22
Voting is not very effective in itself. I'm sorry you don't understand but civil rights movement etc
Leopolds Ghost
Nov 2012
#57
I don't think it's healthy for civil rights movement to be perceived as a monolithic voting block
Leopolds Ghost
Nov 2012
#74
How exactly is that changing goals? That is what they have always done from the beginning.
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#118
They are doing nothing they have not been doing from the beginning. The sad thing is
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#123
They never presented themselves as apolitical. They presented themselves as nonpartisan &
Luminous Animal
Nov 2012
#58
We know PLENTY about you based on how very nasty you are just in this thread.
kestrel91316
Nov 2012
#165
You are far from indifferent to OWS. We have addressed this before. You are as indifferent
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#111
Lol, welcome to DU. Summer despises OWS and always has. She has a right to do so.
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#124
The media says the opposite about OWS. In fact they ignored it for two weeks and
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#120
Actually it doesn't matter what the media does or does not do. But in the beginning they were
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#134
Actually it was the other way around. I follow a lot of the celebrities who showed up
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#193
The anti war protests lasted for a few hours on one day at a time. There are no numbers available
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#197
Lol, of course they weren't that many. Although they were way more than anyone ever
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#203
It will be nice to get back to discussing and working to change these issues:
Fire Walk With Me
Nov 2012
#45
OWS exists because nothing has been done about these issues you say everyone knew
sabrina 1
Nov 2012
#139
Yes, I think OWS was a great deal more effective than most give it credit for.
sibelian
Nov 2012
#66