Skip to main content

View Diary: The Squandered Potential of Occupy (240 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Nearly every criticism I read here of Occupy (12+ / 0-)

    is from someone who watched from the outside.  I also participated on a limited basis in my local occupation while it still was active.  General Assemblies could be frustrating because of the nature of their structure which gave worth to all who chose to participate, but that is not a valid reason to criticize the movement.  

    Each local occupation had varying local agendas, but all of them placed a heavy emphasis upon the worth of the people, all people.  People should not be casualties of corporate greed, which is what we are seeing in our society right now.

    Those who are critical of the Occupy Movement fail to comprehend that first and foremost, it is not a political movement.  It is not a liberal movement either, although many of the people behind it were liberals.  I met people in my own Occupy movement who were libertarian and others who were politically unaffiliated and blamed all conventional politicians.

    I cannot emphasize this enough.  Occupy is a social movement that exists outside organized politics.  Here is what I wrote on another diary to which David Graeber (one of the original forces behind the Occupy Movement and its NYC iteration OWS) responded.

    Occupy is a social movement, and (9+ / 0-)

    as was the case with many social movements in the past, Occupy is having political effects without being a part of any political party or the formal political process.  The people behind Occupy have understood from the beginning that the political process itself is broken and changes will come as a result from forces outside that process.

    The main reason Democrats benefited from Occupy is because the Democrats were more willing to understand just how powerful a change in the national conversation that Occupy had brought to fore and used that in appealing to the electorate.  I would like to see some follow up by our elected officials, but count me among those who are skeptical as to whether or not they will follow through in the legislative process.

    by gulfgal98 on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 06:13:26 AM EST

    [ Parent | Reply to This ]

       

    the OWS strategy (9+ / 0-)

        was to play on the already-existing sense that politicians of both parties were crooks more answerable to the 1% who fund them than to those they ostensibly represent. It was a popular delegitimation exercise. This would both cause some within the system to desperately try to relegitimate the system by making policy initiatives they never would have otherwise, and also open up spaces outside the system to create a new directly democratic culture which would have even more profound long-term effects.

     that's what I think most of the original strategists were, and are still, trying to do in the long term. Of course in a diverse democratic movement there are people with very different ideas of what the movement should be about. But I think this is the center of it.

    by david graeber on Wed Nov 28, 2012 at 11:07:57 AM EST

    It is disconcerting to see a diary such as this make the top of the recommended list.  While the diarist has the right to take exception with some of the methods of the Occupy Movement, he has no right to declare that it is a failure when he has not contributed to trying to make it succeed.  IMHO, Occupy has already succeeded in that it single handedly changed the national conversation from debt reduction to income inequality and we saw that in the last election.

    "Growing up is for those who don't have the guts not to. Grow wise, grow loving, grow compassionate, but why grow up?" - Fiddlegirl

    by gulfgal98 on Sun Dec 02, 2012 at 06:56:13 AM PST

    [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site