Contact
Support the 99 percent
A scene from a recent Occupy march at New Mexico State University (Courtesy photo)
I appreciate the meaningful ways that the Occupy movement has moved the national conversation in a direction that can now include not only retrenchment and austerity but also basic fairness and opportunity for everyone. But they need our help.
While trying to juggle my infant son’s 4:30 a.m. feedings, keep up with the classes I take and teach, and fulfill my professional obligations, I simply don’t have the capacity to join the Occupy Las Cruces movement as they camp out in front of the Thomas Branigan Library in Las Cruces.
And — let’s be honest — I’m less willing as I get older to give up my warm home and cozy bed to endure cold nights sleeping on park grass. Either way, I’m glad that members of the Occupy Las Cruces group — and other Occupy groups around the country — are willing to endure this hardship on my behalf.
Nick Voges
But what’s OWS all about?
As I see it, the Occupy movement is concerned about a lot of things: income inequality, corporate greed, failing institutions, high unemployment and lack of opportunity, corporations run amok, free trade policies, globalization, environmental degradation, endangered personal freedoms — I could continue, but you get the picture. Most importantly, however, the Occupy groups around the country are about voicing concern over where the country is headed in general.
In that way, they very much represent the mainstream of U.S. public thought, according to a recent Pew Research Center finding. Like the TEA Party before them, the 99 percent movement has provided a full-throated, impossible-to-ignore outcry that speaks to the concerns of many Americans, including myself. To me, the most important thing that Occupy Las Cruces is doing is nominating and making real the sense — shared by many — that something is wrong with our country.
Not very precise, is it?
I don’t agree with many commentators that this is a weakness. Part of the strength of the 99 percent movement is the inchoate nature of their frustrations. After all, there’s plenty wrong with the country; what’s the point for Occupiers to argue about what exactly is wrong? Making everyone agree seems like a quick way of sapping the energy of any broad-reaching movement. It’s enough for the Occupy groups to keep saying over and over again: There’s something wrong here; there’s something wrong here.
Can they be effective?
Many people, including on this site, have argued that the Occupy movements will not be effective if they don’t develop a formal platform and begin to align themselves with like-minded organizations (conservative donors, after all, were key to helping the TEA Party movement gain national prominence). The only problem with this argument is that they’ve already been effective. As Dan Buecke from Bloomberg Business weekly points out, Google trend analyses that examine how often particular keywords are typed into their search engine show that Occupiers have greatly impacted the national conversation.
Furthermore, before the Occupy movements, the loudest voices in the debate about what was wrong with the country were TEA Party members. Now, despite initially being dismissed by the gatekeepers in both major U.S. political parties, the Occupiers have made certain that the national conversation about what’s wrong with this country not only includes TEA Party themes around debt and deficit reduction and shrinking government, but also addresses concerncs around income inequality, dwindling opportunity for American workers, and making sure that important government projects and services are protected and, in some cases, expanded.
The Occupiers, without the support of a political party or self-interested financiers like the Koch brothers, have changed the terms of the national conversation. That’s a pretty big deal.
Of course, this success doesn’t necessarily mean that the Occupy protests will successfully develop into a sustainable, long-term movement. But I’m not certain that is or even should be their goal. For now, under their current structure, the 99 percent don’t answer to national strategists and no one makes a buck off whether the movement succeeds or fails. The groups’ spontaneity and energy is part of what keeps the country paying attention. By adopting the structures and platforms of more traditional social movements, the Occupiers risk losing the very thing that makes them so compelling to so many: authenticity.
What can we do?
Say that you’re like me: You can’t occupy the park in front of Branigan Library, yet you want to show your support and gratitude to those who are willing to stand up and give voice to the fears and dissatisfactions you feel about the direction we’re heading. What can you do?
The first thing you can do is donate a little money to help pay the permit cost to stay in the park. You can do that by getting in touch with Jason Burke. His e-mail address is wldtrkey@gmail.com. You can also call him at (575) 915-2766.
The second thing to do is stop by and visit when you can. Talk with the folks down there. Listen to their concerns and share your own. My experience has been that we have many of the same values and concerns.
Again, as someone who wants to preserve — and improve — the opportunities that will be available to myself and my children, I appreciate the meaningful ways that the Occupy movement has moved the national conversation in a direction that can now include not only retrenchment and austerity but also basic fairness and opportunity for everyone. Keep it up, 99 percent-ers!
Nick Voges is the columnist behind NMPolitics.net’s Zeitgeist. E-mail him at nick@nmpolitics.net.
24 comments so far. Scroll down to submit your own comment.
Leave a response
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I think the real 99% was out on Black Friday, and they were occupying places like WalMart, BestBuy, Kohl’s, etc. Those camping out around those places at least had a purpose and goal in mind, they are the 99%. And yes, Mr. Best, that was my original quote Thinker attributed to your reply quoting it. I stand by it, just check the records of Dr. King’s activities, they were not at all like the Occupy rabel.
The Thinker needs a bit of retraction …
I am not responsible for the quote, “Dr. King was not breaking laws like the ones being broken today.”
“Wage slavery and forced destitution for producers ain’t it .”
I’m sorry you are being held against your will. Maybe the police can help.
Good enough qofdisks and IP, why then doesn’t the OWS rebel take corporate America to court as being unconstitutional? That would be a funny one. And if you are not making that “living wage”, sue the employer for being unconstitutional, right.
qofdisks:
Only because I’m feeling somewhat snarky today, I thought I should play devil’s advocate briefly; The Declaration of Independence is in no way a legally-binding document. You actually could have made your point just as succinctly (and with more authority) with, “promote the general welfare”.
“certain unalienable rights, life, liberty, pursuit of happiness”
That says it all Dr. J. Wage slavery and forced destitution for producers ain’t it .
qofdisks says: “ Every human being should be able to command a basic living for themselves and 2 other people at a minimum for one full time job. “ OK, so we need to amend the the Constitution and Declaration of Independence to include this, right? So, we are endowed by our creator of certain unalienable rights, life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, and of course a job that pays for basic living expenses for 3 people, minimum, and at a comfortable level too! Oh, and don’t forget to add health care for life as well, may as well get it all in while we are amending things.
It’s comforting to see the usual suspects here doing what they do best: repeat word for word complete fabrications talk radio hosts tutored their listeners with in the previous week. ALL of which, by the way, have been debunked by legitimate media and journalism as simply not happening or as not being done by OWS protesters. (Oh, and by the way, a majority of OWS protesters are employed or retired, so you can hold the “get a job” spiel Newtie taught you, too.)
In case you missed it, part of what they want to bring attention to (aside from huge income inequality, corruption in the Finance industry and the wholesale purchasing of our government by the richest 1%) is that we (THE 99%) in numbers, matter, and we will show you (THE 1%) by being present where you are. Get it? “OCCUPY”=”BE IN THE WAY SO YOU START TO THINK ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE DOING”. You can’t just ignore us, steal from us, mock us.
So the Righties don’t like the message because it interferes with their ability to con simple people into voting against their interests. I get it. But seriously, pepper spraying point-blank into the faces of peaceful college students on THEIR OWN CAMPUS because they are “misbehaving”? I guess you think that’s fine, since you already define them as unpatriotic. But it was ok when the Tea Party waved racist signs and carried guns to political rallies to warn Obama they were “serious”. THEY were “Patriots” expressing their constitutionally protected rights to freedom of assembly and speech.
Finally, I must say, this one is rich:
I so don’t know how to respond to the incredible amount of erasure of modern American history it would require to believe that statement. Next thing you know, you’ll be telling me Michelle Obama was being uppity NASCAR the other day. ‘Cause i hear that’s what Rush said and you know, that’s not racist–it’s just the truth!!
Will someone please define a living wage?
So, if we raise the minimum wage to something called a living wage, costs will increase up and down the board. Prices will increase for all goods. So, those who are at the minimum wage are still going to be paying higher prices.
What we need to do is reform the tax code. Make America attractive once again for manufacturing. Provide good paying jobs paying a full days pay for a full days work.
Sounds better than artificially increasing pay by increasing the minimum wage.
The plan proposed by qofdisks sounds almost Marxist. From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs.
Occupiers are my heroes. This is a growing movement. Every human being should be able to command a basic living for themselves and 2 other people at a minimum for one full time job. The most important wage gap is between the depressed wage and living wage. That disparity is socially non-sustainable. Long term solutions are what is needed for long term viability with dignity for human beings.
Wow Centerline, just wow. Are you deliberately letting yourself be so mislead?
It’s pretty sad that there are those who pick and choose what parts of the US Constitution they wish to follow and how they interpret the rest of it. The Tea Party and other extremists, i.e.., Fox News and Entertainmenbt, Rush, and Hannity are having a hard time coming up with anything substantive to say opposing the OWS protesters and their right to free speech. Other than the above hate motivated dialogue I’ve heard these occupiers called thugs, terrorists, free loaders, etc. I know for a fact that many of the Tea Perty gang are taking long swigs from from the government troth in the form of disabilty checks, VA medical benefits, social security and Medicare, and so on. It’s really funny to see the Tea Party crowd talking about the protesters in need of a shower and other attacks when their own lives are filled with hypocrisy. Thats the bigotry of these extreme Republicans who do not know the personal stories of these protesters, all assumptions like the rest of their non-factual spin just to further their idealistic view of the world. I know of some who have lost their jobs, some who have lost their homes, some who just graduated and cannot find a job, and others who lost much of what they saved over several years to the stock market. People like Artiofab are obviously very intimidated by others who are expressing their right of free speech. The OWS folks are my heroes for spending days and nights in the elements and away from their friends and family to bring attention to those issues that need to be addressed. I didn’t see the Tea Baggers making this type of saccrifice.
artiofab:
Your mention of MLK is apt.
The civil rights protests had specific grievances and specific solutions: integration and equality to counter the denial of civil rights.
The Vietnam protests similarly had an identifiable grievance and solution: end the war.
The Arab Spring uprisings had a specific solution: overthrow dictators.
But the OWS? Certainly not specific – the original poster ASKED, rather than declared a solution.
Many of the problems we are facing are not policy problems.
Globalization? Protectionism can cause deprivation and stagnation just as competition can.
Automation? We could outlaw all machines so that we artificially required more people to do jobs, but this too would be bad for standards of living.
Aging society? There is actually a helpful policy adjustment – slightly and slowly raise retirement age.
The OWS seems to be a ‘me too’ protest in a world of protesters.
But we have to distinguish between the ‘Arab Spring’ and the Europeans.
The Arabs had legitimate oppression from dictators.
The Europeans ( and I think the OWS ) are throwing tantrums about the impossible promises governments have made.
The whole thing may be a ‘crisis of democracy’ – people cannot rule themselves because self interest exceeds group interest.
artiofab, Dr. King was not breaking laws like the ones being broken today. The authorities would not give them permts in the old South to even march peacefully down the street and protest, those are the “unjust” laws he was referring to here, along with the major unjust laws based on race and colour. The OWS degrades Dr. King and his ideals by even trying to think they are the same as him. If the OWS were doing the same and based on the same ideals as Dr. King and his followers (note, not the Black Panthers and others), I would be out today, as I was in those days, supporting them. I was proud to be with Dr. King in those days, I am ashamed of the OWS rabel today, totally and completely different.
We will be there visiting family and Occupy in my home town. I look forward to the discussions from a local NM perspective. I’ll let you know how it goes.
There is an Occupy Socorro but I missed it. It is hard to have an Occupy Socorro because everybody personally knows the employees at the banks and local businesses. Literally. Personal feelings would be involved. We all know that they are all struggling with low wages like the rest of us. People in Socorro care about each other and the community and make a big point of getting along for the sake of the kids. Still, there are lively discussions in the shops and tavern.
<i> I am in that group, but my idea of free speech and assembly is to obey city rules, obey the police, respect public and private property, and not obstruct and prevent people from trying to make a living and earn an honest buck. 1st Amendment protections do not allow most of the things they are doing, and the cities know that and are cracking down on these criminals.</i>
Shorter Dr. J from 50 years ago:
“I think that Dr. King would do better to obey the law, rather than cause trouble.”
Oddly enough, in his foresight, Dr. King wrote a letter addressing that exact complaint that he should never break the law. I assume we’ve all read it? Particularly the line “I am sure that none of you would want to rest content with the superficial kind of social analysis that deals merely with effects and does not grapple with underlying causes”?
Really Heath, I am surprised you allow political fundraising for free on your site. Nick and OWS should have to pay for soliciting donations, like your other advertisers.
And the recent elections all over Europe tend to reinforce what Skeptic says about Europe. The utter failure of the left wing agenda, green jobs policies, etc. in Europe, and now the backlash sending the liberals running is what has been happening here, and will continue into 2012. If you think he OWS rabel represents the bottom 99% of Americans, I would beg to differ. Their tactics such as, riots, campouts, vandalism, waste of economic and police resources for cities, crime magnets, general filth and garbage everywhere, is just not what 99% of Americans would agree with. I am in that group, but my idea of free speech and assembly is to obey city rules, obey the police, respect public and private property, and not obstruct and prevent people from trying to make a living and earn an honest buck. 1st Amendment protections do not allow most of the things they are doing, and the cities know that and are cracking down on these criminals.
Funny, I just do not remember those afflictions associated with the TEA Party protests, but then most of the TEA Partiers had gainful employment and access to a shower.
In other words, Mark Best is not in favor of listening to a fellow American’s socio-political ideas if they are part of the 9% of unemployed Americans or the 1% of homeless Americans.
I’m not surprised by conservatives using random acts of violence at OWS events to discredit the OWS movement; even though it’s fallacious (ecological fallacy, cherry picking, if not others), at least it makes some kind of sense. But using lice and tuberculosis to discredit OWS is illogical. It is arguing that people, who themselves might not be able to afford health care, who come into contact with people who can’t afford health care, shouldn’t acquire communicable diseases.
Apparently add that to the list of things that Mark Best thinks invalidates a person’s right to have freedom of speech: no job, no home, and a non-perfect immune system. I guess that means he is in favor of affordable health care for all, so that all Americans can be healthy enough to deserve their rights?
In spite of stever’s pessimistic review, I do agree with part of his position. If you, Nick Voges, think that economic inequality is a big problem, do something about it, instead of paying someone else to do it for you. Democracy is not a spectator sport. If the Tea Party was able to change the tone of Congressional town hall meetings in the summer of 2009, then Occupy can do the same thing this winter, and next spring, and next summer, etc.
Mr. Best:
What “news” are you consuming? Did you just decide to pick up every ultra-right-wing negative stereotype of the homeless and apply it to the “Occupy” protestors instead, rather than make the slightest bit of effort to acknowledge that there are intelligent people in this world who have the temerity to disagree – on issues, rather than merely hygiene – with whatever sound-bites you’ve chosen to consume?
Its over and hasn’t changed a thing. I find it interesting that comfortable folks like Nick are so willing to let the Occupy folks do the dirty work. Give them money and talk to them? Really, that’s all you got? Its like the Chickenhawk position.
Right on Nick! It is exciting, in light of those who say people have no power, to see what can happen when people recognize they can make a difference.
I am not so sure that I put the same faith in the OWS movement as Mr Voges.
Cannot seems to follow the path of those who (from news reports) are abusing drugs, committing crime, raping, carrying lice and infected with TB, amongst other things.
Funny, I just do not remember those afflictions associated with the TEA Party protests, but then most of the TEA Partiers had gainful employment and access to a shower.
One of the problems of the OWS is the us versus them mentality.
(It’s always ‘their’ fault, and never ‘our’ fault’).
If OWS has come to the conclusion ”that something is wrong with our country”, then we can welcome their education.
But what exactly is wrong and what to do about it?
And why were there no protests in 2007? The things that are wrong were just as wrong then.
It is the recession and an imitative reaction to far more legitimate global protests.
The fact of an aging society lies at the center of our debt crisis – is that what we’re protesting?
The fact that policy makers have over promised benefits beyond our ability to pay is certainly bad policy,
but we ( the 100%) have gone along with it ‘as long as we get ours’.
Obama and the super majority Democrats took power in 2008. Then voters threw out the same
super majority and elected Republicans in 2010. This kind of thrashing I thought was due to
the majority over reach. But look at Europe. In the most troubled nations, (Spain, Ireland, Portugal,
Greece, Italy ) there is similar thrashing – to and from left and right wing candidates. There, people
are also upset, and there too, they want some one to maintain their denial but the bond market
keeps intervening.
Europe is a cautionary tale. They have higher tax rates, and yet cannot pay for the
promises they made. Why do we think it should be any different here?