The Occupy Movement is getting ready to fire itself back up for what some are calling — maybe tongue in cheek, maybe not — a "spring offensive." The plan is to reassemble tomorrow, and the timing is transparent: It's May Day, the day when the workers of the world traditionally unite. Although the political right doesn't call them "workers" — it calls them "communists."
It doesn't seem to me that the basis for what the movement is protesting has changed all that much since the winter. So I'm reposting from back then what I wrote about Occupy L.A., which took over the lawns around City Hall for weeks, gained a fair amount of local support, protested relatively peacefully compared with Occupy efforts in other cities, and was then evicted by the authorities with some arrests. What are these folks still mad about? Read on...
Following in the footsteps of the Occupy Wall Street protest movement, a group called "Occupy LA" set up shop in front of City Hall over the weekend and have now begun to move around town.
Back in New York, things had turned ugly, as the two-week protest saw a bunch of protestors arrested as they marched across the Brooklyn Bridge. From what I can tell, Occupy LA was rather more mellow. I asked a KPCC colleague who had visited the protest what the protesters were, you know, protesting. He wasn't sure, but he did say that "We are the 99%" signs were all over the place.
The LA Times explains:
The movement takes issue with corporate influence on government and the shift of wealth and political clout toward the richest 1% of the population. Many protesters carried signs with variations on the slogan "We are the 99%."
So what does this actually mean?
The economist Joseph Stiglitz provided a summary back in May, in an article for Vanity Fair:
The upper 1 percent of Americans are now taking in nearly a quarter of the nation’s income every year. In terms of wealth rather than income, the top 1 percent control 40 percent. Their lot in life has improved considerably. Twenty-five years ago, the corresponding figures were 12 percent and 33 percent. One response might be to celebrate the ingenuity and drive that brought good fortune to these people, and to contend that a rising tide lifts all boats. That response would be misguided.
The Occupy Wall Street protestors and, presumably, the Occupy LA crowd are definitely not inclined to "celebrate the ingenuity and drive" of their foes. With Sitglitz, they're angry about how that ingenuity and drive has lost interest in the whole idea that a successful society is about more than success:
The more divided a society becomes in terms of wealth, the more reluctant the wealthy become to spend money on common needs. The rich don’t need to rely on government for parks or education or medical care or personal security—they can buy all these things for themselves. In the process, they become more distant from ordinary people, losing whatever empathy they may once have had.
Of course, it's worth noting that the 1% aren't exactly having a ball right now. They're reaping what they sowed, as global markets struggle to overcome the volatility that a series of crises, beginning in the U.S. in 2008 and culminating with Europe's debt debacle now, has brought on.
But the 1% are also insulated. They can lose some, but not all. The reason the other 99%, at least on Wall Street and at LA City Hall, have taken to the streets is that they believe they really can lose everything. And some of the people they claim to speak for have: unemployment in stuck at 9 percent nationally and at more than 12 percent in LA; the foreclosure crisis grinds on; the number of people living in poverty in the U.S. is at its highest level since the Census Bureau started keeping track.
Initially, we could have looked at the Occupy Wall Street movement and seen it as an extension of the WTO protests in Seattle in 1999, or as an attempt to copy on a much smaller scale the protests of the Arab Spring.
But Occupy Wall Street is now replicating itself. Some of those who've joined in may just want something to do. But with their "We are the 99%" argument, they've got a strong case that something is wrong and needs to be fixed.