Why “Occupy Wall Street” is both a success and failure.
I am reminded about the Monty Python movie, “The Life of Brian,” when I recently viewed footage from the Occupy Wall Street crowd. The scene that I am referencing is after Brian and his girlfriend have “relations.” Once Brian opens the window, a crowd of followers is below it. After a long debate, Brian states, “You are all individuals. You have your own thoughts. You do not need to follow anyone.” After each sentence, the followers repeat him.
Now, 32 years after that scene is played, the Occupy Wall Street (OWS) group reenacts it. It is funny, but not for either the business people or the common citizen. While the majority of the US population is extremely upset about the economic collapse, Occupy Wall Street will eventually alienate the very group they are trying to focus on. Why? Well, lets look at the success and eventual failure.
OWS’ Success
OWS has great success because they are using the law to benefit them. The right to organize is a core fundamental written in the US Constitution. OWS obtained their permits to allow their protest.
OWS is also successful in bringing attention to, what many believe, are the perpetrators of the economic downturn. Their ability to generate focus on this one aspect of our economy is great. They make their case visually, not verbally.
Finally, OWS will succeed in many aspects of our modern world. Using tactics found in the “Arab Spring” movement, OWS’ people, in general, are maintaining a peaceful demonstration. This is ensuring the movement’s voice is seen and heard.
OWS’ Eventual Failure
Before anyone writes abusive comments (which I will delete) or accuse me of being things I am not, history has shown, no matter what the subject is, movements such as OWS have a greater than 90% chance of failing.
Why will OWS fail? It will begin alienating the very people they are looking to recruit. With more regulations, which OWS wishes, comes increasing expenses for the business. Many publicly traded companies are trying to decrease their expenses to not only gain additional profits, but to have a great portion of those profits saved in case an economic collapse occurs. Again, I stated many, not all.
When a company begins to see a rise in expenses, it will try to eliminate its liabilities before removing the employees. When the employees are the only thing left, then layoffs occur. The major layoffs start with small businesses (including franchises), then you have the news of large corporations removing their employee base.
History also plays a part in this failure. We remember from our world history classes that, after the French Revolution, there was a period known as the “Reign of Terror.” Now, I am not equating OWS as a new form of the Reign, but, what the Reign eventually did was target mainstream people, the same people OWS relies on for their power base.
Finally, many companies are beginning to learn a vital lesson from the Great Recession. Slow growth and reduced employee need are becoming popular for businesses trying to navigate the new economy. Why hire when our current employees are handling the same, or reduced workload? The economy will return to the high times, but, with a reduced need for employees. All a business will need to state is, “OWS allowed us to understand the need to do more with less. Our company does not need the number employees we had in the past. Thank you, Occupy Wall Street.”
Even worse, and associated with this final thought, are the politicians. One politician wanted to speak in support of the group. However, “there was no consensus among the group in regards to allowing Congressman John Lewis to speak.” Wait, Mr. Lewis tried to speak at Occupy Atlanta, not OWS. Why make a statement above?
The simple answer is because Occupy Atlanta attributes its start from OWS. Daily, we here the politician on the TV, radio or newsprint speaking in support for the movement, but never do you see them among the masses. Eventually, OWS and all the other Occupy groups will turn on the politicians themselves, citing inactivity of Congress (both Democrat and Republican) and the President. Once this turn happens, the politicians will condemn the movements.
Conclusion
I congratulate the members of the Occupy Wall Street movement. Not for their demands, but for exercising their right to assemble.
When it comes to the economy, as I stated before, politicians and the masses, do not understand the many threads that make up economics. One action can change everything. As we have seen in 2008, and the aftermath, an isolated incident has the potential to destroy economies. Also, the people that Occupy Wall Street vote in the elections. The issue they have is that they do not wish to be run over by policies that favor the wealthiest one percent. But when you vote for a person who’s war chest is in the millions, both personal and contributions, how are you going to stop the policies?
- Demetria Irwin: Occupying Wall Street 140 Characters at a Time (huffingtonpost.com)
- Occupy Wall Street-The New Left? 10/10/11 (michaelarenadouglas.wordpress.com)
- Paul Brandeis Raushenbush: What Does Wall Street Really Want? (huffingtonpost.com)
- Krugman Refuses To Speak At Occupy Wall Street (huffingtonpost.com)
- Occupy Wall Street organizer hiring people to carry out “direct action” (gunnyg.wordpress.com)
The Average Joe Economic Show by Brandon Holm (Host) is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.
Based on a work at averagejoeecon.info.
