Two things that can kill the “Occupy” movement

Nothing lasts forever, and protest movements against the power structure are particularly hard to sustain. Movements of any substance are incredibly difficult to even begin, at least at a level that will have any important impact. If such a movement does gather the critical mass and solidarity to make actual ripples in the mainstream media, then challenges are quickly mounted, both by the power structure and of course the media itself. The opposition to “Occupy Wall Street” is emerging in full force.

The “Occupy” movement is huge, and right now it’s only getting bigger. But it’s unclear to me whether it could really lead to systemic change, or whether it might only be “the thing that leads to the thing” that brings change. Even that latter possibility is a glass half full. Such a movement, in threatening the ensconced positions of the class that controls the wealth, the government and the media, requires immense inertia as well as long-term endurance. All too often, legitimate unrest is attenuated by lip-service and false engagement, or astroturfing, then quietly bled from the public consciousness via the normal pathways of distraction. Isn’t there a World Series coming up? Shouldn’t Dancing with the Stars be approaching yet another thrilling climax soon?

Well, watch out, because their opulence has been threatened, and the financiers and their congressional lackeys need to find their Death Star. Their weapon of choice when fighting against the people is the people themselves, and this case will be no exception. For a long time, mainstream news sites avoided highly-visible coverage of the movement. Even today, unbelievably, I encounter people who haven’t heard about it. When they did start devoting a bit more time to it, it was mostly just to wonder if the people involved had any specific “demands” or “plans” of their own, thus questioning the legitimacy of the protests. The unspoken implications were: #1 the movement was capricious and immature, and #2 if it were to be taken seriously in its desire to upend the current system, it should probably have its own fully-fleshed-out plan in place, maybe in the form of a 1500-page Senate Bill or something. When coverage lit upon specific individuals involved, preference was given to those who had misguided or extreme quotes, or were very unconventional in appearance. Official sources, when quoted, usually said something about how they “understood the concerns” of the protesters, but didn’t think they were organized or informed enough to go about affecting change through the proper channels. So casual perusal of the news might lead to the impression that “Occupy” was small, “fringe-y,” not well-organized, and not being taken very seriously. When that seemed to be ineffective, they turned to pitting elements of the population against one another, more actively trying to portray the protesters as people who were unlucky and bitter about it, and simply wanted to alleviate their own misfortunes by misappropriating the fortunes of others. Oh, and in addition to just being unlucky, they might also be lazy and use drugs. Some of them might not even be unlucky, but only joined in because said drugs were free at protests (WTF??) and there was probably sex, too.

“Most people view it as a ragtag group looking for sex, drugs and rock ’n’ roll,” said one top hedge fund manager. (NYT)

Erick Erickson, soft, pasty white guy and officious suckler on the hemorrhoids of the rich and powerful, has taken on astroturfing duties with his disgusting and disingenuous blog, exploiting the fears of the intellectually retarded. Throughout history, the wealthy have always set the poor against the poor and the poor against the middle-class, because…well, because it keeps them (the wealthy) mostly out of the conversation. I won’t spend time elaborating on this, because I couldn’t possibly do it any better than Doug Muder does in his post Suck it Up: Using Our Pride Against Us. You really ought to read that piece. In fact, if you aren’t currently reading all of Doug’s posts, then any time you spend reading mine could be put to better use. For me, here’s the quote that best sums it up:

We can all decide not to identify with the people who work more and more for less and less, but we can’t decide not to resemble them.

Don’t let those in power divide and separate our hope for a decent future. If you really believe that “Occupy” protesters are just lazy, dirty hippies looking for drugs and sex, you are truly drinking the Kool-Aid. And I am not talking about the run-of-the-mill kill-your-friends-and-family Guyana Grape served in a small styrofoam cup, either. This is the new and improved hardcore Planetary Rape juice, brewed by IMF half-orcs in Rupert Murdoch’s bathtub, personally pissed in by Herman Cain, and shot down your gullet through a massive Halliburton-engineered Fear-Bong.

I really hope you’ll read Doug’s piece, and also the one which preceded it and is the best summation of what “Occupy Wall Street” is all about: Turn the Shame Around. But in case you don’t here’s one more great quote from it, which provides the “human nature” reason that makes it easier for the elite to pit us against one another:

The closer you are to the abyss, the stronger the temptation to deny that you bear any resemblance to the people who have already fallen in.

Muder also links to the incredibly awesome Open Letter to that 53% Guy. Great collection of thoughts from a guy named Max Udargo. I guess between the Udargo letter and Doug’s site, I’m sort of wondering why I should even be writing about this, because those are so much better. But I suppose there are those few who might be swayed by my tendency toward colorful metaphor. Whatever it takes!

OK, so that’s one ominous force which threatens the “occupy” movement. The other is something I’ve only recently become aware of: media fatigue. When something this big happens, everybody has to have an opinion, and a lot of you are probably sick and fucking tired of hearing and reading about it. Of course I’ve seen media fatigue a lot during the past decade or so in which I’ve actually been paying attention. But only recently, while listening to a radio interview with a shrimp boat captain whose livelihood was wrecked by the BP oil spill, and who has yet to receive any of the promised restitution, have I grasped that such fatigue plays a natural supporting role keeping the minds of the people from where they should be. I was like “Oh, yeah, the oil spill….” And then it hit me. Haiti. The Japan tsunami. The Indian Ocean tsunami. Oil Spill. Etc. Not only do these stories serve to distract everyone from other really important things that are happening under their noses, they also serve to make people refractory to any new information on the topic, because they are saturated. Election coverage, too, I suppose. The media lifespan of a story is less of a media-directed thing than an overload thing for media consumers. We can handle a certain amount of stuff on one topic. Doesn’t matter whether it’s true, false, new interesting, rehashed, whatever. We get to a point, and we’re done. The only time an old story is trotted out again is if there’s a propaganda purpose. Think 9/11. I think it’s a good possibility that “Occupy” overload might be the thing that kills the movement, in auto-immune fashion. I hope not. If everyone turned off their goddamned TVs for a while, we might have a chance, you know?

Tagged as: class warfare, occupy, wall street