Wednesday, October 5, 2011

The Wall Street occupation: Some players with some hidden agendas?

Conventional wisdom would tell you that the main players behind the occupation of Wall Street are socialists and anarchists with varied agendas that they hope will result in an Obama reelection to the White House!

Comparing themselves to the Arab Spring protesters in the Middle East, these demonstrators are using the argument of too much wealth concentrated in the hands of too few as the stated rationale for this "peaceful" uprising that has resulted in hundreds of arrests.

Is there another agenda in the minds of the organizers, and is this a precursor to widespread civil unrest in the United States?

And is widespread civil unrest the organizers actual agenda after all, just as it was at times in the prior century for groups like the Weather Underground and one of its leader (and associate of President Obama) William Ayers?

Curiously some the labor unions, led by AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka and typically beneficiaries of capitalism, are now also joining in the protests that seem ready to spread across the country.

Know your targets!

Note some of the language used in the Young Workers Summit agenda below that speaks to knowing ones targets. This language, if used by the Republicans, would be vilified in the press but that is not the case here!

Though unlike past Tea Party rallies that have had the mainstream media cast the protestors in the light of the right-wing lunatic fringe, the press has been much kinder in its coverage of the Wall Street occupation.

So is capitalism that rewards innovation, sweat equity and hard work the enemy of the people? Are 1% of the population really enjoying all of the wealth and prosperity?

Once again could there be some ulterior motive to these protests that in the end would not be beneficial to the country or its citizens, that in reality would be beneficial to a small group of people by furthering their agenda?

Da comrade?

Who are some the players in this call for an end to capitalism as we know it?

Occupy Wall Street: "The participation of every person, and every organization, that has an interest in returning the US back into the hands of it's individual citizens is required.

Our nation, our species and our world are in crisis. The US has an important role to play in the solution, but we can no longer afford to let corporate greed and corrupt politics set the policies if our nation.

We, the people of the United States of America, considering the crisis at hand, now reassert our sovereign control of our land.

Solidarity Forever!" (Source)


We are the 99 percent: "We are the 99 percent. We are getting kicked out of our homes. We are forced to choose between groceries and rent. We are denied quality medical care. We are suffering from environmental pollution. We are working long hours for little pay and no rights, if we're working at all. We are getting nothing while the other 1 percent is getting everything. We are the 99 percent." (Source)

AFL-CIO Young Workers: "Why are they so powerful? Since the rich keep getting richer, it’s our responsibility to understand the powerful networks of CEOs, corporations, elected officials and the webs of relationships connecting them to one another. The foundation of any successful organizing or advocacy campaign is a clear understanding of the power relationships of the target and the ability of the campaigners to affect those relationships. This workshop will focus on providing young workers a framework to map out the power relationships of corporations, elected officials or any other type of potential target. Knowing their power gives us power and starts to even the playing field. The workshop also will provide participants with the skills to develop an internal assessment of their organizations to determine their capacity to effectively engage their targets and maximize their power." (Source)

NYC General Assembly: "The main goals and values of this college is to teach how important establishing the values of any group is, and that a society or environment of non-dominance and non-hierarchy is the one in which its members thrive. Anarchy literally means without a ruler, so an individual who oppresses any other individual by limiting their autonomy including if it is a member of the establishment’s protection service, (i.e. police) who is not directly involved in oppression, would not be an anarchist since they would be dominating the other without warrant. Unprovoked oppression not for defense of ones own autonomy is not anarchy." (Source)

Da comrade?

Before you go, look below! Connect with Michael on social media and subscribe to TPC!







Follow Michael on Twitter

Friend Michael on Facebook

Connect with Michael on LinkedIn

Subscribe to TPC right here!

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner


Subscribe in a reader

2 comments :

  1. It is entirely possible, Michael, that these folks have nothing but a standard Leftist agenda. And it is certainly true they are being treated with kid gloves in the media compared to tea party groups.

    But they do have one great advantage here: If their overall message is that the people that run Wall St. are in league with corrupt and venal politicians, and their interests do not mesh at all with those of the average American, they are right. Where they frequently get it wrong is the notion that what Goldman Sachs and their allies in government are up to has anything to do with free markets. These people *hate* free markets.

    So if I were a political consultant type I would advise real conservative candidates to tread lightly, here. At the broad-strokes level these protests are merely the populist photographic negative of the tea parties: Same image, really, just from the Left. What this country is waiting for is a real Populist leader that can synthesize the two. Because the American public is indeed sick of the status quo.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Treading lightly is good advice although I don't think that these are your basic Leftists. Some may be but I think that some of those in leadership roles have a much more radical and revolutionary agenda.

    Thanks for the comments.

    Mike

    ReplyDelete

;