I’m going to make this cut-‘n’-dry. The Occupy Wall Street movement failed for two reasons:
- Every participant in the movement was the spokesperson for the movement.
- There were protesting Wall Street.
A movement cannot have everyone be the voice of it . That causes the movement to become a disjointed jumble of messages and causes. By letting radical people have the same voice as the moderate majority of people, the message most of the people want to get across is deluded or changed. In the Occupy Movement’s case, many outsiders of the movement began to believe that the movement’s purpose was create a communist-like America because of the radicals making their voice loud and clear. Of course that turned the American public outside of the movement off because if there is one word we Americans are born and bred to hate the most in the world, it is communism. As we all know, the media played a significant part in making the Occupy movement seem like a communist revolution ran by hippies to the general American public.
Communism was not the message of the majority of people in Occupy Wall Street though. Most people in the Occupy Movement wanted their pain to be heard. They wanted the government to step up and regulate the control Wall Street had on their lives, not a communist society. Nonetheless, their voices were drowned out . . .
Although allowing radicals to have an equal voice as the moderate majority of the movement was a mistake, where the participants were protesting was an even bigger mistake. Occupy Wall Street? No, Wall Street is the wrong place to hold one’s pickets signs and march around at. I know that may come as a shock to some people, but let those people ask themselves these questions:
- Who has the power to regulate Wall Street?
- Who is allowing Wall Street to infiltrate our government?
- Who accepts the money of Wall Street?
If those people read those three questions, hopefully they came up with the answer of “Congress and the White House.” It is quite possible all of Wall Street’s power could be stripped away from them. Who could be the one to take away Wall Street’s power? The government. Not the average folk, but the government because that is who gives them the power they have now. If Obama, G. W. Bush, Clinton, and on back beginning with Reagan stopped giving positions of power to people who obviously have significant ties to Wall Street, doesn’t one think something would change? If congressional figures and members of the executive branch refused to take money from Wall Street, doesn’t one think something would change? If the government got the guts to stand up to Wall Street like the Occupy Movement tried to, doesn’t one think something would change? I would go as far to say that something definitely would change.
Wall Street is not nor will they ever stop trying to snake their way into the government. The government’s job is to turn a blind-eye. So why didn’t the Occupy protesters go after the American government? Why didn’t they march all over Washington, D.C.? Why didn’t they set up tents outside the gates of the White House or across the street from the White House? The government is the one who gives Wall Street their power, not Wall Street. Wall Street isn’t even involved with all of America’s financial problems, but the government is.
I wish that the Occupy Wall Street movement would have been more organized and more focused on the government, not Wall Street. The movement may still be active now if they had tried those methods. I also may not be looking at a future where I have to pay an average of $22, 092 a year (which I cannot afford except through student loans and scholarships) to go to a decent American college.