'Occupy' Protesters March on New York Stock Exchange
Article by: Perry Chiaranonte
Response by: Eric Gorski
I have supported the 'Occupy' movement from the beginning. The economic gap between the wealthiest 1% and the middle class has never been higher, and these protests are crucial in bringing about the social and political change that is required to remedy these disparates. This article, from the right-leaning FoxNews, portrays the protesters in a negative light and focuses on any problems caused by the movement rather than the attention it has already brought to the injustices in our economic system. For example the author, Perry Chiaranonte, describes the people protesting in New York's financial district as a "horde" who only want to "disrupt the major parts of the city. This author also talks about Shaun Bowlin, an innocent pedestrian who got swept away with the "horde of people" and was arrested, even though he claims to never even have been involved in the movement.
7 comments:
If you know me at all, you know how I feel about Fox. However, I do agree that these Occupy protests are nothing more than a publicity stunt. I support the notion that people should speak out against the corruption of the bureaucracy, of course, but these people barely know what they're protesting against. In this vein, completely agree Esther's comparison the the whole Ms. Moore-Isaiah situation. Even though Isaiah had every right to speak out against the system, he didn't know his facts. He admitted this in the end and apologized to the administration.
There is so much more at play on Wall Street than simple money-laundering. We can't just set up camp for two months and hope for the best; we must educate ourselves and then take action.
I protested a couple of weeks ago with my Dad. It was really intense by it being packed and you could tell there was a lot of anger in the air. The banks were guarded heavily by police forces with barricades set up all around the perimeter. They were also protecting the "robber barons" as my Dad puts it. I also though there were going to be fights because a bunch of the bystanders trying to cross the street by times square. They were getting extremely aggravated and pushy. You wouldn't believe how rude people get when they are trying to get somewhere.
Whether or not the occupiers started out seeking publicity seems kind of moot at this point. The domino chain of other protests across the country is sending a very strong message to the financial and governmental sectors no matter what. Speaking from experience people are not there to be on the news--the sincerity is practically overwhelming. We all have had experience as attention seeking little kids so I think we can all agree the signs of attention-stunts are unmistakable. Smiles creep around your lips when you try to be serious. There are furtive looks to ensure you are being watched. And being heard means a lot more than being taken to heart. None of these signs were obvious at the site on wall street so I am going to have to completely side with Eric and the protesters against Fox.
Also your preposition that we "educate" ourselves seems kind of contradictory to the entire movement. The whole point is that we are coming to together regardless of differences such as education and the beauty of the thing is that because it is so physical anyone can feel welcome. Yes I always support direct well-reasoned action and I think at least some people need to be super-well-informed in order to communicate with the government effectively but it doesn't mean we should also exclude those who are not "educated" but have a gut feeling or experience that tells them something isn't right.
Esther, I totally agree with your thoughts on the universality of the movement. In terms of education, I didn't mean to pretend to be above the protesters; I think it's great that people are banding together for a common cause. But I feel that's also how most people see it - it's a great cause and only that. I hope I'm proved incorrect, though.
Also, 'publicity stunt' was a little strong. I only meant that it was a populist movement aimed more towards raising awareness than implementing actual change. (Actually, I didn't even remember using that phrase until re-reading my post! In the words of Rick Perry, "Oops.")
Madelene said...
i actually believe that they do know why their protesting. many of these people are college graduates with no jobs but a big amount of money that needs to be paid for their college tuition and to me they are just fighting for America, those who have a good education with no jobs.
Of course they need publicity! Today was what it was because people were able to communicate and have even started developing networks, which has done so much good already. I was down there this evening, and as soon as North Dakota occupiers saw that the Zuccotti library had been completely destroyed in the raid (they had had 5000 books, now the NYPD are offering them about 20 boxed to reclaim), they began restocking it immediately. It had almost as much as Occupy New Haven did within about half an hour.
It seems like the movements with the biggest crowds have the most momentum, they're forced to, and this momentum is what's needed, because once all the cabbies and garbage men see them marching over the Brooklyn Bridge, they might consider joining or even going on strike. There's talk of the possibility of the police joining as well, but that's more optimistic, and if it happened, I've heard that there would be a chance of them instating martial law.
Awareness is being raised, and with greater crowds comes change, like with the delaying of the Stock Exchange bell today.
Post a Comment