OWS 'movement' de-evolving

I take issue with the idea that the Occupy Wall Street Movement is growing, or "evolving," or demonstrating any sort of progress toward becoming a force of any kind. In fact, headlines across the country today demonstrate a movement that is in the process of imploding as the consequences of a "leaderless" group become obvious.

The problem with not designating "leaders" or failing to create some kind of hierarchical structure that the group respects is that the natural proclivities of human beings assert themselves and instead of rationality and order, chaos ensues with predictable results.

A sample of some headlines:

Fox 5 News Reporter Assaulted at OWS

Occupy Madison loses permit because protestors were publicly masturbating

The Night Occupy Los Angles Tore itself in Two

Flier at Occupy Phoenix asks "When should you shoot a cop?"

There is little doubt that there are a few dozen or hundred citizens in many metro areas who are willing to take part in these protests. When they call for a march, organized labor gets organized and few thousand of their members join the protestors.

But where is the evidence that this movement has penetrated beyond the extraordinary narrow confines of far left radicals, a few befuddled youngsters, and gimlet eyed cadres of labor union members? The saturation coverage of these protests does not match the level of demonstrated support by the mass of American people who may agree that they hate Wall Street, but blanch at the thought of being too closely associated with a movement featuring revolutionary extremists, stoned out dilletantes, and angry anarchists.

The people don't want phoney baloney media events like marching on banks or drum circles. They want solutions. So far, the best the OWS crowd can do is spout several versions of the same tune; Eat the Rich. That's not a solution; it's posturing. It's playing the poseur to vindicate one's own self worth with the belief that they possess some kind of moral authority for opposing "the rich" that the rest of us lack.

Nonsense. And until those crowds start to swell into the tens of thousands, they will convince no one but themselves -- and a less than skeptical media -- that they represent anybody but a tiny minority of the public at large.


I take issue with the idea that the Occupy Wall Street Movement is growing, or "evolving," or demonstrating any sort of progress toward becoming a force of any kind. In fact, headlines across the country today demonstrate a movement that is in the process of imploding as the consequences of a "leaderless" group become obvious.

The problem with not designating "leaders" or failing to create some kind of hierarchical structure that the group respects is that the natural proclivities of human beings assert themselves and instead of rationality and order, chaos ensues with predictable results.

A sample of some headlines:

Fox 5 News Reporter Assaulted at OWS

Occupy Madison loses permit because protestors were publicly masturbating

The Night Occupy Los Angles Tore itself in Two

Flier at Occupy Phoenix asks "When should you shoot a cop?"

There is little doubt that there are a few dozen or hundred citizens in many metro areas who are willing to take part in these protests. When they call for a march, organized labor gets organized and few thousand of their members join the protestors.

But where is the evidence that this movement has penetrated beyond the extraordinary narrow confines of far left radicals, a few befuddled youngsters, and gimlet eyed cadres of labor union members? The saturation coverage of these protests does not match the level of demonstrated support by the mass of American people who may agree that they hate Wall Street, but blanch at the thought of being too closely associated with a movement featuring revolutionary extremists, stoned out dilletantes, and angry anarchists.

The people don't want phoney baloney media events like marching on banks or drum circles. They want solutions. So far, the best the OWS crowd can do is spout several versions of the same tune; Eat the Rich. That's not a solution; it's posturing. It's playing the poseur to vindicate one's own self worth with the belief that they possess some kind of moral authority for opposing "the rich" that the rest of us lack.

Nonsense. And until those crowds start to swell into the tens of thousands, they will convince no one but themselves -- and a less than skeptical media -- that they represent anybody but a tiny minority of the public at large.


RECENT VIDEOS