Development of OccupyWallSt's Termonology and Slogans?

[palotin]

I'm still working out my ultimate opinion of the Occupy protests. They seem a huge mix of ideologies which must inevitably conflict at some point. In essence, I want to use this as an opportunity to theorize populism a bit more than I have done. It is the wide spread contempt for Wall St and our political classes that produced the underlying anger in such diverse groups of people.

But the rhetoric of the organizers themselves has played a role in keeping the political space open to as many people as possible, more open than perhaps I am comfortable with. It will come as no shock to the people here that not only is there not an advanced class analysis in sloganeering like 'The 99% vs the 1%'), but this rhetoric in a very real way precludes a more realistic understanding of how wealth and power relate and reinforce each other in our society. I'd like to know more about where these slogans came from, before forming too many judgments. Did the initial Adbusters call out propose them? I'm also interested in when terms like "the People's Mic" started.

[Binh]

I've written about this topic based on my involvement with OWS:
http://www.indypendent.org/2011/10/0...and-videotape/

Here's a vid discussing it as well:
http://louisproyect.wordpress.com/20...reet/#comments

This protest came out of the New Yorkers Against Budget Cuts organizing during the spring/summer where they tried to organize a permanent occupation called "Bloombergville." It never went anywhere and the draconian cuts were passed. OWS was a response to that defeat, a second try. Bloombergville was a dress rehearsal.

[Dunk]

I agree that these income based class slogans obscure reality and hinder the development of a stronger threat emerging from what is obviously a working class movement, but it's certainly a hell of an improvement over the diversion and channeling of anger and energy into legislative processes or talk of "saving the middle class".

Let's help the struggle build, and with it, consciousness. It's my opinion that in these times of the developing intensity of struggle, it's our responsibility as class conscious revolutionaries to fight alongside our fellow workers - where the real movement of our class currently is - but also importantly to speak the truth and listen to them concerning capitalism.

EDIT: I was really excited for OccupyWallStreet to begin, but in it's initial days I was very skeptical about what kind of form it would take; could it easily be co-opted or dissipate into nothing, etc. I now feel proud of the people there, and ashamed that I'm not there to help. The economy is global, our class is global, and the response of our class may not be tightly coordinated but it certainly is global as well - the occupations of these spaces and the emergence of these ultra democratic assemblies are a road map to the future.

EDIT2: I think it's also important to clarify that while I think the movement is global, taking the next step outside of Zuccotti Park and literally taking over Wall Street is the difference between activism and revolt. They have the potential and the momentum. But there needs to be more.

OK, I'll stop editing now, Jesus what's wrong with me.

[ScarletStandard]

I'm also somewhat skeptical about how this movement will develop, since it seems to rely on being ideologically moderate, and thus avoids cutting to the core of the issues. The recent list of grievances is pretty straightforward, but we'll see how the list of demands shapes up.

At the same time, I'm determined to join in the struggle and do as much as I can to bring a more trenchant critique of capitalism into the dialogue. New York is a long way away, but there's a movement here in Albuquerque which I've been collaborating on. A few Ron Paul folks and a conservative or two with Tea Party inclinations have been coming around, but they're actually outweighed by left radicals. As expected, the majority are either liberals or have no clear political ideas - only a frustration with their concrete circumstances.

Will the contradictions in the movement become problematic in the future? If the movement continues to grow, then yes. It seems to me that the highest success will be as an awakening, even a Freudian Bahnung, which will open up a space for broad-based challenging of the status quo in the near future. To withdraw our own efforts and insights as revolutionaries would be a big mistake. I highly doubt this will be the big push that finally topples global capitalism, but if we can't disseminate ideas and make our presence and solidarity with working people known, we don't deserve to see our ideas transformed into concrete results later on.

[Le Socialiste]

You can put me in the skeptic camp as well. While it is good that people are finally airing their grievances against the "1%", the attempt to keep the movement moderate alienates it from certain ideas and tactics that may radicalize it and provide effective alternatives. Politically it's very diverse, but the frustration remains. While the focus appears to be largely on Wall Street, I'll continue holding out in the hopes said focus will extend to the broader issues inherent in the capitalist system. The potential is there, it's just a matter of voicing it. There's a growing crisis of confidence simmering underneath the surface of these protests, it's just a matter of exposing the financial-political elite and moving the demonstrations on beyond simple reforms.

[nguyenmuabien]

I also have time to break out only. people will gain as you only