In doing research, I found some interesting facts. Somewhere near the end of my research, I came across Matt Taibbi, writing in Rolling Stone, who says:
beware of provocateurs on both sides of the aisle. This movement is going to attract many Breitbarts, of both the left and right variety. They're going to try to identify fake leaders, draw phony battle lines, and then herd everybody back into the same left-right cage matches of old. Whenever that happens, we just have to remember not to fall for the trap. When someone says this or that person speaks for OWS, don't believe it. This thing is bigger than one or two or a few people, and it isn't part of the same old story.He wrote this after Breitbart's Big Government site published a bunch of stolen emails that Breitbart thought implicated some democrat politicians and public figures for aligning themselves or even helping Occupy Wall Street movement, as if any association constitutes foul play.
The importance of Taibbi's story is not about the stolen emails, it is about who is capitalizing on Occupy Wall Street instead of assisting it or who is pretending to assist it. We already know critics of the OWS will capitalize on it to get their talking points out and trash their opponents. Such behavior has become part of the status quo of political posturing and pseudo debates. But what about those allegedly favoring the movement in order to gain from it? Two groups come to mind. First are the framers, those putting a frame around the movement by defining it in their own self-interest. This group leaves a lot out, actually, it leaves out anything that doesn't fit their perception of the movement. The second group uses the word "understand"a lot. I understand or you don't understand.
I will be adding to this list over time.
NEWS SERVICES
1. Time magazine puts a frame around its list of the Top Ten American Protests Movements. It decides not only which of America's Protest Movements should be in the Top Ten, but more important also what information about the protests should be included and what should be excluded. How would you write about these movements?
The Small Business and Entrepreneurship Council blog frames the Occupy Wall Street protests through its lens. It understands the frustrations of the people in the street. It blames the governments for all the frustration. It claims government calls the shots. Exonerating Wall Street players from responsibility in the current economic mess, this Council claims the government failed to understand what the Council understands about Occupy Wall Street, especially what the Council understands about how to frame the faltering economy that led to Occupy Wall Street. Blame bailouts of Fannie and Freddie, the Council cries out. The Council exonerates Wall Street by claiming its innocence and immunity from having to understand how to fix a country's economy since it is not elected into office to act from such understanding or decision making about the economy. The Council admits Wall Street played a part in the faltering economy but only because government dragged Wall Street into the mess. In the Never Enough Land of Wall Street, the government lacked an understanding of how to bailout Wall Street with enough, I guess. Okay, maybe that part isn't in the article. The Council is not alone in this kind of thinking. Many headlines outside the Occupy Wall Street zone are pointing fingers at political deaf and dumbers with no understanding of the real cause behind the meaning of what brought about Occupy Wall Street.
Here's one reporter from CNNiReport who says he's an insider and wants a leader and he knows who it is.
POLITICIANS
Who are the politicians who say they understand the movement but do little or nothing to directly support it? The list changes daily. All this understanding sounds like a political therapy group. It reminds me of Bill Clinton when he said, "I feel your pain." On the other hand, given the chance, how many politicians want to do the ethical thing?
The Democrats
Key figures among the democrats offer their understanding.
UPDATED: OCT 18. They understand so well, this group has decided to put together its own rally (on creating jobs) in an attempt to siphon off the firefighters, police and teachers from the Occupy Wall Street movement. Okay, maybe siphon is a harsh word. Maybe borrow or maybe just invite. Maybe all along some of the top democrats have been waiting for the people to finally give them a reason to raise hell. It's hard to know. The danger? Fragmenting a movement already underway. The call: Hey, everyone, over here! Well maybe that's okay. It's just one day. An interesting paradox, however. Isn't a rally by any administration an oxymoron act? I don't know. Maybe I'm wrong. Paranoid. Cynical. But to whom are the democrats protesting? Isn't the tradition of rallying of the people against those in power? We have to see where this goes? It could turn out really well.
Have the democrats consulted with the teachers, fire fighters and police--the ones they are calling to action--over what belongs in the jobs bill? Maybe the teachers, police and fire fighters should make sure their needs are being met exactly as they want them met before grabbing that rally sign. What does the jobs bill say about unions currently under Code Dismantle? Why does this administration insist on defining itself as the underdog and oppressed? Is this some kind of code in itself, asking anyone listening for help against some shadow administration that really makes the decisions in Washington? It seems unlikely, but you never know.
Politicians say they understand. But how much of this understanding is self-serving as the Taibbi warns. He seems to share a common cynicism. We're seen the people's power co-opted so often it doesn't take much to turn someone or something into a suspect.
But wait, what might transpire if politicians who say they understand take the bold step and join the Wall Street protests?
And what about all that money on Wall Street? If there's plenty of money to go around but is stuck to 1% of the nation's fingers, wouldn't it benefit the nation for everyone to grab whatever it takes to unstick it once and for all and now? And not just loosen the crumbs under a Trickle Down economic plan that has never worked. How fastened to these few fingers can this wealth be? Certainly, if we can travel to the end of the galaxy, if we can make near fountain of youth discoveries with stems cells, if we can set off particles in accelerators, we can unstick money from a few crooked fingers, especially if it means better survival for humanity and the planet.
How can today's understanding politicians help? For starters, how about sending a lot of money to help Occupy Wall Street get elected people into office who are not dependent on Wall Street's cash? How about supporting the unions? How about refusing money from Wall Street.
The Republicans
The mantra is pervasive. It's like looking up the meaning of a word in a dictionary. They get to blame the democrats for the faltering economy. They get to blame the democrats for the frustration and anger partly fueling the Occupy Wall Street dissent. They get to remind the folks in the streets it's their own fault. Here's a typical opportunistic Cain moment: Herman Cain says if you're not rich, blame yourself. My brother has cerebral palsy and can neither walk nor talk or even use his hands effectively. He is definitely to blame for his medical condition that leads him, no matter how hard he tries to understand the stock market or find someone to hire him, to have to rely on social security to survive. My neighbor lost her house because she lost her job. She should have long ago given up food and banked that money for her rainy day. Her fault.
BUSINESSES, CORPORATIONS, CEOs
1. Warren Buffet and his son Howard, who have not donated any money or supplies to Occupy Wall Street, prefer to donate understanding and benevolent best wishes instead, which not only helps them appear sympathetic but also neutralizes their massive wealth into a no touch safety zone. These well wishers promote themselves as the good hoarders of the cash siphoned off from the 99%.
Giving these good hoarders the benefit of the doubt, let's ask them to practice their angelic compassion. How about donating at least ten million dollars to the Occupy Wall Street Movement no strings attached. This money could be used to help feed people, pay their rent while protesting and replenish medical supplies. Or how about if the good hoarders give up up 10% of their wealth to pay off the students loans of all those workers who work for them. Money left over? Pay the tuition of workers in your vast companies. Shorten the work and raise the pay, both show an appreciation of those who fill the bank accounts of the owners.
2. We all heard Ben and Jerry ice cream wants to be in the Good-Hoarder Column. This company went a step further than the Buffets and actually passed out the sweets at Occupy Wall Street to sweeten up their own image along with the protesters. To really sweeten things up, this company could look at how it treats its employees. Do they have strong benefits and retirement? Are they all earning a living wage? Are any losing their homes? How about profit sharing? Why not lead the Good Company Column by making sure employees are really sharing in the wealth they make for Ben and Jerry's bank accounts. Or rather than pass ice-cream around--all that sugar!--help pay off student loans.
3. Finally, some businesses will always find a innovative way to make money off any situation. These are most certainly the front runners in innovation. The best example so far is the Android iphone, which is advertising its phone by suggesting protesters use it after an arrest.
No comments:
Post a Comment