The Occupy! Trifecta

Three stories today about the OWS movement that I found interesting...

First, apparently someone in the OWS movement is reading this blog. Both Nikto and I agree that the time to stand around a park is over. It seems they are transitioning away from this and into a legitimate social movement. Good deal!

Sadly, though, this article illustrates my chief criticism of the movement.

Despite the strategizing under way in the Occupy Wall Street office space, no one in the movement can say where it will be in six months.

As for a clear set of goals, Goldberg said, “It would be wonderful if the media stopped looking for demands because I think you will be unsatisfied."

He added, "Many of us in the movement don’t want a list of demands because that is empowering someone else to create a change for us.”

Goldberg said he and the others are creating change from the bottom up in their leaderless movement.

“It’s the core of who we are, which is a decentralized, people-driven process," Carey added.

Funny, that sounds almost (gasp!) libertarian, right?

To me, though, they still lack a focus and thankfully, I'm not the only one.

Asking Occupy protesters what, exactly, they would do to reform government and the financial system is a loaded question and a source of internal conflict. Collinge, 41, of Tacoma, Wash., said he has unsuccessfully lobbied Occupy's general assembly meetings in New York to develop a strong platform.

"They should come up with a short-term list of no-brainer agenda items," said Collinge, wearing a huge sign in the rain at New York's Zuccotti Park calling for student loan reforms.

Collinge has his list ready. Return bankruptcy protection to student loans. Bring back banking reform regulations that were removed from the Depression-era Glass-Steagall Act. End corporate personhood.

Absofuckinglutely. The Occupy movement has entered the zeitgeist of the world now and is not going away. For the first time, the political left is driving the conversation and the right is being forced to respond (more on that in a moment). They've successfully been able to create a populist movement around concepts such as the "99 percent" and the "1 percent." People from all areas of life are responding to this positively because...well...they are the 99 percent!

But the ambiguity sans action won't be enough to bring about any real change. This is where I agree with Collinge and it's not surprising really considering he is in my age cohort. There needs to be a focus around the three issues he lists above and each needs to be followed up with action. I'm not sure how this is going to happen considering the OWS folks trust the government about as much as the Tea Party does.

For a group that has "lost the narrative," they sure are making the right nervous. Why all the fuss if that is indeed the case? Here are a few of my favorites from Luntz.

1. Don't say 'capitalism.' "I'm trying to get that word removed and we're replacing it with either 'economic freedom' or 'free market,' " Luntz said. "The public . . . still prefers capitalism to socialism, but they think capitalism is immoral.And if we're seen as defenders of quote, Wall Street, end quote, we've got a problem."

Yeah, you do. Because the American public knows who caused our economic problems. Of course, capitalism isn't immoral...what has been done to it, however, IS.

6. Don't ever say you're willing to 'compromise.' "If you talk about 'compromise,' they'll say you're selling out. Your side doesn't want you to 'compromise.' What you use in that to replace it with is 'cooperation.' It means the same thing. But cooperation means you stick to your principles but still get the job done. Compromise says that you're selling out those principles."

Like I needed a pollster to tell me that!

7. The three most important words you can say to an Occupier: 'I get it.'"First off, here are three words for you all: 'I get it.' . . . 'I get that you're angry. I get that you've seen inequality. I get that you want to fix the system." Then, he instructed, offer Republican solutions to the problem.

Let's see if any of them can actually do this because it involves being empathetic. I doubt it.

The simple fact that they are getting this involved in how they talk about this movement tells me that: a) the talk of the narrative being lost is ridiculously wrong and b) they're nervous.

Good.