Occupy Wall Street – Page 3

But early morning (Occupy Boston, part 2)

Posted on October 20, 2011October 19, 2011 by kathiemm

[Note from Kathie Malley-Morrison: This is Part 2 of our guest post from John Hess of UMass/Boston, reporting on Occupy Boston.]

Occupy Boston signs of freedom and the movement — Photo by Twp. Used under Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 unported license.

When you hear chants like “How do you solve the deficit? End the wars and tax the rich!” and “They got bailed out, we got sold out,” you are in the company of people with a very good understanding of the current situation–neatly summed up in the chant “We are the 99%!”

Where all this will lead, we don’t yet know. But there seems to be a growing wave of discontent that first showed itself in Wisconsin. I read that demonstrations of support for Occupy Wall Street have occurred in over 100 cities and that mini-occupations like Occupy Boston are spreading, even to Europe.

What drives this movement is clear to me: it’s common sense based on the obvious fact that most of us are not being treated fairly by this economy, this social system. We work when we can get a job, but are not properly rewarded.

Reports show that real incomes for most Americans have dropped significantly since the recession officially ended. Education (coupled with hard work) has been the traditional path to a better life for most Americans, yet educational costs are now staggering.

My university, UMass Boston, has seen state funding drop from some 77% of the budget in 1985 to around 26% this year. The shortfall has been made up by heavily increased student fees, which are now over $9,000 of the approximately $12,000 it costs in-state students to attend our commuter school. Why? In large part because we will not tax the rich or the corporations. (I have been told that the head of GE pays less income tax than his personal assistant. Even if he doesn’t, I’ll bet he doesn’t pay much.)

There is much cause for optimism. A generation, no, a nation, seems finally to be waking up, even though it is but early morning and we are still rubbing the sleep from our eyes. Maybe another slap of cold water will bring us fully awake to seize the new day that is dawning.

John Hess, Senior Lecturer in English and American Studies, University of Massachusetts, Boston

Marching with Occupy Boston

Posted on October 17, 2011October 16, 2011 by kathiemm

[Note from Kathie Malley-Morrison: This week we feature two posts from our regular guest contributor, John Hess of UMass/Boston, reporting on Occupy Boston.]

I have just returned from the demonstration to support Occupy Boston (10-10-11) and can happily report that it was a successful march of probably two or more thousand people.

Aside from flashes of déjà vu, a number of things struck me about the march. It was sizable, though there is certainly room for growth, growth that will almost certainly come.

There was a festive but serious atmosphere about the march. Simply being there with so many others who shared the same outlook was exhilarating. Though there was a fair amount of grey hair and grey beards in the crowd, and a fair amount of union representation, the large majority were students, or of that age.

These kids were not naïve thrill seekers or copycats. The ones I spoke with were sharp, aware, and committed, and above all enthusiastic. As we used to say, good vibes were everywhere.

For me, the march was a stunning and unmistakable refutation of some of the myths that have surrounded the Occupy Wall Street wave starting to sweep the country. One myth is that the students are naïvely copying protests of the ‘60s. The second is that what the protesters want is amorphous, airy, or uncertain. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

Although there is no agreed upon platform of practical demands yet, this is in part because many of the protesters seem fully aware that both political parties are in the arms of Wall Street (as Mark Twain famously said in the Gilded Age, “We have the best government money can buy”), and that an appeal to Congress for reform is probably not the way to go at this moment. Nevertheless, there is a clear sense of agreement in political outlook, and this is best reflected in the chants and slogans of the march today.

John Hess, Senior Lecturer in English and American Studies, University of Massachusetts, Boston

Time to protest?

Posted on October 13, 2011October 11, 2011 by kathiemm

In 1965, the Vietnam Day Committee, an anti-war group in Berkeley, California, called for an International Day of Protest from October 15-16 to express revulsion against the Vietnam War.

Protest demonstrations around the country gradually evolved into a powerful anti-war movement that included servicemen rebelling against involvement in a war that they increasingly saw as immoral and unjust.

In 2011, we see an expanding series of protests against the powerful international banking and financial interests that are increasingly recognized as being at the roots of war, injustice, inequality, and the destruction of the planet. For a dramatic overview of the protests ignited by the economic crisis that has resulted in the largest profits ever accruing to the biggest financial institutions in one year, watch the video above.

In the US, there have been growing protests against the Iraq and Afghanistan wars (see, for example), growing protests against Wall Street, and a coming together of the anti-war, anti-Wall Street/pro-peace, pro-democracy groups (see, for example).

These protests are not being conducted by violent fringe groups; they are students, teachers, social workers, nurses, doctors, artists, musicians, community organizers, environmental groups, lay people, professionals—providing a broad representation of the 99% who are not benefiting from the wars and from the control of the government by banking and business institutions.

Their agenda is non-violent. Violence has come from the police and others in authority who are ready to quell protest, however legitimate the concerns of the protestors. The way to keep violence out of protests is not to prevent protests but to bar the police from using violence.

The First Amendment to our Constitution prohibits, among other things, interfering with the right of citizens to assemble peacefully and to petition the government for redress of grievances. If Americans value their democracy, and respect their Constitution, it is important for them to support those rights, and to insure that members of the police/military establishment do not infringe on those rights.

Kathie Malley-Morrison, Professor of Psychology