Letter to the editor
Occupy strikes misunderstood
In recent weeks, sparks have flown within the USC community around the Occupy movement. As the temperature rises, it becomes vital to discuss the controversial issues that have surfaced. To ensure the productivity of this discussion, however, we must first address a few misconceptions regarding the movement.
Foremost, as delineated on the Occupy Wall Street website, the purpose of the movement is to fight “back against the corrosive power of major banks and multinational corporations over the democratic process…” and “to expose how the richest 1 percent of people are writing the rules of an unfair global economy.”
Though it would be easy to simply blame the federal government, the Occupy movement takes a more complex look at a system made up of both private enterprise lobbyists and Washington policy makers.
Members of the Occupy movement speak against this multifaceted system that allows the wealthiest to become wealthier, while their taxes sink and national public interests drown in the wake of personal incentives.
Additionally, the movement has renounced party affiliation, and it has seen opposition on both liberal and conservative stages. Much more could be said about Occupy’s fundamentals, but for the sake of brevity, those who wish to comment on the movement are encouraged to read through the website before making statements to praise or critique it.
It is important to keep in mind that every great movement in history has been ridden with factions and controversy. That said, movements are not defined by their most radical components; they are defined by their larger uniting messages.
The Civil Rights movement in the ’50s and ’60s included some individuals with extreme, regressive perspectives.
Today, we do not remember these movements as “racist” or “misandrist.” We remember them as having fought for racial and gender equality, and applaud their brave efforts.
The same perspective must be applied when discussing Occupy, as it stems from a hugely diverse group of people from every echelon of society, including the aforementioned 1 percent.
We acknowledge and condemn any anti-Semitic statements, including the few made among the crowds. The Wall Street protests as a whole are not anti-Semitic, and the bigotry of a few individuals does not define a movement.
Occupy continues to represent the modern fight for equal opportunity and better representation by government.
Finally, we must address the issue of political discourse in our community. Language is powerful and when speech is weighted more with slander than substance, it stifles effective dialogue. Voters are continually dissatisfied with the partisan bickering in our political system.
Furthermore, little is achieved, whether in Congress or on campus, through shame-oriented dialogue. As such, perhaps we should all remind ourselves of the importance of solidarity. Consider the example of the Trojan Family.
As one of the most diverse universities in the nation, our thriving, supportive and ever-expanding network is a cornerstone of our success. This extends to our wonderfully diverse set of political ideologies.
In the spirit of the Trojan Family, we must remember that every person who takes a stand for their views is doing so with the common incentive to improve themselves and their community. Let’s take care with our language and remain diligent in creating healthy forums for political dialogue.
In so doing, the USC community at large will no doubt contribute to the greater efforts to shape the American political system as a less hostile, more thoughtful and more productive democracy.
Keep calm and fight on!
Ximena Velázquez-Arenas
President, USC College Democrats
Tim, ARN, and whoever else is not getting the point (see: word MISUNDERSTOOD in subtitle):
One of the ideas behind Occupy is that there is no equality of opportunity, banks and the 1% rig the game so they will succeed no matter what. Also by getting rid of Glass-Steagall, the bankers were able to gamble with other people’s money without them realizing it and then they bet against their original bets…they made it so they could not lose. The whole point is equity not equality but there is not equity in the current system.
America is all about equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. Get out there and start hustling if you want to improve your economic situation.
The trust-fund kids have spoken! Hahaha! These students are too conservative and need to pull their heads out of their rear ends! Change is coming and it’s inevitable….just hope that others have pity on you when you’re obsolete thoughts are nothing more than the mumblings of those out of touch with reality!
Right on Ximena!
Consider this dose of reality as well, Miss Velazquez-Arenas: http://dlombard.livejournal.com/529413.html
ITT: Proof that the Democrats own OWS. The OWS vision is the vision the Democrats have for America. If this was the writer’s personal opinion, it should not have been signed as the President of the USC chapter of College Democrats.
Miss Velázquez-Arenas, the hypocrisy displayed by you and other democrats is incredible. While the Tea party was largely defined by your ilk by their isolated incidents of racism, the OWS is ” not defined by their most radical components; they are defined by their larger uniting messages.” How convenient. There have been murders, rapes, and defecating on police cars and in the parks, yet of course OWS is not to blame. The Tea Party on the other hand, how dare they protest higher taxes and big government in an organized and well behaved manner.
I would like to point out that America IS a land of equal opportunity but nowhere is it guaranteed that there should be wealth distribution, the key focus of OWS. I came to the US with $100. Today I am financially independent. There is nothing in this adopted land of mine that stops people from achieving their dreams. Ah except of course we have to work hard for it. Likewise all the folks we admire, Steve Jobs, Larry Page, Larry Ellison, Sergey Brin all started with very little. Today they are the 1%. Do I begrudge them that? NO. I admire them. The OWS folks seem to want things handed to them. Thankfully and not surprisingly there is now very little support among the American public for them.
My dear in your defense of the OWS movement, methinks thou protest too much.
Perhaps your admiration of these figures shouldn’t be so blind-sided. Yes some of their accomplishments are great. Our system today makes it difficult/ nearly impossible for small businesses to grow to that extent. The qualms are not quite for wealth distribution as much as they are for an even playing field (and if you look at it carefully it’s not). The movement is about equal opportunity not equal outcome. Just because you were lucky enough to make it in America with just $100 doesn’t mean that it should be our standard. We’re better than that. We’re looking to restore the American Dream because if you look at our day to day lives something’s gone drastically wrong. I refuse to cop-out of a real debate and say it’s the peoples’ faults that they’re in this predicament.
Oh, please. This is the most condescending drivel I’ve read all week.
Criticism of the OWS movement is not rooted in a “misunderstanding” of what it represents. Everyone is well aware that their chief complaint is about wealth distribution. What makes the OWS protesters so roundly criticized and/or ridiculed centers on critical problems with the movement itself:
1) A widespread ignorance among the protesters of even the most rudimentary understanding of how America’s economic system actually works. When I see OWS protesters holding signs demanding things like “a guaranteed income for everyone regardless of employment”, “outlaw credit”, “eliminate all debts”, and “abolish money”, I just shake my head and wonder how these people could be so woefully lacking in not just education but common sense. Monetary exchange, lending, and investment are the foundation of human civilization. Without them we would still be subsistence farmers dying of dysentery before we turned 40.
2) A complete lack of any coherent and actionable policy goals. “Corporations are greedy” is not a solution, it’s a tantrum. These people need to propose actual solutions that are specific and realistic.
3) A refusal to denounce the violent, criminal. and antisemetic elements that are deeply-rooted within it. The internet is rife with YouTube videos of protesters screaming epithets such as “down with Jew bankers” with no rebuttal from their colleagues. Additionally, many anarchist groups have used the OWS movement as a platform to commit violence against police and business owners, and the OWS “mainstream activists” have not only failed to speak out against them, they have actively endorsed them. For example: a motion by Occupy Berkeley to denounce the looting and vandalism committed by members of the anarchist Black Bloc was roundly defeated by the camp’s General Assembly. Instead, their GA passed (by overwhelming majority) a competing resolution to “respect a diversity of tactics” – this amounts to an explicit endorsement of unacceptable criminal behavior.
The problem with OWS is not that that people are misinterpreting their message, because OWS doesn’t have any coherent message for anyone to understand in the first place.
To Anon: Stop sensationalizing Occupy Wall St.! You’re doing a disservice to anyone who would like to have an actual intellectual debate regarding the merits of the movement. I’d like to respond to the points you raise in your comment:
Firstly, I think it’s safe to say your claims that the protestors are ignorant are largely unfounded. If you have taken any time to go out to our own local Occupy LA you would find that the movement is very organized and is promoting a thought out message. Anecdotal evidence aside, you don’t have any right to sensationalize this movement and downplay it’s core cause. While there may be some vocal minority that may try and promote some anti-semitic agenda (as you claim; I’ve yet to see this myself at any Occupy rally I’ve attended, and I’ve seen about 3 different cities’ rallies) you’re clearly missing the point of the movement. This use of anti semitism for political gain is not only wrong and selfish but highly immoral.
While I can’t speak for Occupy Cal I think it’s safe to say that there may be a lot of disperse interests taking note of this movement and use it as a platform. A well-read, informed person should be able to discern the differences between the rhetorics of the group. You shouldn’t be discrediting the Occupy movement on the basis that it has attracted some anti-semites. While it is wrong, this has absolutely nothing to do with what the Occupy Wallst. Movement is about. The movement is about our economy. It is focused around “evening the playing field” that is so heavily skewed to favor the wealthy in our country today (look no farther than the access to education over the last two decades).
Next, don’t cop out of a debate by claiming Occupy Wall St. Hasn’t suggested any policy goals. They have set forth their agenda and have made their ideology clear. According to recent census data, 100 million Americans (1 in 3) is either under, at, or near the poverty line. Our economy is struggling and OWS is calling for accountability in dealing with the loopholes and financial interests that got us into this mess. Have you noticed how difficult it is to get a loan today? Perhaps you haven’t had to deal directly with this mess but as a result of the shortcomings of our financial system it has become incredibly difficult today to procure a loan to buy a home or start a business. If you are unfamiliar with some of these problems or some of the proposed policy agendas of Occupy Wall St. I would read this article for starters: http://goo.gl/VbKCR
Finally don’t sell yourself short. It’s a protest. You’re not going to find their specific policies or plans of action on their signs (the regulations probably won’t fit ;) ) I’m glad you’ve gained some financial expertise because I still come across accounts from PhD economists that don’t show a consensus on how our monetary systems and markets work. Imagine if we took all the Tea Parties signs seriously.
These movements deserve a fair chance to be heard. We shouldn’t begin by sensationalizing them to discredit their points and concerns. It’s just as wrong for the left to do this to the tea party as it is for you to try to do to Occupy Wall St. Try and judge the movement from what it is proposing.
-Concerned student reader.
I wish someone would read “The Ant and the Grasshopper” to these overgrown children. Perhaps if they spent some time working or doing something productive, they wouldn’t have the need to walk around in circles wondering why life is so unfair to them.