Some have compared the ongoing Wall Street demonstrations with the early rallies of the Tea Party. Beyond the obvious ideological differences lies the basic fact that the Tea Party assemblies continue to be orchestrated and instigated by various politicians, various groups, on a single-day basis, to promote candidates, and to improve grass-roots support for factions in the Republican Party that are notoriously pro-corporation. Trusting voters are assured they are assembling to demand less spending and more patriotism from the government.
The same organizers whom they trust and trusted are now campaigning for more battleships, more aggressive missile systems with first strike capabilities, and a greater store of defensive missiles. All of these things are costly, provide huge profits to huge corporations, and there is no explanation as to how they are to be financed. One might make a comparison to the development, in the 1950s, of a complex system of anti-missile missiles that time has shown would have been of little or no value had an enemy attack ensued.
The Occupy Wall Street movement, for a while called the “U.S. Days of Rage” is a true and spontaneous grass-roots movement, and most will agree it has not to this point been subject to coordination by any particular high power group or individual. It has no Rush Limbaugh, no Glenn Beck, no Sarah Palin.
Ironically the lack of sophisticated and directed mentoring is the largest potentially fatal flaw within the Occupy movement. For example, the Wall Street activists, many young and naïve, know they are “against” banks and banking, but in some cases they are at a loss when plied for specific explanation. If the student and anarchistic element of the Wall Street protests knew that the problem with the banks lies in technical issues such as non-regulation of mortgaging, and lack of accountability in the buying and selling of loans, they might well be bored to tears. It is true that the banks add fees and charges, as the Fed reduces the banks’ income possibilities, but a few fees is hardly cause for taking it “to the streets.”
Oddly the protestors are concerned about jobs being elusive and far between; but yet they haven’t at this writing gone to the Capitol to demand passage of the well structured presidential job bill, or conversely the immediate passage of something similar. In addition, to my knowledge, the obstructive policies of the Republican Party are not a main focal point of the new movement. Myself, I’d love to step forward and tell the well-meaning throngs to fight for free media, and for an ending to all pay-to-play special interest lobbies. They would surly oppose a congress of men and women so caught up in politics as to be losing popular support even among their own parties. I would encourage those demonstrating to demand an overturn of the Supreme Court “Citizen United” decision, allowing corporate money to flood the political marketplace. There too are other issues that should be addressed.
Some will be shocked to know that a small but growing percentage of the new protestors are taking up a banner of communism. Communism has many facets; free speech can be eliminated in order to protect the security of the state. Religion may or may not be tolerated; Marx called religious belief the “opiate of the masses” which “gives false hope to the working class.” Modern theoreticians, in a free country, in a world moving toward an absolute belief in a human right to freedom, and with high regard for the value of life, would find such dated views contemptible. Greater government control of banking, corporations, and manufacturing, may appear to be a “new socialism”; but such control hardly embarks on communism!
Still I applaud the concept of “one citizen, one vote!”, and the petition for an end to corporate greed. These young people and frustrated citizens need support and encouragement from bloggers, newscasters, well-informed teachers, and those who have the time to be aware of the state of the state.