A movement to “Occupy Wall Street” began about a month ago.  I visited the epicenter of the protest on two separate occasions within the first week to learn more about the individuals involved.  Initially thinking this activity would cease in the near future, I opted not to post an article I had written about the group.  They have, however, shown a decent amount of perseverance (or just an overwhelming amount of free time) and are still there.  Moreover, they’ve caused others throughout the world to rise up and let us know they are unhappy.  What exactly they’re unhappy with has yet to be determined, but they’re sure about their misery.

I give you my unedited draft: conversational at times, Cartman-esque at others.  Further commentary will come shortly, but it’s important – now – to understand that they haven’t a clue what they’re complaining about.

–

Any good protest relies on three factors: turnout, cohesion, and persistence.  Lack one of these and the protest may get noticed.  Lack two of these and the protest is doomed to fail.  I sought to evaluate the recent “occupation” of Wall Street on two separate occasions (Sunday 9/18 and Thursday 9/22) in order to determine its magnitude on these scales.  What I found was nothing impressive.

My first steps, Sunday, out of the World Trade Center PATH station saw weary hippies trudging towards whatever mode of public transportation could take them home.  The less carbon-conscious (or maybe just the ones bankrolled by Mommy and Daddy) chose taxis.  One day into the Occupy Wall St. protests, this mass exodus was not a positive sign.

As I made my way to Zucotti Park at the intersection of Broadway and Liberty, the small yet determined band of activists welcomed me with angry signs and frustrated chants.  It seemed they wanted to be heard: and I wanted to hear what they had to say.  Beyond the internet’s vague charges against “corporate greed” and “Wall Street irresponsibility”, I was anxious to probe the depths of these protesters’ ideologies.  Ready to dive into an ocean, I wound up standing in the kiddy pool.

The first protester I spoke with was a young lady by the name of Emmorrie.  A self-proclaimed musician and “liver-of-life”, Emmorrie joined the movement to express her disgust at Wall Street greed.  She expressed that Wall Street is “the symbol of Capitalism” and “because the banks have taken all the money, the middle class is now the lower class”.  Her proposed solution to the issue: “incorporate urban farming”.  Okay…

Emmorrie

I pressed for details and learned that her notion of urban farming involves replacing whole trading floors in skyscrapers with indoor greenhouses.  Instead of Bloomberg terminals: tomatoes.  In place of tickers: turnips.  Blueberries instead of Blackberries.

She then decided conventional sentence structure should follow her already departed logic into the abyss and opted for a few sound bites such as “The Obama Deception”, “Voting is deadweight”, and “Give back and give plenty”.  As for retribution against the bankers themselves, “Take down the banks, not the bankers”.  I’d like to think these were the beginnings of actual thoughts but, as experience has shown, these are most likely mere repetitions of what she’s heard from others in the protest.

The musing about sparing the bankers seems nice, but my initial characterization of Emmorrie as a peaceful and sensible advocate for change was soon proven false as she began a vitriolic rant against “incompetent southerners” complete with faux-accent.  It was in the middle of this tirade that a cardboard sign flew into the air near 1 Liberty Plaza prompting a call and response of “Who’s street?  Our street!  Occupy Wall Street!”  Seeing a natural break in conversation, I moved on to my next interviewees.

Emily Goodrich – an unemployed teacher – and Gary Rotter – a philosophy student from Brooklyn – sat listlessly atop a picnic table in the middle of Zucotti Park.  With the apathetic tone of your garden variety hipster, Gary explained to me how Wall Street “gambled ‘our’ money without us asking for it”.  To add insult to injury, “our” money was then used “against our will” to bail out the major financial firms who caused this financial crisis in the first place.  Again lacking any concrete discussion points past the initial charge, the two simply agreed or disagreed with a few of my suggestions for change.  Their favorite: increased redistributive taxation in order to achieve (their conception of) economic equality.  After one too many skeptical looks at the Ralph Lauren Polo pony on my shirt, I decided it would be best to move on.

I was immediately drawn to my third and final interviewee, Robert Segal.  Dressed in a suit, he seemed as Wall Street as they come.  His bright yellow tie, however, made it quite clear he was making a statement.

Robert briefed me on his personal history in the financial services industry – after a stint in the Navy, Robert ran computer systems at the NYMEX for a period of time.  On September 11, 2001 a meeting with a corporate headhunter was cut short by the commotion a few blocks away.  He found himself alongside first responders shoveling debris in an attempt to reach those trapped in the wreckage of the World Trade Center.

Robert

The experience left him with a renewed sense of patriotism and he looked to the department of homeland security for further employment.  He took the only job he could get “without a Middle-Eastern Studies degree”: an explosives checker at LaGuardia Airport.

Not only was his background significantly more impressive than the other protesters, but he also was the only one I found to have a concrete issue with Wall Street.  In his opinion, economic inequality in the United States must be addressed on the political side: through campaign finance reform.  As he put it, “When corporations donate money to political campaigns, it’s voting.  Corporations shouldn’t vote!”

Opinion specifics aside, this author respects the fact that Robert could articulate a clear stance on an issue as well as his dedication to the United States of America.  Unfortunately, clarity was a rarity among the rest of the protesters.  Countless individuals were unable to explain why exactly they were there and even fewer were able to give the slightest indication as to what changes they would like to see.

–

As I began my walk up Broadway on Thursday after work, I heard chants forming in the distance.  The angry mob, armed with “Eat the Rich!” signs, advanced towards my sea of suits.  New York City Police Officers acted as a moving barricade – herding and containing the protesters as they marched past the iconic bull.  About a block before I reached Zucotti Park, I ran into some work colleagues.  We began speaking and, as it would have it, my friend Emmorrie walked by.  A light punch on my arm was all she needed to express her mixture of surprise, disappointment, and (probable) disgust at my business attire and its implications.  I, after all, am the enemy.

If the peaceful ones didn’t want to talk to me, I decided it was in my best interest to avoid direct contact with the more easily excitable protesters while looking so formal.  I observed from a respectable distance.

Clearly there weren’t any meteorologists among the dissidents, as they picked a terrible couple of weeks to begin a protest – but the few that made it out (compared to their original goal) have shown a good deal of resilience.  Unfortunately for them, making a statement only works if there’s legitimacy to the statement itself.  While a few individuals actually have contributed to society and have something real to say, they are ultimately drowned out by the restless shouts of kids who protest by day – but retreat to sleep at Mommy’s and Daddy’s for the night.

Ultimately, this protest has done more harm than good.  A good deal of money has been necessary to keep Police on the scene containing the protesters.  Beyond that, while the owner of the local pizza shop probably isn’t complaining, all those cardboard pizza boxes are generating a good deal of waste.  Some of those will be turned into protest signs, but the disposable plastic water bottles serve no purpose beyond their intended use.  For a group as seemingly concerned with sustainability as this one is, they certainly aren’t acting very green.   Furthermore, the Wall Street Bull is fenced off – ruining countless tourists’ dreams of taking a picture with the statue.

You can't cage him forever...

Most important, however, is the negative effect these protests have on political discourse.  Many people have astute and well thought-out opinions, but will be silenced by the noise of this crowd.  Reckless protesting causes a “cry-wolf” syndrome in the public forum.  By irresponsibly marching and carelessly chanting, the very nature of dissidence loses credibility.

It doesn’t matter what your opinion is, just that you have the right to express it.  This comes with a caveat, though, that you be sure to have an opinion before aimlessly expressing.  Without the underlying ethos necessary for a successful protest, the aims of this “occupation” have not been met and have only served to discredit the very act of protest itself.

...right.

 Print This Post