Occupied on Wall Street

There's a lot of talk out there about "Occupying Wall Street", and talk of it being a revolution of sorts. That's what gets me worried, because revolutions, historically, are a fairly bloody phenomenon. Two revolutions that come to mind were both bloody, one American, one French. But there is a major difference between these two. The former produced a Constitution. The latter produced no less than twelve Constitutions. The difference has to do with the revolters. Why were they revolting?

In the American, though they differed as to why, the revolters all had one goal, which was the overthrow of the English, and this is important... for the sake of governing themselves better. In the French, everyone had a different motive and a different goal. The poor wanted bread, the nobles more influence, the growing middle class trades and craftsman wanted more economic independence. They all united to destroy the king and his infrastructure, because he was the problem for supposedly achieving all of these goals. The former revolt was an organized group under wise leadership, the latter simply a mob. So they "occupied Versailles". Yet they ended up with an emperor instead. 

Revolutions swing the pendulum. Always. And when the pendulum swings back, it swings hard. Sometimes. The French Revolution swung back hard, and everyone should take note that they have had emperor, bloodbath, terror and over a dozen Constitutions, where the American has had just one.

The Wall Street protesters need to be very, very clear about what they set out to do, even while everyone has his or her own reasons for why one should do just that thing. These people need united goals. If they don't their revolution will be a French one, and not an American one.

Here is the crux of the matter: The protest started without a clearly defined goal. The protest, while trying to define a goal (because it knows it cannot succeed without one) is struggling with the fact that determining a goal becomes increasingly difficult as more people arrive, each with a different vision of what the protest should be. Cornel West, a civil rights activist, in an interview at the protest recently pointed out the arrival of many people, with many, many different views of what was taking place, and what ought to take place. But he gave no clear indication, as a leader it would seem, of where the protest should go.

Now the "Occupy Wall Street" effort still hasnt voted on the details it is striving for yet. Not only is the cause being hammered out after the fact of its organization, but knew proposals continue to arrive. You can read the main efforts being proposed for vote here. Don't vote without reading EVERYTHING! It is misleading, but those items one can vote on are placed before those informative aspects like these being demands rather than proposals, that they can be made from anywhere in the world without US citizenship, etc.

That's right, these are not proposals, but demands. In the name of civil disobedience, these protesters write the following:

"We should make the demands below very publicly [sic] at a press conference a few days after arriving in DC. When doing so, we should give a clear deadline of 3 days for a firm written commitment with signatures from at least 60% of members of House and 60% of the members of the Senate to pass these bills by the end of the year. If this commitment on the full slate of demands is not met by midnight on the 3rd day (which it won't be) we should be prepared to non-violently block access to all or part of the Capitol complex the next morning by traditional proven non-violent tactics. The purpose is to bring the leaders of the House and Senate to the negotiating table."

Let's take one of these demands as our example:

"2. USE CONGRESSIONAL AUTHORITY AND OVERSIGHT TO ENSURE APPROPRIATE FEDERAL AGENCIES FULLY INVESTIGATE AND PROSECUTE THE WALL STREET CRIMINALS who clearly broke the law and helped cause the 2008 financial crisis in the following notable cases: (insert list of the most clear cut criminal actions). There is a pretty broad consensus that there is a clear group of people who got away with millions / billions illegally and haven't been brought to justice. Boy would this be long overdue and cathartic for millions of Americans. It would also be a shot across the bow for the financial industry. If you watch the solidly researched and awared winning documentary film "Inside Job" that was narrated by Matt Damon (pretty brave Matt!) and do other research, it wouldn't take long to develop the list."

Here it is assumed from the outset that someone is guilty! At the time I looked, 95% (hence it being #2) had voted to include this in the official demands. There is "consensus" that a clear group of people are guilty of swindling money. The list of who is guilty will be determined by the documentary film "Inside Job" and "other research". Now, once you have this list, are you bringing these people to trial for accusations of fraud? No, the list is already comprised as of their guilt. This is more of the French Revolution and "off with their heads". It reminds me very much of President Obama's recent killing of a U.S. citizen without trial because of his being labeled a terrorist. Guilt by accusation is what Obama did, and what the Occupy Wall Street protesters are seeking.

How can anyone claiming that there are crooks on Wall Street also claim out of the same mouth, and in the name of democracy, that someone is guilty? And based on "pretty broad consensus"? No, no, no. I want innocent until proven guilty. Bring accusations against someone. File a suite. Make a case against an individual or group of individuals. But do not demand to shut down the Capitol unless a list of crooks is made! Based on a documentary! The fact is, this revolt is not to overthrow a government in order to do that very important thing I mentioned at the outset... i.e. "to govern oneself better". Guilty until proven innocent is not a better principle than the one in existence. It is a revolt to meet certain demands, who knows what they are just yet, at all cost. This is not the American sort of revolution.

What is more worrisome is that these lynch mob demands to the American congress are not being made alone by the American people. This isn't local democracy. This isn't grassroots. Everyone in the world is able to vote to determine what will be demanded of congress. I know because I just did it right here from Sweden, without being asked my status as a US citizen. Incidentally, I voted NO on the guilty-until-proven-innocent demand (#2 above) to be sent to congress. It is a demand by the world potentially for the US congress, beholden to the people of the US alone, to enact certain laws. This is a theft of the sovereignty of the American people, in fact. And if that demand, made by the world, isn't met, these protesters are going to attempt to shut down government after 3 days. Let me put it differently, the world voting to make an impossible demand or they shut down the US Capital.

Now don't get me wrong. I am all for protest, and the fight for change, civil disobedience, etc, but I want to, as they say, turn the page not burn the page. This mob has no goal as of yet. And the goals it has are both a motley of mixed emotion of having been wronged, are undemocratic, and are an effort in some cases to tear down infrastructure. They are also not being determined alone by the people who are sovereign over their representatives, but by everyone. Just so we are all clear, if you revolt against the system with too many Indians and not enough chiefs, that is to say, without clearly defined goals, you are likely to end up removing a king, only to find yourself in the hands of an emperor. And if you revolt against the system in ignorance, you won't even realize you're worse off in the new system. 

The advent of social networks like Google+, Twitter, and Facebook in combination with social media like Youtube, Flickr and cellphone cameras, have put everyone in touch. This new and revolutionary technology is, however, a double edged sword. Public opinion is not always right! And the tyranny of public opinion is at hand. We all know this is true. Read your new testament. Mobs tend to sing Hosannas for the guy who rides in on mule of peace one day, but shout "crucify him!" only days later. It's a sad story, and it is about to repeat itself.

Taken as a whole, this little protest is more dangerous than anyone is really yet ready to admit. It's going to get big, and then it's going to get unwieldy. It is looking more and more like a French Revolution than an American one every day. In reference to the Arab Srping, Cornel West likened the occupation to a "US Autumn". My concern is a winter of our disillusionment will be the result.