Glenn Greenwald: What are those Occupy Wall Street people so angry about?

[Better Believe It]

What are those OWS people so angry about?
October 17, 2011

One of the most revealing aspects of the rapidly growing OccupyWallStreet protest movement has been the bewilderment and befuddlement expressed by so many media stars as to what the “message” is of these protests and what these protesters are so angry about. Perhaps this juxtaposition can clarify things, from The New York Times today:



And from McClatchy today:



.... one point that I think becomes clear is that growing wealth and income inequality, by itself, would not spark massive protests if there were a perception that the top 1% (more accurately thought of as the top .1%) had acquired their gains honestly and legitimately. Americans in particular have been inculcated for decades with the belief that even substantial outcome inequality is acceptable (even desirable) provided that it is the by-product of fairly applied rules. What makes this inequality so infuriating (aside from the human suffering it is generating) is precisely that it is illegitimate: it is caused and bolstered by decisively unfair application of laws and rules, by undemocratic control of the political process by the nation’s oligarchs, and by a full-scale shield of immunity that allows them — and only them — to engage in the most egregious corruption and even criminality without any consequence (other than a further entrenching of their prerogatives and ill-gotten gains).

Anyone who expressed difficulty seeing or understanding what motivates these protests revealed many things about themselves. None is flattering. The only thing that’s surprising is that these protests didn’t happen sooner and that they’re not more widespread and intense. I think it’s become increasingly clear that that is likely to change, and soon. Like the Arab Spring, the rapid growth of these protests should be a permanent antidote against defeatism. It’s unclear what these protests will accomplish — that still depends on how many people join them and what they cause it to be — but, already, they prove that the possibility always exists for subverting even the most seemingly invulnerable power factions. That hasn’t happened yet, but the possibility that these protests are only in their incipient stages is one of the more exciting and positive political developments in some time. It’s been clear for quite awhile that unrest and disruptions — and the fear which they alone can put in the hearts and minds of those responsible for widespread ills — are absolute prerequisites for meaningful reform (our fundamentally corrupted electoral process certainly can’t and won’t accomplish that). These protests at least reflect the possibility, the template, for that to happen. And anyone expressing confusion about why these protests are erupting is almost certainly someone invested in keeping things exactly the way they are.

Read the full article at:

http://www.salon.com/2011/10/17/what_are_those_ows_people_so_angry_about/

[SpiralHawk]

1. The Villagers (R) have not got a clue

They are too busy kicking back in their leather barcaloungers, putting their Gucci loafers up, and guzzling down the Fox Crapaganda (R) of the day.

I heard Rush bloviating about OWS today. He is either Completely OUT OF IT (back on drugs?), or Working Overtime to Make Up Shit (R-Lies).

[Better Believe It]

2. And they call this a "democratic" government of the people.

[pnorman]

4. I'm using that image and thanks!

[gateley]

3. K&R! nt

[Kaleko]

5. Brilliantly worded as usual.

Glenn Greenwald has a laser-sharp grasp of what matters most.

[Better Believe It]

7. Yup. He's usually right on target.

[Laelth]

6. Excellent read. k&r n/t

-Laelth