I meant "stick it to the man" mockingly, not that one of them actually said it (on video, at least). Most of them are just spewing the same rhetoric we hear all the time, so it's hard for me to take it seriously (then again, I'm a bit of cynic when it comes to this sort of thing).
Ah, I see. I understood that the tone was mocking, but I thought you meant it a bit more meaningful (like you thought all of them are just stoner hippies who can't argue their way out of a wet paper sack when their views are actually confronted. At least that's the picture I get when I think of people trying to "Stick it to the man.").
An unorganized protest is too unfocused to have a serious effect. Even a focused protest tends to accomplish little, if anything meaningful. The people in power know what people say, they certainly aren't that stupid. The only thing that makes protests work is to show that people can be organized against something, and that makes them dangerous. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing, because in the end, the threat of force is the only thing keeping them in line (except the very rare politician that actually cares for the people and was unaware of what the people wanted). Everything else is just a warning that we will resort to force if they don't shape up, and means nothing if we are not willing to follow through with it. This can be used for good or bad.
That being said, protests have been bastardized and now just seem loud and obnoxious, regardless of their message. Or is it just my cynicism again?
No, quite often protests are portrayed as being loud, obnoxious, inconvenient, misguided, etc., at least that I've seen, so I agree with you there. I believe that this social movement is a bit different though. The point isn't to be as absolutely organized as possible (thought organization is great), the point is to disallow anyone from
ignoring the protests. There's going to be such a ruckus, for so long, that SOMETHING will have to be done, and if nothing's done, then this movement will still impact the future leaders of America (and possibly those of other nations which also have Occupy protests starting up).
The Occupy protests have a strong internet-culture following, social media is exploding with information, the mainstream news is even reporting on it. Even if people don't really know about it, they've at least HEARD of it. The main message behind the Occupy movement is also a sentiment held by a lot of Americans. Important people, especially politicians, are going to be asked about the protests, and if they want to whore themselves out for votes (or seemingly whore themselves out for votes, sometimes they don't realize their target audience can see through veiled lies), they're going to have to acknowledge them and incorporate it somehow into their platform.
That is the danger of these protests for politicians, in my opinion.
Author
Topic: Occupying Wallstreet (Read 294754 times)