The new counterculture (part two)

This is the second part of the Occupy Wall Street posts.  Here's the first one.


I like the idea of the Occupy movement but there is something missing in it.  For the longest time, I couldn't put my finger on it.  Then it dawned on me.  It wasn't some great epiphany or in the middle of the night and I shot up in bed with this great idea.  It just popped in my head when I was reading some articles on the movement.  They aren't doing as much as they should be.

It is great that there are so many voices in so many places finding a purpose.  Not only are they finding a purpose, but it is the same purpose.  A unified front speaking out against those they feel have let them down.  Or at the very least, looked down on them from their corner offices and downtown penthouses.  

The movement is great, but you can only say so much before needing to take action.  They must realize that marching in the street, camping night in and night out in a town square, and making funny yet poignant signs can only get you attention.  Going on political talk shows gets the attention that you need, but you need to take that next step and get your voice heard by those who really can make the change you want.  If you are there just to protest that's fine, but if you want actual change, you need to take your anger and your voice and present your case, whatever it might be, to the government.  They aren't going to sit up on capital hill and eventually change the way they do things just because there are protests all around the country.  They can wait it out.

Do I think this will actually happen?  I don't think so.  I know that the thought process behind the movement is that it is suppose to be a leaderless movement.  No one person is the voice of the Occupy movement.  They are a collective voice.  There are local leaders I guess you would call them, but there is not one or two big time leaders, but that is what they need.  They need just a handful of people to meet with lawmakers and get these changes made.  The only way just flat out protesting will get anything accomplished is if it is a violent protest.  With guns.  And that won't happen.  It worked in the Middle East, but that is an entirely different world compared to the one that the Occupy movement is dealing with.  The Middle East protests started violent and used violence to end oppressive and violent regimes.  You can't go from being a non-violent protest movement to taking up arms.  That would be disastrous.


In the end, the important thing to take away from the Occupy movement is that thousands of voices can find a common theme.  And what they say can change the country if they find the right people to lead them.