Occupy Wall Street Meets the Tea Parties
I have worked hard to understand the Occupy Wall Street movement. I'm not disposed against protest movements and, in fact, find them intriguing. And whatever their other messaging and ideological problems, I'm open to a discussion on corporations collusion with the troubling situation we're in. A correspondent recently mentioned Phillip Blond, the English political thinker, Anglican theologian and director of the think tank ResPublica. In 2009, he lambasted both inveighed state and market monopolies and how they isolated individuals:
Look at the society we have become: we are a bi-polar nation, a bureaucratic, centralised state that presides dysfunctionally over an increasingly fragmented, disempowered and isolated citizenry. The intermediary structures of a civilised life have been eliminated, and with them the Burkean ideal of a civic, religious, political or social middle, as the state and the market accrue power at the expense of ordinary people.
This destruction of Tocqueville's intermediary structures may be a liberal phenomenon, but it hurts folks on the left just as much as it hurts everyone else.
What do you think? Are we seeing the other side of the Tea Party coin -- angst about inability to have any control over or say in any institution?
This Reason video about the Occupy Los Angeles movement discusses some of the overlap between Tea Party and Occupy movements:
- Comment (19)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (1)
Comments :
Jun '10
Re: Occupy Wall Street Meets the Tea Parties
To me, it seems silly to make bankers the focus of what claims to be a political protest. Bankers operate in the environment that the government gives them. And if they're breaking the law, prosecute them. But they're not political figures. If a Republican was in the White House, would they be protesting on Wall Street? I don't think so.
Jun '10
Re: Occupy Wall Street Meets the Tea Parties
Any overlap between the two groups is strictly tangential. The comparison between the two sides is actually a study in contrasts. We could make a long list. I'll start with a two of the most obvious.
1. The two main pillars of the Tea party are fiscal sobriety and limited government whereas the OWS is all over the map.
2. The Tea Party is populated by America's middle-class. The OWS represents every left-wing, fringe group imaginable most of whose members are non-working.
Conservatives should not make common cause with this mob. Let the Democrats embrace them to their obvious peril. It will be their loss in the end when these protests erupt into violence. The contrast between the pristine aftermath of a Tea Party event vs. the trash left by the OWS crowd will be obvious to anyone with eyes to see.
Dec '10
Re: Occupy Wall Street Meets the Tea Parties
There is angst on both sides. The right is frustrated that Obama is implementing his agenda and it is ruining the nation. The left is frustrated that Obama is implementing his agenda and it is not ushering in Utopia.
Dec '10
Re: Occupy Wall Street Meets the Tea Parties
OWS is a cheap, vulgar, communist-backed counterfeit. Demonic, if you want to get all Ann Coulter about it. Have you seen the Columbia grad student trust fund freak? It's more like matter and anti-matter than two sides of a coin.
That's not to say they shouldn't go on and on and on...
Re: Occupy Wall Street Meets the Tea Parties
~Paules: Any overlap between the two groups is strictly tangential. The comparison between the two sides is actually a study in contrasts. We could make a long list. I'll start with a two of the most obvious.
1. The two main pillars of the Tea party are fiscal sobriety and limited government whereas the OWS is all over the map.
2. The Tea Party is populated by America's middle-class. The OWS represents every left-wing, fringe group imaginable most of whose members are non-working.
Conservatives should not make common cause with this mob. Let the Democrats embrace them to their obvious peril. It will be their loss in the end when these protests erupt into violence. The contrast between the pristine aftermath of a Tea Party event vs. the trash left by the OWS crowd will be obvious to anyone with eyes to see. · Oct 17 at 7:31am
I'm less interested in making common cause (and certainly not in the mood to embrace them) than in planning a more effective response to this widespread malaise.
Jun '10
Re: Occupy Wall Street Meets the Tea Parties
An over lap cannot be tangential by definition. I think, ~Paules, you mean coincidental. And if the groups are truly "a study in contrasts" any similarities would be more a matter of chance than coincidence.
Edited on Oct 17, 2011 at 7:56amRe: Occupy Wall Street Meets the Tea Parties
From Competitive Enterprise Institute:
Aug '10
Re: Occupy Wall Street Meets the Tea Parties
One thing I suspect the OWS crowd doesn't understand (or doesn't believe in) is that increasing the regulatory burden increases (rather than decreases) the likelihood of regulatory capture.
Both Tea Party participants and OWS-ers rail against regulatory capture. But Tea-Partiers usually understand that minimizing the regulatory state minimizes the incentive of regulated firms to game the regulatory state. Whereas it seems the OWS-ers, disgusted at how regulated firms game the regulatory state, wish to increase the regulatory state, thereby increasing the incentive of the firms to game the system.
More generally, it seems that Tea-Partiers and OWS-ers have radically different conceptions of how people respond to incentives. Peter C has some good comments on this here, here and here.
Two groups can share the same frustrations about society, but if they can't at least broadly agree on how human beings respond to incentives, they'll still end up opposed.
Jun '10
Re: Occupy Wall Street Meets the Tea Parties
Mollie Hemingway, Ed.
I'm less interested in making common cause (and certainly not in the mood to embrace them) than in planning a more effective response to this widespread malaise. · Oct 17 at 7:53am
The best response is to stand clear and not provoke this mob. A counter-protest will only give the media an excuse to blame us. We can make our case once these protests subside by whatever editorial means is open to us. Let this creature of the left run amok. And it will if a cold rain doesn't arrive first.
Dec '10
Re: Occupy Wall Street Meets the Tea Parties
~Paules
Mollie Hemingway, Ed.
I'm less interested in making common cause (and certainly not in the mood to embrace them) than in planning a more effective response to this widespread malaise. · Oct 17 at 7:53am
The best response is to stand clear and not provoke this mob. A counter-protest will only give the media an excuse to blame us. We can make our case once these protests subside by whatever editorial means is open to us. Let this creature of the left run amok. And it will if a cold rain doesn't arrive first. · Oct 17 at 8:15am
Exactly. And let the President take up its rhetoric. He will finally be revealing his ideology, rather than pretending to "occupy" the middle ground.
Oct '10
Re: Occupy Wall Street Meets the Tea Parties
"[T]he state and the market accrue power at the expense of ordinary people". The comparison is odious - the state is a power relation (or set of power relations) backed by a monopoly on deadly force. The market is a rhetorical device for summarising the free decisions of those "ordinary people". The one has power in opposition to the people; the other is the power of the people.
Aug '10
Re: Occupy Wall Street Meets the Tea Parties
Mollie Hemingway, Ed.: Phillip Blond lambasted both inveighed state and market monopolies and how they isolated individuals:
This destruction of Tocqueville's intermediary structures may be a liberal phenomenon, but it hurts folks on the left just as much as it hurts everyone else.
I'm too much married to an economist to buy the line that the market as such accrues power "at the expense of ordinary people". But I agree that the erosion of Burke's "little platoons" hurts folks on the left as much as everyone else.
I believe a hunger to belong to something -- anything -- bigger than themselves is why a lot of the leftists I know are leftists.
For example, I grew up in a family where family affection wasn't strong, and children were oddly discouraged from participation in society's "little platoons". My leftish-leaning hipster sister told me just the other day how attracted she is to the sheer community of leftist gatherings, even when the politics is "obviously stupid".
I know exactly how she feels.
Sep '10
Re: Occupy Wall Street Meets the Tea Parties
I think these folks (at least the older ones) have argued all their lives for more government power at the federal level and are frustrated that it has not produced an egalitarian paradise: From each according to his whim, to each according to his need.
What we have found is that goverment regulations generally only work to the advantage of large corporations. So the very course for which they have advocated has strengthened those they wished to weaken.
I'd be frustrated too.
Feb '11
Re: Occupy Wall Street Meets the Tea Parties
~Paules
Mollie Hemingway, Ed.
I'm less interested in making common cause (and certainly not in the mood to embrace them) than in planning a more effective response to this widespread malaise. · Oct 17 at 7:53am
The best response is to stand clear and not provoke this mob. A counter-protest will only give the media an excuse to blame us. We can make our case once these protests subside by whatever editorial means is open to us. Let this creature of the left run amok. And it will if a cold rain doesn't arrive first. · Oct 17 at 8:15am
Maybe avoidance is best, but that's a risky approach; what if the rain never comes or if the mob doesn't break up when it gets drenched?
There are basic questions of fairness at play here (or incentives as the returning Midge phrases it), and we may think the answers are obvious, but chances are that they think so too. I'd prefer that our side maintain a line of communication - a sane outlet for this frustration, always pointing out the shortcomings of any leftist answers and promoting the utility of conservative answers.
Edited on Oct 17, 2011 at 3:14pmAug '10
Re: Occupy Wall Street Meets the Tea Parties
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
I believe a hunger to belong to something -- anything -- bigger than themselves is why a lot of the leftists I know are leftists.
The obvious question then is:
If these people are so hungry to be part of something bigger than themselves, why don't they take advantage of traditional institutions (church, family, civic clubs, etc)?
Here are three reasons:
1) They grew up with little experience of traditional institutions, and so don't know where to start.
2) They've had such bad experience with traditional institutions that they don't trust them anymore.
3) They were taught that traditional institutions are "inauthentic" -- for example, family and church aren't "authentic community" but rather tools of oppression.
I suspect it's often a mixture of all three. For example, a person with little experience of traditional institutions (1) who has been taught that they're inauthentic (3) is more likely to approach traditional institutions in a way that makes bad experiences with them more likely (2), thus confirming his belief that traditional institutions are inauthentic (3).
Such a person, finding no home in the "little platoons", turns to the only thing left: the State.
Jun '10
Re: Occupy Wall Street Meets the Tea Parties
Ed G.
Maybe avoidance is best, but that's a risky approach; what if the rain never comes or if the mob doesn't break up when it gets drenched?
My advice to Mayor Bloomberg for what it's worth. Bring in a few dozen firetrucks around midnight and create a light but soaking rain over the entire park. The protesters aren't so dedicated that they'll sit around shivering in the rain. A hundred city garbage trucks and a few hundred sanitation workers should be enough to clear the park before sunrise. If the protesters return, start the waterworks flowing again. If they move to a different location, have the firetrucks follow them. Simple.
Aug '10
Re: Occupy Wall Street Meets the Tea Parties
Just so. But then why should we sympathize with their belated complaints? Even Tocqueville and Burke would have little time for people exhibiting such a lack of introspection.
Feb '11
Re: Occupy Wall Street Meets the Tea Parties
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
The obvious question then is:
If these people are so hungry to be part of something bigger than themselves, why don't they take advantage of traditional institutions (church, family, civic clubs, etc)?
Here are three reasons:
1) They grew up with little experience of traditional institutions, and so don't know where to start.
2) They've had such bad experience with traditional institutions that they don't trust them anymore.
3) They were taught that traditional institutions are "inauthentic" -- for example, family and church aren't "authentic community" but rather tools of oppression.
I suspect it's often a mixture of all three. For example, a person with little experience of traditional institutions (1) who has been taught that they're inauthentic (3) is more likely to approach traditional institutions in a way that makes bad experiences with them more likely (2), thus confirming his belief that traditional institutions are inauthentic (3).
Such a person, finding no home in the "little platoons", turns to the only thing left: the State.
Midge, you've perfectly described more than half of my now thirtysomething friends. I say this is an opportunity to make another pitch.
Sep '10
Re: Occupy Wall Street Meets the Tea Parties
Midget Faded Rattlesnake
Such a person, finding no home in the "little platoons", turns to the only thing left: the State. · Oct 17 at 11:41am
I have a strong feeling that most of the people we're seeing in these protests have no idea that what they're embracing is "the State". They are animated by what they're against, and they grab for the biggest club they can find to beat it with, but if you tried to explain to them that what they're engaged in advancing is actually totalitarianism they would not be able to make that connection at all. They are rebels, you see, sticking it to the man. They can not possibly be the man.
I'm sure there are plenty of professional activists doing what they can to move the herd in the desired direction, but the herd are not aware of this. They're individualists, iconoclasts, rebels.