The Question of Culture

Part 2 of 4. [Originally posted on November 30, 2011, in order of composition. Reposted on January 10, 2012, in reading order.]

In a Word

Part 1 of 4. Draft begun August 9, 2011. [Originally posted on November 29, 2011, in order of composition. Reposted on January 10, 2012, in reading order.]

Occupy this! or, What the Chief Said

When the newscast about the Occupy [fill in the blank] movement blocking the North Avenue bridge came on the other night, I observed that the only people they were inconveniencing were those coming home from work – a gesture more likely to make enemies than friends among the 99%. A few minutes later Chief Flynn made essentially the same point: there weren’t any bankers trying to cross the bridge, and those who were live in a district with 35% unemployment.

I guess that puts me in sympathy with Chief Flynn then, doesn’t it? Not really: my sympathies are with the working poor. I just happen to agree with the Chief that the working poor were among the ones inconvenienced by this unlawful action.

I agree with a couple other points he made as well. But one point he didn’t make and couldn’t be expected to make is this: the Tea Party has a much sounder political strategy.

Some people say the Tea Party and the Occupy movement have a few things in common. They’re both angry; the anger is initially expressed in a specific direction, but without a specific program; and – at least to all appearances and at the start – they possess grassroots credentials.

Go further. Both were (or came to be, or seem to have been) appropriated by political professionals behind the scenes. Both were…diverted?...into programs that aligned better with the original anger than with valid public purposes. And the one got “their” candidates elected, while the other – got themselves arrested.

Hey! This isn’t Egypt. The police are our friends and they have been at least since 911. Efforts to make them seem like enemies for political purposes are not only wasted but also destructive of those purposes. Here too I agree with the Chief. He did the Occupy movement a favor by not arresting them, just because that was a dumb and self-destructive tactical objective for the movement and what I would like to hope are its real purposes.

And yes, I do have a better strategy in mind, but I’m not done criticizing the present one yet.

The tactics of winning the masses by defying those symbols of state authority that happen to be immediately present was more than 100 years old in the ‘60’s. Then all it did was align the Silent Majority behind the reelection of Richard Nixon. That anyone would expect a different result today, particularly when the Tea Party is already well organized and successful, surpasses belief. Lawless actions and police-baiting can only gain net adherents for…the Tea Party.

I could expect a few college students to deceive themselves on that point. But if there’s really union money behind this, even if it’s just for “infrastructure” (food, shelter, signage), it’s good money badly spent. Go back to the people on the No. 21 bus trying to get home that night after work: did this action make them more likely to vote for a democrat next time around? to vote at all?

Because that’s the real problem. How the 99% could ever elect a republican also surpasses belief. I submit – I urge – the proposition that whenever a republican wins a majority in an election, a majority of the 99% have voted against their real economic interests. The question is how to make the people understand this the way the Tea Party made the people “understand” that the government is picking their pockets.

But just exactly those people who can be deceived to vote against their real interests, are the people who will not be persuaded otherwise by lawless behavior. A strategy to win elections is called for…

…and just when you think the movement has enough energy to execute one, they show up in New Hampshire and heckle the President – as if Wall Street were his constituency.

No: this movement is non-partisan. It’s also no help. And it’s not going to become a political counterweight to the Tea Party.