The Occupy Wall Street (OWS) Movement is a movement that started at New York City’s financial district which is more popularly known as “Wall Street” sometime September 2011. The protest movement was backed up by known public relations firm “Workhouse” and the Canadian anti-consumerist and pro-environment group “Adbusters”, which resulted in the protest being a spectacular display of people-power in Manhattan. The protesters centered around discussions regarding social and economic inequality, perceived corruption and greed, and the influence of the financial sector on public policy and governance. According to their website, the Occupy Wall Street is a “leaderless resistance movement with people of many colors, genders and political persuasions. The one thing we all have in common is that We Are The 99% that will no longer tolerate the greed and corruption of the 1%. We are using the revolutionary Arab Spring tactic to achieve our ends and encourage the use of nonviolence to maximize the safety of all participants”. The movement relied on protestation to achieve consensus-based decisions. After several days of protest, the protesters were removed from their protest location on November 15, 2011. After trying to get back into Wall Street and after having been successfully deterred by authorities, the movement sought other locations such as banks, corporate offices, universities among others.
Moral and Economic Implications
The Occupy Wall Street Movement follows a simple moral principle. It is not right to destroy the world and it is not right to destroy the health and hopes of other people . It is true that the current economic systems have forced majority of the population to bear and suffer the impacts of the top 1% profiteering part of the world’s population, with the 99% being left to bear the real cost of these reckless actions. The OWS Movement believes that the cycles that promote the powerful to gain more wealth and power while the greater majority suffer is a moral monstrosity. In addition, the OWS Movement believes that it is possible for everyone to flourish and succeed mutually, with the world being an interconnected and interdependent place wherein everyone has the moral obligation to protect and preserve the present and the future of the planet.
What many believe is just a problem in the United States is in fact an echo of the current state of the world. In Beijing, it was seen for example, as the American people finally opposing capitalism, which is a principle that was espoused by the former communist country of China. When the Occupy Wall Street Movement was replicated in 71 other countries across the world did people only realize that this is indeed a cry for help. Occupy Wall Street focused on their moral principles and the call for equality and equity throughout the world, and the replication in many countries states that the problem of inequality and inequity is not prevalent in the United States alone. It is everywhere. Governments vary in terms of their approach to solving these issues but these issues, and the cry for change of OWS, makes wider sense .
The Economic Theory of OWS
OWS states that the social interest of the individual should be taken over the interest of the corporate, an inversion of the current state of liberalism wherein society and/or state power is reformed for the benefit of the dominant institution within the system, in this case capitalist corporations. Capitalists argue that capitalism has created more wealth for the middle working class, however the OWS Movement points out that this has stagnated in the last decades with incomes barely rising alongside costs and social and economic inequity rising at a faster rate. OWS wants this social inequity to stop, through a new value system that is a reinvention of contemporary capitalism. It is in this regard that the OWS is utilitarian in nature .
The economic theory of Kantianism is also applicable to the set of ideals that the OWS espouses. The OWS says that no person should use another person as a means to their own end, the central principle of Kantianism. For firms, this means that a firm must always considered all stakeholder interests, and not just its profit motivations. An example is given by Kimble (2011) “When boards of directors voted to give John G. Stumpf, Chief Executive of Wells Fargo, $18 million or James M. Cracchiolo, Chief Executive of Ameriprise Financial, $17 million all in 2011, they were reaching these decisions while taking into account their creditors, customers, employees, suppliers, etc. They were putting the interests and well-being of the top employees before all other stakeholders.”
Lastly, it is widely accepted that the OWS Movement is a virtual ethical shift starting with thte identification of points of dysfunction and injustice to a central social pathology (greed, corruption, overt use of influence) and a situation where the government is controlled by those recklessly exchange short-term gains with fatal and long-term risks. The OWS is moving us to see the consequences of having a destructive few controlling the direction of social and economic development of the majority. The OWS Movement calls for ethnical shift by saying that all people in the planet regardless of demographics, is in the movement together. People have recognized the common grounds that bring everyone together, which is widespread social and economic inequality and injustice .
The Failure of Government
In the United States, the Democratic government has been taking care of the low-income segment of the population, thus priming up injustice and inequality. The Democratic government has cuddled the poor through a “protection of the disadvantaged” mantra that has created susceptibility. Thus when the subprime mortgage crisis broke out, these segments of the population easily were affected.
Partly to blame is the education system in America. American universities are mostly leftists but they think along the lines of wealth creation rather than wealth distribution. While the American education system states that everyone is eligible for education, the environment to which that education can be applied to is significantly different. While the US believes in what is called the “American Dream” and can be achieved by working hard and strong, the opportunities are becoming less and less equal for people of different social classes, which contribute to a deepening of the economic rift those results in imbalanced income distribution and social injustices.
What is Next?
The Occupy Wall Street Movement has failed in the United States to create a sustained buzz around their marching principles. However, there is no reason why we cannot take lessons from the movement, evaluate it against accepted economic thought, and formulate a strategy by which practicable elements of the movement can be churned into useful corporate strategies that would achieve the original goals of the movement.
The world already has mature capitalist countries, democratic and free market countries, and areas where there are despotic regimes. Clearly the OWS Movement states that democracy and capitalism is not mixing very well and that change is possible and is necessary. While it is unappealing to mention the idea of communism, it is quite acceptable to come up with a variation of capitalist utilitarianism, an amalgamation of both a capitalist structure and a utilitiarian structure. Both these frameworks are discussed in what the OWS states as its mantra, increasing the income opportunity of individuals and distributing power. Increasing the income opportunity comes from the creation of jobs which is a capitalist consequence while distributing power is a utilitarian consequence wherein the benefits of all stakeholders are kept in mind during the entire decision making process.
This capitalist utilitarianism may prove to be a long-term solution to the pressing social and economic issues plaguing the world today. In small bits and pieces, we see this coming to life. For example, the rise in corporate social responsibility in the last decade is not driven by profits, but driven by a higher meaning, that of protecting or preserving the environment or the society they operate in regardless of its effect on the company’s bottom line. These initiatives are capitalist and utilitarian in nature and are seen to be the next big step in solving the issues raised by the Occupy Wall Street Movement, hopefully helping in turning the world into a more socially and economically just and fair place for all.
Works Cited
Gabriel, B. W. (2011). Occupy Wall-Street, Two Schools of Liberalism, and the Great Renaissance Dam. Retrieved June 26, 2013, from Aiga Forum: http://aigaforum.com/articles/Liberalism.pdf
Kimble, J. (2011, November 10). Fight the Pay!: Occupy Wall Street’s Cohesive Goal. Retrieved June 26, 2013, from BizGovSoc: http://mg312.wordpress.com/2011/11/04/fight-the-pay-occupy-wall-street%E2%80%99s-cohesive-goal/
Moore, K. (2011, November 2). Occupy Wall Street’s Moral Ground. Retrieved June 24, 2013, from Yes!: http://www.yesmagazine.org/people-power/occupy-wall-streets-moral-ground
Occupy Wall Street. (2013, June 21). The Revolution Continues. Retrieved June 26, 2013, from Occupy Wall Street: http://occupywallst.org/
Qinglian, H. (2012, July 14). On “Occupy Wall Street” and Its implications. Retrieved June 24, 2013, from Articles by He Qinglian: http://hqlenglish.blogspot.com/2011/10/occupy-wall-street.html
