Occupy Wall Street is a continuing series of protests that were started by a Canadian lobby group called the Adbusters. The protests begun on 17th September, 2011 in Zuccotti Park which is located in the financial district of Wall Street in New York (Stelter 1). The main issues that the demonstrations highlight are corruption, economic inequality, undue influence of large organizations, and high rates of unemployment. Occupy Wall Street is a movement that intends to support a creative strategy for economic justice in the United States of America.
Background
Though the Occupy Wall Street campaign begun officially on 17th September, 2011, its origins can be traced back to a blog post by the Adbusters Foundation on 13th July the same year (Gelder 26). In this blog post the lobby group called for a non-violent occupation of Wall Street. One of the main reasons why I support the Occupy Wall Street protests is because of their advocacy for non-violent demonstrations. This shows that the movement has no malicious objectives other than the goals stated in the mass media. This occupation was meant to protest against the growing influence that corporate had on democracy, lack of legal repercussions after the recent international financial crisis, and an increasing gap between the wealthy and the middle class. Adbusters sought to link the Spanish protests that year with the Tahrir Square which was a symbolic location (Chen 72). The editorial team of the lobby group said that this call for demonstrations posted on their blog was spontaneously supported by people from all around the world. The group’s single demand that politics and money be separated formed a basis that most people identified with in their call for a ‘New America’.
I also identified with this call since I feel that failure to create such a distinction would mean that the policies passed by Congress are made to please the rich minority. The call to Occupy Wall Street was publicized over various media such as the internet where the lobby group used a poster of a dancer on top of a charging bull; the bull is an iconic representation of Wall Street. The publicizing of the demonstrations on the internet received backing from groups such as Anonymous, a global hacking group that instigates civil disobedience while maintaining anonymity of its leaders and followers. This group called upon its members to participate in the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations by setting up peaceful barricades among other things. Other groups that supported this call by Adbusters include the New York General Assembly, the Day of Rage, and the governing council for the Occupy Wall Street movement (Campbell 18). All these groups helped to organize the demonstrations that begun on 17th September, 2011.
THE 99%
This figure is used in the slogan for the Occupy Wall Street group. The slogan depicts that wealth is concentrated in only 1% of the population while the 99% majority struggle with economic hardships. The slogan was launched at a blog page on Tumblr in August 2011 (McGaughey 11). This slogan is based on the fact that the 1% of top income earners has increased their income by two within the last 30 years- these figures were released in report by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). This report came at about the same time as when the activities of the Occupy Wall Street were beginning to get national attention. The release of the report by the CBO gave the movement some form of validity in that it showed that the demonstrators’ demands were not mere propaganda by groups just out to stir civil disobedience. The CBO report showed me that the Occupy Wall Street movement had solid evidence for its call for protests. I am of the opinion that the 99% needs to do something to stop increasing wealth disparity between them and the 1%; otherwise the 99% will have no control over decision making in the country.
INCREASING WEALTH DISPARAGE IN THE UNITED STATES
This report shows that indeed the growing wealth disparage is a matter of national concern in the United States if the country wishes to promote equal economic growth in all levels of income earners. The issues raised by the CBO report show that the Occupy Wall Street deserves support from every American that dreams of a new America that has equal opportunities for all. The report indicated that the income for these top income earners increased by 275% from 1979 to 2007 which was about 4 times more than the increase recorded for lower income earners during the same period (Pryce, Kakabadse and Lloyd, 588). At this rate I noted that for a low income earner of about $ 10,000 they will still be way far off an income earner of about $ 100,000. What this means is that there will never be equality until the 99%, the majority, speak out against this economic inequality. It should be noted that these inequalities in income will increase with time if it is not checked; and that is why I believe that the Occupy Wall Street movement should receive the support of citizens who wouldn’t wish future generations where over 50% of the country’s wealth is owned by only 1% of the population. Currently the disparity is not only in terms of income but wealth in general with the 1% owning about 35% of private wealth, and approximately 43% of all financial wealth. At this rate the 1% may well hit the 50% mark if the 99% does nothing to stop it.
INCOME INEQUALITIES IN THE UNITED STATES
In the year 2006, the income inequality levels in the United States were at the highest peak. This was the case as measured via the Gini Index. The US was rated as the highest in income inequality country among other developed countries or the other countries with high income since 1980. As a citizen of the United States I take pride in my country being rated first globally in good things but in issues pertaining such inequalities; this is the nationalistic reason why I support the Occupy Wall Street movement. The causes and importance of the trend is argued until this time by scholars. However, it is because of this inequality that the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations were organized to try and create awareness on the problem. Education has been viewed as an important toll in the society especially for imparting people with skill to carry out tasks and various duties in their workplaces. However, it is seen as a toll that has promoted inequality in the society. Politics has also been seen as another cause for this inequality as observed by various social and political scientists such as Paul Krugman and Larry Bartels (Thompson and Smeeding 128).
Factors leading to inequality
Use of machines (automation) is one of the reasons that led to inequality, since the replacement of manual labor with machines led to employment of less skilled workers in working sectors. Due to employment of inexperienced and unskilled labor, wages accorded dropped and consequently wealth ended up in the owners’ accounts.
Politics and politicians on the other hand are yet another factor that has led to the development of inequality in the society, whereby the income-tax policy promoted by the Republican form of administration has developed and been insisted on in a significantly large extent as noted in the former Republican government’s form of administration. Various economists such as Thomas Piketty, having analyzed the country’s financial performance over the past five decades (1960-2010), note that a lot of tax reductions took place in two phases, which affected the income-tax stability of the country’s economy from Reagan’s to Bush’s administration in 2008 (Apergis, Oguzhan and Payne 132).
In the 1960’s the then United States’ President, Ronald Reagan, who was a Republican, decreased the rate for top marginal tax to 28% from 70%. This reduction contrasted with the high rates for the top marginal tax that were in use during the ‘Great Compression’ which was a period of income equality in the United States (Pryce, Kakabadse and Lloyd, 589).
Evidence shows that during Republican regimes the largest income gains were at the top and decreased as one progressed downwards on the income scale. For the Democratic governments it has been the contrary, with largest income gains being recorded at the bottom and reducing as one went up the income scale (Hsing 641).
Relevance of the Occupy Wall Street Demonstrations to reducing Income Inequalities in the United States
As can be noted from the section above some of the factors behind income inequality in the United States are bigger than any one citizen or a small group of people can handle. These factors require a unified bloc of American voters to change and to consequently reduce income inequality (Kaminski 20). For example, on the issue of politics and the policies made by various regimes, the Occupy Wall Street movement is necessary to create awareness among American voters on the perils of not being concerned with income related economic policies that are made. The Occupy Wall Street forum is the most appropriate at the moment to tell the American people that they cannot afford to ignore the economic inequalities between them anymore; because this would result in them losing control of their country to a small percentage of individuals. Several economists have tried to highlight the income inequalities in the United States but have failed, simply because they did it without any mass support (Apergis, Oguzhan and Payne 132). The Occupy Wall Street movement is aware of this and that is why it is rallying for support from American citizens to influence the much needed change in society. Various studies have shown that the income concentration is neither compatible nor sustainable in a country such as America that advocates for real democracy (Apergis, Oguzhan and Payne 133). This is the basis of the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations since such income disparities may lead to instability and infringe on democracy as the government feels obligated to please the small minority at the expense of the majority.
PUBLIC OPINION ON THE OCCUPY WALL STREET MOVEMENT
Results of opinion polls conducted nationally between October and November 2011 showed some inconsistency in the support for the Occupy Wall Street movement though some consistency was noted in the fact that there was always more approval than disapproval for the protests. The approval votes for the protests varied from 22-59% which showed mixed feelings and uncertainty when it comes to the view the public is taking on the demonstrations. One of the latest polls conducted by the University of Quinnipiac on November 3rd showed that only 30% of voters in America supported this movement (McGaughey 96). This fluctuating public opinion shows that most of the American voters do not understand the course that the movement is fighting for and that most people have been influenced to see the movement as a nuisance. What most of the American voters do not know is that 20 years from now, when the predictions of the Occupy Wall Street have happened, the wealth disparage will be so unbearable and it will be so hard to reverse it then. The income statistics discussed above show that these American voters fall under the ‘99%’ category of income earners which means that they are affected by the fact that there is a 1% that makes almost 4 times more than them. There is hence a growing need to sensitize the public on the damaging effect of the country being practically owned by 99% and the dangers of mixing political and economic decisions.
CRITICISM ON THE OCCUPY WALL STREET DEMONSTRATIONS
Although Occupy Wall Street has gained popularity in the New York it has also faced a lot of criticism. As we know the Occupy Wall Street was aimed at objection to social and economical inequality, corruption and unemployment. A group of people led by Erick Erickson arranged a movement called themselves the 53% (Campbell 31) .The fifty three percent were the Americans who made a lot of money for federal taxation, they had faced recession as well as the poor who owned 99% of the countries wealth. Mike Brownfield disputed the rebuff of rules that Occupy Wall Street activists advocate and capitalist system would not lead to job opportunities for the jobless Americans. Nevertheless, heritage disputes that free enterprise is essential in improving the financial system it should be centered on protesting on development of administration instead of calling for government involvement. However, the 53% is just a move by the wealthy to protect their wealth by opposing the demands made by the Occupy Wall Street protesters. Though the 53% attempt to show that there is no economic inequality in the United States, they have found it hard to prove this fact rather than their claims that they can afford to pay tax.
Mark Tooley from a Religion and Democracy Institute believed that the Occupy Wall Street has thrived in gaining interest however; it’s limited since it only receiving support from the religious. He also argued that the administration’s redeployment of wealth and dependence on the street activism did not appeal to a person who is conservative biased or religious. In addition, Occupy Wall Street has also been criticized for abiding anti-Semitic activists. The Emergency Committee in Israel and the political leaders have called for a movement in condemning anti-Semitic affiliations. These accusations lead a league to denounce anti-Semitic remarks and symbols that appeared all over the world in some complaint public meeting. Conversely, journalists have disagreed with the allegations of anti-Semitism as not revealing the movement as a whole. Linking the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations with anti-Semitism is a false allegation since the demands made by the protesters are meant to favor any American regardless of their religious or racial affiliation. The accusations that are made of the demonstrations being anti-Semitic in nature are just meant to blind the general public from seeing the actual economic divisions that exist between them by creating a diversion in this case racial division.
WORKS CITED
Gelder, Sarah. This Changes Everything: Occupy Wall Street and the 99% Movement.
Washington: Berrett-Koehler Publishers, 2011. Print.
Campbell, Prince. The Definitive Guide to Occupy Wall Street. New York: Pearson, 2011. Print.
Chen, Gwendolyn. Occupy Wall Street: Social Networks and the Arab Spring. New Jersey:
Wiley, 2011. Print.
McGaughey, William. How Occupy Wall Street can have staying power- What is Gold Party and
how does it relate to Occupy Wall Street. New York: Pearson, 2011. Print.
Stelter, Brian. “Occupy Wall Street Puts the Coverage on the Spotlight.” New York Times, 20
Nov. 2011. Web. 26 Nov. 2011
(http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/21/business/media/occupy-wall-street-
puts-the-
coverage-in-the-spotlight.html)
Pryce, Adrian, Nada Kakabadse, Tom Lloyd. “Income differentials and corporate performance.”
Corporate Governance 11.5 (2011): 587-600
Apergis, Nicholas, Oguzhan Dincer and James Payne. “On the dynamics of poverty and income
inequality in the United States.” Journal of Economic Studies, 38.2 (2011): 132-143
Hsing, Yu. “Economic growth and income inequality: the case of the US.” International Journal
of Social Economics, 32.7 (2005): 639-647
Thompson, Jeffrey and Timothy Smeeding. “Recent trends in income inequality.” Research in
Labor Economics, 32 (2011): 122-126
Kaminski, Thomas. “The New Tammany Hall.” Wall Street Journal, 26 Nov. 2011. Web. 26
Nov. 2011.
(http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052970203716204577016092542307600.html
)
