There's no easy way to define Occupy Wall Street. That's part of what's made it hard for the media – and those involved in the protests – to wrap their arms around the movement.
Many people have questioned the movement's legitimacy, since it has no clear leadership, nor a clear list of demands or solutions to the economic inequalities it rails against.
It also raises endgame questions.
What would it actually take to say, yes, this movement of protest, spurred by a large group of people across the country and world, was a successful movement? Or is it too early to even assess what impact it may have had?
Would success need to come in the form of large reforms being passed regarding jobs, unemployment and economic policies that affect Wall Street – or even of President Obama losing re-election? Would it be adjustment of our current government model to one that more accurately reflects what protesters want?
Jeffrey D. Sachs, an expert in economics, visited the Occupy Wall Street crowd in New York's Zuccotti Park early in October and suggested that success could come in the form of a change in what groups politicians look to for influence (hint: not the 1% that can shell out money for dinners with the politicians). He also said the protesters needed to elect a government that will represent the 99%.
"What are we going to do when we get it? We are going to re-establish government for the people. The people need help and the government is there to help. So with all that income of the 1%, there's some pretty good things to do."
Sachs suggests that the 99% could make a lot of changes with the money of the 1% – including spreading the wealth to close the financial equality gap, while taxing the rich in order to use the money to fix our struggling economy as well as bringing our troops home.
Some have suggested you wouldn't need a re-established government or new policies as a whole to be a success – just a defeat for Obama.
Jonah Goldberg, an American Enterprise Institute visiting fellow, wrote for the National Review about the Occupy Wall Street movement's potential to have political success like the tea party:
"There's only one way the Occupy Wall Street movement can become like the tea parties, and that’s for Barack Obama to lose in 2012. Why? Because Obama is the most divisive figure in American politics today. ...
If Occupy Wall Street is a sincere, organic, grassroots movement for radical change and overturning the status quo, it can’t be 100 percent behind the guy who’s been running the country for the last three years.
Moreover, Democrats had near total control of the government for Obama’s first two years. Together, Obama and congressional Democrats already got their Wall Street and student-loan reforms, their health-care overhaul, and a huge stimulus. And yet Occupy Wall Street is still furious with the political status quo. Does anyone believe Obama can both run on his record and co-opt the Occupy Wall Streeters?"
Joseph Lazzaro, the U.S. editor at the International Business Times, notes that while some on the right may believe unseating Obama is the key to ending the movement, it won't end what jump-started the movement.
"Tea party supporters, and other conservatives, argue that if only President Barack Obama is defeated, or more Republicans are elected to Congress (and more Democrats voted out of Congress) or more unions are broken up, that will be the end of Occupy Wall Street, and the nation's economic and social problems.
In sum, the U.S.'s economic and social problems are there, Occupy Wall Street headlines or not."
NPR dedicated a segment to asking people what they felt would spell success for the movement. One listener suggested it would come in the form of presenting the movement's own political candidates and a voting bloc. Another suggested success was simply about raising greater awareness and continuing the path the movement is on. Others suggested that it meant specific reform in campaign finance laws and bankruptcy regulations.
So, you've got passing reform, ousting the leader of our country, and engagement in the political process as options. But is a defined, significant goal like that the only way to measure success? Does it depend on whether the Occupy protesters can literally weather the cold fronts that are upon them? Or is it possible you could already call the movement a winner because it has invigorated a group of people, who may not have been politically active before, to stand up and say they are unhappy with the status quo?
Don McNay, the author of "Wealth Without Wall Street: A Main Street Guide to Making Money" wrote for the Huffington Post that the movement has allowed that group and the silent majority that supports it to have a wider voice in the public discourse.
"The days of clamping down free speech with violence are over. The average citizen, using social media, has too many ways to communicate, organize and stand up to oppression.
I think it will be difficult for the Occupy movement to maintain its outdoor protests through the cold winter months, but I expect the seeds of their protest to have an impact for years.
Already, they have had an immediate victory."
While we may not know, or be able to really put into words, what a finish line looks like for the Occupy movement, there are a few things that can give us some insight on how its ideas are entering the national dialogue. Google took the time to dedicate a blog post to looking at what search terms might tell us about the movement's impact.
"Search interest for (Occupy Wall Street) jumped ahead of the (tea party) on September 24, and hasn’t looked back. In a historical context, when viewing the snapshot of their nascent birth, we can see the peak of (Occupy Wall Street) has slightly more interest in American than searches for the (tea party) did during the groups peak in 2009."
So what would success for the movement look like to you? Do you think there is a finish line in sight? Let us know your thoughts below.
© 2012 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertising practices | Advertise with us | About us | Work for us | Help
The Occupy movement can not succeed because what they are really fighting is: big business and the federal government and they're in bed together and they are both completely corrupt. They can't be beat without a complete revolution. Average citizens aren't ready to do that at this point. Replacing Captialism with Socialism would only make things worst for the 99%. The only answer that I can see is for States to break away from the Union and form smaller more manageable and controlable governments.
To me success would mean:
1. That the lobby of the people (99%) is taken more seriously by congress and Wall Street
2. That Wall Street and Congress will treat the american people with respect
3. That the Democratic party would get some backbone and remember that in the past they were known as the party for the middle class and improvished in this country.
4. It would be the end of Wall Street and Congress expecting the middle class to pay for their mistakes while the Republican party keeps protecting the 1% on our dime.
5. Americans buying American and putting americans back to work.
To me......that would be success
To me, success would be repealing the healthcare monstrosity that no one read.
A win would be to separate politics from business. The way to do that is to enact single term limits for congress. If every representative and senator could only serve one term, then less time and money (from special interest groups) would be spent on campaigning to get reelected. I propose that all members of congress serve a single 6-year term, with 1/3 of members being overturned every 2 years. This would put an end to career politicians, and hopefully would allow our elected representatives to base their decisions on what's best for the whole country and as opposed to what will get them reelected.
DONT POST ANY OPINIONS ON THIS PAGE. IT IS" INFORMATION-MINING" BY A CORPORATE PROPAGANDA MEDIA OUTLET THAT IS PAID OFF BY BIG CORPORATIONS GOVERNMENT AND BANKERS IN AN EFFORT TO GAIN INFORMATION TO WEAKEN THE MOVEMENT THAT IS SUCCESSFULLY CHALLENGING THE WEALTHY WHO STEAL.
First of all it is interesting that the majority of comments are negative towards the Occupy Wall Street movement. I expect it reflects that CNN readers are sensible and recognize the group is generally made up of malcontents who have found a common voice to complain and shift the blame for their choices in life to an "evil" common enemy the 1%. Have they considered that it is the 1% that pay the majority of taxes to fund the nation's infrastructure, parks and recreation, teachers salaries, welfare programs, regulatory agencies, etc.? While it may sound condescending, who the heck is going to employ and support businesses and individuals that are engaged in high end restaurants, home building, skilled craftsmen of every trade, landscaping, domestic work, etc? If the Occupy force got their way and got rid of all the rich, millions of people would lose their livelihood and businesses. They need to stop for a minute and take an honest look at what they are advocating. Do they just want to make sure everyone is unemployed or dissatisfied with their choices in life as they appear to be?
Stop with the oversimplified extreme choices. That's what got us here and OWS is out there because they see through them now. You have to come up with a new game plan, like maybe actually soving the problems that got us here.
So stop with the BS scare tactics, get off you duff and do something productive for a change. Whining about the lazy people that work for you or that you put out of work, is no longer the easy solution it once was.
A 'large group of people' my ass. This is a small, concentrated effort by progressives to disrupt, again and forever, society. ACORN by any other name is still a joke. Unfortunately, it's a serious joke.
Are you in charge? Which is it now? A threat or not a threat?
The problems being faced are extremely complex, there is a huge variety of potential ways forward, and even elected officials and professional economists cannot agree on what should be done to fix the economy. Why are people surprised that this movement is equally ambiguous? People are frustrated with the big corporations and the government's poor handling of them. Simply making that into an acknowledged issue is a "success".
DONT POST ANY OPINIONS ON THIS PAGE. IT IS" INFORMATION-MINING" BY A CORPORATE PROPAGANDA MEDIA OUTLET THAT IS PAID OFF BY BIG CORPORATIONS GOVERNMENT AND BANKERS IN AN EFFORT TO GAIN INFORMATION TO WEAKEN THE MOVEMENT THAT IS SUCCESSFULLY CHALLENGING THE ELITE.
DONT POST ANY OPINIONS ON THIS PAGE. IT IS" INFORMATION-MINING" BY A CORPORATE PROPAGANDA MEDIA OUTLET THAT IS PAID OFF BY BIG CORPORATIONS GOVERNMENT AND BANKERS IN AN EFFORT TO GAIN INFORMATION TO WEAKEN THE MOVEMENT THAT IS SUCCESSFULLY CHALLENGING THE ELITE.
It is unbelievable and un acceptable that republicans who are the pets of wall street and against the average working americans are trying to hijack this movement for their and their masters benefit. I hope we as Americans prove that against the prevailing stereo type we are not so dumb that will let them use this movement like they started the tea party to steal the peoples movement for their own benefit. We need a leadership that will not be bought and can be trusted to bring the change needed to the world distribution of wealth and equity to the economic security for the people.
DONT POST ANY OPINIONS ON THIS PAGE. IT IS" DATA-MINING" BY A CORPORATE PROPAGANDA MEDIA OUTLET CALLED CNN THAT IS PAID OFF BY BIG CORPORATIONS GOVERNMENT AND BANKERS IN AN EFFORT TO GAIN INFORMATION TO WEAKEN THE OCCUPY MOVEMENT THE OCCUPY MOVEMENT THAT IS SUCCESSFULLY CHALLENGING THE ELITE BECAUSE IT CANNOT BE PIGEON-HOLED AND "SPINNED"
What is a win? Not hard to figure out: arrest the CEOs of the large banks, AIG and Lehman who stole
the money. Get their assets, give that the government who had to take huge sums from their taxpayers to bring down
the cost of borrowing for homes and business. Why is it so hard for the media sycophants of corporate thieves to understand? Just rhetorical.
Those CEO own the government and the justice system and the military.
This is a pipe dream.
The only recourse left to the average individual is to take the wealth from the rich.
Take it in the dark of night.
We still have our guns, although they are trying to take them away for this very reason.
There's no mediating a win on this topic.
It has to be taken. And who's going to risk what little they still have to do that?
Not me....
Of course they own the government. So did Gadhafi. But Americans are armed. Once they realize that the only solution is violence to take down these thieves, they will do that, even though revolutions, advocated by Thomas Jefferson
every 2 generations, often do take a path that is unpredictable.
DONT POST ANY OPINIONS ON THIS PAGE. IT IS" DATA-MINING" BY A CORPORATE PROPAGANDA MEDIA OUTLET CALLED CNN THAT IS PAID OFF BY BIG CORPORATIONS GOVERNMENT AND BANKERS IN AN EFFORT TO GAIN INFORMATION TO WEAKEN THE OCCUPY MOVEMENT THE OCCUPY MOVEMENT THAT IS SUCCESSFULLY CHALLENGING THE ELITE BECAUSE IT CANNOT BE PIGEON-HOLED AND "SPINNED"
Although I posted before I read your post, your post reflects my belief exactly. An establishment attempt to "study," spin, and - ultimately - dismiss Occupy.
I think the most important thing we can do to help alleviate what is going on in big government is to rid ourselves of lobbyists..stop this huge corporate influence of our legislators. When was the last time 'we the people' actually had a voice?
Or YOU are a paid troll , sent to quiet and discourage the mass information exchange we call the internet.
You are correct, these cronies of Obama and the bankers are in fact managing the American revolution, to prevent it from getting to the weapons phase. Not sure if they will succeed. The 2nd amendment was precisely to go after abusive government people and not to kill deer.
Norm you need to go back to your bar stool at Cheers. hello hello McFly? ! ? nuff said.
They Don't KNOW it YET but a WIN would be to put an OCCUPY Candidate on Every 2012 Congressional Ballot.
simple end to the arguement, look at North Korea(socialist) vs. South Korea(capitalist) which country would you rather live in and why? North Korea has no energy, food, or money... or motivation for it's people to help themselves. The people depend on the Govt to provide and or solve their problems. In capitalistic societies people do better for themselves to improve their own lives....
not all that food of an analogy at all.
Please. Stop wasting space with oversimplified extremist choices. American only functions well with a balanced systm of Capitalism and socialism. The problem is that once the fall of communism in Russia the Capitalists took it as a sign that they now had no one to keep their greedy needs in check. Yes people should be paid more for working hard. However in the last 30 years the 1% have increased the wealth 270% while the 99% only 4%. That's hardly equitable (equitable means fair fair for the stupid rich or their stupid lackeys – no not all rich got that way because they are smart or worked for it – some were born into it) Anyway, the argument that the poor rich pay most of the taxes is also false fodder for those that don't know enough about statistics to know better. Of course they pay more. They have more. that's they way it works. The problem is the percent that they have more, is so much more than the percent that they pay more.
This is another typical stupid media question. To attempt to quantify Occupy in it initials stages, rather than historically, is another media attempt to trivialize Occupy.
I think a win would be arresting corporate leaders who make profit off of others bad times, bail out the people of America debt instead of the corporations that led its creation. Create a less capitalist society, one which works for the people instead of against those who do not run it financially, close the gap between rich and poor. This list could go no forever and in my honest opinion within the next 10 years if some serious changes are not made these protest signs will become something much more dangerous and the US of A will be looking at its next civil war.
Exactly my sentiment. The 10 trillion$$ did not disappear. It is probably in places like Cayman Islands. Fuld (Lehman exec) is still living happily with his 3 billion. Why is the government not going after it? easy: Obama is surrounded with the bankers and their cronies (e.g. Larry Summers, David Axelrod, Rahm Emanuel (still as mayor of Chicago he is involved),....
These are all part of the problem.