All we are saying…is give occupy a chance

The emergence of Occupy Wall Street as a political force has dominated political debate in the United States. While there were concerns in the early days of the movement that it lacked clarity (“abolish the death penalty? Sure! Scrap nuclear weapons? Why not?”), there is now a sense of cohesion around standing up for “The Other 99%” – the majority of citizens who work hard and play by the rules only to find that these rules are stacked against them.

With Occupy having gone global and reached London, the left would be wrong to dismiss the movement before it has even gotten off the ground. The fact that the movement is truly global in nature should give us pause for thought before we rush to dismiss, as some have, the “righteous and self-congratulatory” nature of a protest that is apparently driven by a “permanent encampment of unemployed people, students, [and] the homeless.” On the contrary, Polly Toynbee (when not administering a battering to the Taxpayers Alliance) has suggested that the protests have struck a chord in the political psyche of Americans and Britons tired of the staggering levels of inequality engendered by over thirty years of neoliberal economics.

Where critics are correct is to question the viability of the movement vis-à-vis its ability to affect change. A recent Time magazine survey is illustrative here. It found that 79% of Americans believe the gap between the richest and poorest Americans is too large; 86% believe Wall Street has too much influence on the political process; 71% believe that executives of financial institutions culpable for the 2008 global financial crisis should be punished; and 68% believe the richest strata of American society should pay more in taxes. Reasons to be cheerful, no? Well, let’s not be hasty. The sting in the tail of the survey is only 30% believe the protests will have a positive impact, while 65% believe the protests will have a negative or minimal impact.

The data gives the left plenty of food for thought and is not as contradictory as it may appear. It demonstrates that ordinary Americans identify strongly with the issues that prompted the protests but lack faith in the protests as a vehicle for change. Importantly, it suggests that while there is a somewhat depressing fatalism in the public mood in that things are doomed to remain the same, it also indicates that the left have much to work with. Of course, this is American polling data, but I would be willing to bet that British polling would find something similar. When even Richard Littlejohn is bemoaning the “unsavoury orgy of greed,” the political terrain is definitely up for grabs.

Like Emma Burnell, my politics are evolutionary not revolutionary. The Red Army is not at the gates and this is not the start of a glorious revolution. Nor do I claim that Occupy, as some are suggesting, is a western equivalent of Tahrir Square and the Arab Spring, a parallel that shows a frightening lack of perspective (we would do well to keep in mind that while here we are the 99%, to the developing world we are the 1%).

However, I am with Toynbee and Seumas Milne in believing this is the start of something big. As democratic socialists, we should not be dismissing the movement as inconsequential or bemoaning its unsightliness but instead acknowledging the raw and genuine nature of public anger and asking questions of how this can be harnessed and structured toward political change. However, as the protests continue, winning the support of ordinary people – in other words, the 99% – will be critical.

I should make a confession here. When protests turn violent, I cringe. When I see the usual stream of protesters in Guy Fawkes masks, I cringe. When I see protesters daubed in body paint engaging in street theatre, I cringe. Not because it offends my delicate sensibilities but because I know how it plays out in working class families like mine. The vast majority of people just want to get on in life and would be hard pressed to join the encampment at St. Paul’s Cathedral when there’s a shift to clock in for, mouths to feed, and bills to pay. The Occupy protests must make common cause with the hardworking majority who are not “political” in this sense but who feel that no matter how hard they work, life seems to be an uphill struggle. How can this be done? I would propose three simple suggestions.

First, let’s avoid infantile showboating and gesture politics, the likes of which only serve as fodder for denigration and dismissal. This is not a carnival. This is not the opportunity to express oneself. We are the 99%, and the 99% does not frolic around in Guy Fawkes masks, defecate on police cars, dance on war memorials, or deface statues of former Prime Ministers. Second, let’s not antagonise the public. The harassed mother-of-three who finds that her route to work has been blocked by protesters is not likely to support Occupy’s goals. We are the 99%, and the 99% does not block traffic. Third, let’s understand that violence, if it occurs, will inevitably capture media attention. This is as inevitable as the day is long. Keep the anarchists (who have vandalised social movements the world over) at bay and keep it cool. We are the 99%, and the 99% does not smash windows.

Comparisons with the student protests of 1968 in the US and France are unhelpful. The uninformed dreamers who believe that ’68 was the pinnacle of student activism forget the postscript to this story: Richard Nixon winning the 1968 presidential election on the back of a “silent majority” of blue-collar Americans alienated by the antics of the student movement. Commentators on the political right have already presciently pointed to the dangers of this kind of protest for President Obama’s re-election bid. In Britain, Labour must navigate the treacherous waters between the Scylla of distancing itself too much and seeming aloof to the struggle of people on low and median incomes and the Charybdis of hugging the movement too closely and being associated with the excesses and eccentricities that come with political protest.

However, this long-term theorising does not change the fact that the Occupy protesters the world over deserve our encouragement and support, not our scorn. The current model of casino capitalism is demonstrably unsustainable. The potential is there for a refashioning of the political economy that will put into place rules that level the playing field and ensure equal opportunity for all, rather than reward a select few. Occupy has done us a great service by opening up a discussion on matters on inequality. Whether or not Occupy can or will succeed is a matter of legitimate debate, but nothing will be solved by dismissing the movement when it is barely out of the starting blocks.