Humanity & Society http://has.sagepub.

com/

The Crisis and a Way Forward: What We Can Learn from Occupy Wall Street
Ben Brucato Humanity & Society 2012 36: 76 DOI: 10.1177/0160597611435635 The online version of this article can be found at: http://has.sagepub.com/content/36/1/76

Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com

On behalf of:

Association for Humanistic Society

Additional services and information for Humanity & Society can be found at: Email Alerts: http://has.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Subscriptions: http://has.sagepub.com/subscriptions Reprints: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Permissions: http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Citations: http://has.sagepub.com/content/36/1/76.refs.html

>> Version of Record - Feb 1, 2012 What is This?

Downloaded from has.sagepub.com at Fund Diag.Est Imstico PARENT on September 25, 2013

Action Note
Humanity & Society 36(1) 76-84 The Author(s) 2012 Reprints and permission: sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav DOI: 10.1177/0160597611435635 http://has.sagepub.com

The Crisis and a Way Forward: What We Can Learn from Occupy Wall Street
Ben Brucato1

Abstract The financial crisis of 2007 has generated ubiquitous commentary; it also spurred a global grassroots uprising that began with Occupy Wall Street. This movement provided a unique analysis of the crisis as well as a practical example of a way forward. Occupy Wall Street possesses a unique analysis of and response to the financial crisis. Here we see facilitation of political action by heterogeneous partisans that both demand and exemplify increased transparency and participation in decision making. Further, this movement relies upon both human-scaled and participatory technologies. Occupy Wall Street is a microcommunity that embodies a vision for a pluralistic, direct democratic society and demonstrates it through practice. This uprising provides a potential democratic solution for a way beyond crisis to new horizons. Keywords social movements, 2007 financial crisis, Occupy Wall Street, human-scaled technology, participatory technology Reflexive Statement I am a PhD student in Science and Technology Studies (STS) at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institutes (RPI) in Troy, New York. I study the politics of technology as it

Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, USA

Corresponding Author: Ben Brucato, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, 110 Eighth Street, Troy, NY USA 12180 Email:

Brucato

77

addresses materially-embedded ideologies and hierarchies. As a particular site of inquiry, I investigate mediating technologies from social media to surveillance cameras to identify ways that they add obduracy to past and existing relationships of dominance and authority, and how they resist popular intervention. Part of the aim of my work is to develop analytic and evaluative criteria that will allow better engagement with technologies to counter tendencies toward technological somnambulism. Other current substantive research is focused on surveillance and weaponization in college campus policing. The structure of the general assemblies and the peoples mic drew my attention to Occupy Wall Street first and foremost. These demonstrated the embedding of deliberative and critical orientations to organizational technologies that give the movement unique prospects for building democratic community. The Occupy Wall Street movement is the first worldwide postmodern uprising. This essay focuses on Occupy Wall Streets analysis of the financial crisis; the facilitating of political action from disparate, heterogeneous partisans; increasing of transparency and participation in decision making; and relying upon both human-scaled and participatory technologies. Through these means, the Occupy Wall Street microcommunity embodies a vision for a pluralistic, direct democratic society and demonstrates it through practice. Through this process, this uprising embodies potential democratic solutions for a way beyond the crisis. The Occupy Wall Street movement more effectively addresses the cause of the financial crisis than economists and discussions in the mainstream press. Three years into an economic recession that rivals the Great Depression, economists are scrambling for explanations of its origins and the steps to take. Congressperson Darrel Issa (R-CA), Ranking Member of the House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, blames unaffordable housing and political kickbacks from the banking industry. He stresses the need to return to fiscal discipline and prudent, responsible housing policies (Issa 2011:419). Gary B. Gorton of the Yale School of Management traces an added cause to the parallel banking system and a banking panic that began in August 2007 (2010:2). Former economist at Freddie Mac and the Federal Reserve and current Cato Institute adjunct, Arnold Kling, blames capital regulations and cognitive failures of executives in financial institutions. It may not be surprising to the reader that this employee of a libertarian think-tank advocates for deregulation and expects the public to not be deceived into believing that regulatory foresight can be as keen as regulatory hindsight (Kling 2011: 517). Ten-year veteran Chief Executive Officer and President of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis and current Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute blames a failure of political leadership in Washington and short-sighted portfolio policies by financial firms (Poole 2010:433, 440). While there is much hemming and hawing over causes, and plenty of caution and hesitation over solutionsespecially those that might impinge on profits at financial institutionstens of millions of Americans are unemployed, and just as many are in nearly catastrophic situations. But one would be in error to expect

78

Humanity & Society 36(1)

economists to focus on this group of Americans that outnumber the entire population of any member state in the European Union. Theyre happy to take the credit in the good times, but the disciples of this false science are hard to find in a recession (Jenkins 2009). One would be better aided to turn to those catastrophically impacted by this crisis than those who constructed and maintain a financial system that routinely fails the public, while the power and privilege of elites continue to escalate. On September 17, 2011, several hundred activists marched to Wall Street, near the New York Stock Exchange. This was the beginning of an uprising now known as Occupy Wall Street. This broad group of citizens, who claim unity as the 99% against the corporate influence in American politics, was more clear in assigning blame for the financial crisis: it belongs to the top 1 percent. A marcher explained, You need a scorecard to keep track of all the things that corporations have done that are bad for this country (Moynihan 2011). For this movement, the crisis was not a dysfunctional failure of financial capitalism but the essence of its utilization of catastrophe to consolidate financial capital. We see in this approach a distinctly postmodern analysis of class relations and political economy in which cognitive capital becomes central and financialization is a fundamental yet new process of capital accumulation (Marazzi 2011). This group quickly grew to several thousand protestors who took and maintained control of Zuccotti Park. Campers maintained a constant occupation of the park, representing the interests of distressed homeowners, the elderly, people of color, women, noncisgendered persons, small farmers, low-wage workers, college students, manufacturing workers, the uninsured and underinsured, privacy advocates, journalists, victims of police brutality, consumer advocates, alternative energy advocates, and prisoners. The park became a microcommunity and homes to dozens of permanent campers, and hundreds who stayed for varying lengths of time. This became a place to read and criticize, to eat and sleep, and to organize and mobilize. From this base, occupiers expressed concerns ranging from access to medicine and health care to oil spills, truth in media to internal colonialism and imperialism, weapons to healthy food advocates, and animal rights to the rights of children (General Assembly 2011). Two months later, Zuccotti Park remained occupied, and the movement has inspired over 2,000 other solidarity protests and occupations throughout the world, mostly in the United States (Occupy Together 2011). As this movement spreads to differing cities and becomes home to multiple subjectivities, each occupation demonstrates localized political and policing strategies. Organizational strategies of occupiers for marches, encampments, direct actions, and public relations vary, and they are met with dramatically differing reactions from law enforcement. In Oakland, multiple militarized police raids of the encampment led to mass arrests and hospitalizations of injured protestors (Petty and Cooper 2011). In Albany, Governor Cuomo ordered the occupation to be evicted and all occupiers arrested, but the Chief of Police refused to make arrests and the District Attorney refused to charge anyone

Brucato

79

if they were (Lyons 2011). Despite the variety of policing tactics, during the first 2 months of the movement, there have been thousands of arrests. In November 2011, President Obama was heckled at a speech in New Hampshire by local members of an occupation who criticized his silence on the over 4,000 arrests nationwide at Occupy Together occupations (Jackson 2011). These heterogeneous groups have a functioning pluralism, whereas liberal democratic states have not sufficiently practiced it (Lindblom 1986:352). Perhaps, the lack of familiarity with authentic pluralism is what has inspired perplexity toward the movement, especially among journalists. Most media pundits express exasperated confusion by this diverse group of interests expressed by an even more visibly diverse group of activists and citizens. Commentators on FoxNews complain about the lack of a cohesive message and clearly stated goals. The New York Times ran a story on the faulty aim of the movement, condemning its lack of cohesion and its apparent wish to pantomime progressivism rather than practice it knowledgably (Bellafante 2011). Douglas Rushkoff argues that What upsets bankings defenders and politicians alike is the refusal of this movement to state its terms or set its goals in the traditional language of campaigns (2011). The pundits and reporters employed by megacorporate-owned press not only lack the language to discuss this movement, its analysis and aspirations; they also lack the interest in utilizing the rhetoric articulated by the movement. Since this movement possesses a fresh political and economic analysis, new models for organizing, and different styles of communication when compared with traditional protest events, the response by the press to dismiss the movement for lacking a message is an easy play. Certain aspects of Occupy Wall Street share similarities with new social movements, particularly Claus Offes characterization that these movements involve their postideological, posthistorical nature as well as their lack of a positive alternative and specific target in the form of a privileged class, and that they deny accommodation to existing power and resist standard forms of co-optation (Buechler 1995). What is uniquely postmodern is that the movement lacks a clear beginning and ending. FoxNews reporter Griff Jenkins asked protestor Jesse LaGreca, how do you want to see this [end]? If you could have it in a perfect way, how would it be? LaGreca replied, I wouldnt like to see this end. I would like to see the conversation continue (Grant 2011). In this sense, this microcommunity becomes a parallel political model based on direct democracy and rooted in affinity. Whereas commentators and reportersas well as their viewing publicare accustomed to responding to protest marches and demonstrations expressing the politics of partisan interests and populated by a group of citizens defined by a narrowly specified aim, Occupy Wall Street engenders the all-embracing meeting point of partisans. At this juncture, the people are united by a politics of negativity: in identifying a common enemy in the ruling elites; and a politics of practice: pluralist, direct democracy. So in this sense, as LaGreca commented, there is no end. Even beyond the politics of negativityor the removal of corporate influence in governancethe process remains. This is a model of change exemplified by the newest social movements that seeks

80

Humanity & Society 36(1)

to generate a living, nonhegemonic model of politics as a revolutionary process, in contrast to that which would see the seizure and control of state power (Al-Jazeera 2011; Day 2005). As Lindblom reminds us, no social scientist or researcher can tightly derive short-run or middle-run interim steps from a model of a far-distant, wholly harmonious society . . . (Lindblom 1986:364). Occupy Wall Street appears to embrace Agambens expression of a politics and a life that are yet to be entirely thought (2000:111). Douglas Rushkoff explains that It is difficult to comprehend a 21st century movement from the perspective of the 20th century politics, media, and economics in which we are still steeped (Think Occupy Wall St. Is A Phase? You Dont Get It., 2011). The politics of the past century stress the objective pursuit of goals for the broader public, emphasizing the common good. This tradition led to the public interest to be defined around conventional positions . . . However another result is that dissident interests are disproportionately deprived . . . (Lindblom 1986:349). This is precisely why Occupy Wall Street is so important to turn to for insightthis is perhaps the first model of a truly postmodern movement in the United States, and certainly the first one to take on global proportions. Some might see the World Trade Organization protests in Seattle as an antecedent, and this event has an important genealogical place in the development of what we now see in New York. But in turning to the decision making and processual aspects of Occupy Wall Street, we see that beyond the lack of a discernable beginning and ending of the movement we also see a heightened level of transparency and participation embedded in this movement. The actual physical arrangement as well as the organizational technologies and the mechanisms for decision making depict unique features of this newest movement. First, the occupying of a physical space emphasizes proximal origins. Without walls and doors dividing people, the occupiers are in constant interaction. Social psychologists have recently turned to a concern for the importance of space. Maass and Suitner explain that humans not only live in space, they also reason in space. Spatial reasoning has been demonstrated to impact social cognition in addition to higher-level cognitive functioning. [P]eople pay greater attention to detailed information about temporally, spatially or socially near objects or persons, but elaborate distant stimuli at a more global level, considering general features rather than specific details . . . with increasing distance, events or objects are perceived more abstractly (Maas & Suitner 2011:159). Occupy Wall Street thus has a unique capability to develop politics through interaction among a variety of partisans, and through challenging existing structuresboth institutional but also internalizedbeyond the level of abstraction, and instead through practice. The capacity for power to be challenged and democracy to be exercised not through ideology and structures but through practical decision making and action appears to better connect with findings in social research about how humans associate with and think about one another. Second, the organizational technologies employed are explicitly participatory. This is certainly aided by proximal space, as people draw on their affective,

Brucato

81

cognitive and bodily experiences as a source of information to make judgments (Schwarz and Clore 2007:385). But this is only important if they are able to exercise this judgment. Occupy Wall Street, without predetermined demands or goals, and with its General Assembly structure, allows participants to speak freely to shape its evolving politics. Decisions are consensed after anyone can take the open floor. Facilitators mediate the assembly to allow full participation, including taking a progressive stack, in which people from historically oppressed groups talk first, and when frequent contributors to the discussion are moved back in the speaking order. The facilitation processes lead to synchronous yet slow decision making. Asynchronous decision making can lead to the prioritization of rationalizing, reduction to ideology, and a diminishing of the role of affect. Rapid decisions suppress certain voices and propel conventional thinking and action. Democracy that is direct and participatory is notoriously slow, however, is deliberate and mindful: only those things worth the investment of time and cognitive energy are endeavored. Additionally the use of human-scaled technologies pulls participants together. Amplification is banned in the parks in New York. To effectively communicate with a large crowd, speakers break up their communication into small phrases that are echoed by the crowd. Sometimes this occurs in succession, so the speech is transmitted in waves emitted away from the oratory among the audience. This is referred to as the peoples mic, which introduces reciprocity and feedback, thereby producing a democratic communication as opposed to the more conventional Saussaurean model of sender-message-receiver, which so easily becomes the conservative media model that produces non-communication (Mason 2011). When author of The Shock Doctrine, Naomi Klein, spoke at Occupy Wall Street, she characterized the peoples mic as encouraging one to Say unto others what you would have them say unto you, only way louder (Occupy Wall Street: The Most Important Thing in the World Now, 2011). This is a human-scaled technology in the most literal sense. Occupiers are increasingly turning to highly customizable social media, such as Vibe, to aid communication. The app allows users to share messages with users within certain distances160 feet to worldwidethat will be automatically deleted within a set amount of time that they control, from 15 minutes to 30 days (McMillan 2011). Instead of relying on the mainstream press, Occupy Wall Street participants are capturing and editing video on location for viral films. Meetings and events are streamed live on the Internet. A variety of social media is utilized to spread footage of police brutality against protestors. In addition to their availability on the Internet, these videos have been picked up and broadcast by news outlets across the world. Too often we are apprised of complicated or muddling explanations of a predicament and offered simplistic and reductionist recommendations for a way out of it. Occupy New York offers a break from this tradition. The financial crisis is their (the 1 percents) crisis, yet we (the 99 percent) have to bear the brunt of it. Indeed, we dont need a score card. What we do need is a mind toward practice and process. While the liberal democratic state has failed to integrate pluralism, Occupy Wall

82

Humanity & Society 36(1)

Street shows the degree to which transparency and participation is essential for partisan politics to play out. Further, it lacks both the demand for the feasible and the focus toward official representatives (cf. Lindblom 1986). These critical aspects are embedded in the very processes, organizations and technologies employed by Occupy Wall Street, and thus its commitment to democracy is not merely ideological but also practical. None of this is to say that Occupy Wall Street will take monumental steps forward; rather, the argument is that this model enables such steps while the existing political, organizational and technological structures prohibit them. The Manichaean posing of the 99 percent against the 1 percent offers some political utility if pursued with vigor, and if the often-contradictory needs of the 99 percent are worked out. Such a dualistic approach creates not two, but three categories: friends, enemies, and those undecided or not yet mobilized (Olson 2012). A redistribution of wealth and political power toward the most exploited, marginalized, and disenfranchised would certainly mean a reduction in the privileges of the middle class. Historically, the managerial and professional classes have served as a buffer to maintain class relations, legitimating ruling class dominance, and suppressing uprisings of the working class and poor. Declaring the 1 percent as the enemy is not new, as the ownership of the means of production has been so consolidated since early in the industrial period, a phenomena never without its critics. But to pose the unity of the 99 percent against this enemy is distinct. What it lacks in historical analysis it may gain by posing this Manichaean rift, but only if the movement forces the middle class from their historic buffer zone and into the struggle against the ruling class. Declaration of Conflicting Interests
The author declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding
The author received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References
Agamben, G. 2000. Means Without End: Notes on Politics. Translated by V. Binetti & C. Casarino. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Al-Jazeera. 2011, October 8. US Activists Have Lost Trust in Politicians. Retrieved October 8, 2011, Al-Jazeera English (http://english.aljazeera.net/video/americas/2011/10/ 201110814017891684.html). Bellafante, G. 2011, September 23. Gunning for Wall Street, With Faulty Aim. Retrieved October 4, 2011, The New York Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/25/nyregion/ protesters-are-gunning-for-wall-street-with-faulty-aim.html?_r1).

Brucato

83

Buechler, S. M. 1995. New Social Movement Theories. The Sociological Quarterly 36(3): 441-64. Day, R. J. F. 2005. Gramsci Is Dead: Anarchist Currents in the Newest Social Movements. London, England: Pluto Press. General Assembly. 2011, September 30. Occupy Wall Street. Retrieved October 4, 2011, First Official Release from Occupy Wall Street (http://occupywallst.org/forum/first-officialrelease-from-occupy-wall-street/). Gorton, G. B. 2010. Questions and Answers about the Financial Crisis. Cambridge, MA: National Bureau of Economic Research. Grant, D. 2011, October 3. Occupy Wall Street Activist Slams Fox News Producer in Un-Aired Interview. Retrieved October 4, 2011, The New York Observer (http://www. observer.com/2011/10/exclusive-occupy-wall-street-activist-slams-fox-news-anchor-inun-aired-interview-video/). Issa, D. 2011. Unaffordable Housing and Political Kickbacks. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 33(2):407-19. Jackson, D. 2011, November 22. Obama Heckled in New Hampshire. Retrieved November 23, 2011, USA Today: The Oval-Tracking the Obama Presidency (http:// content.usatoday.com/communities/theoval/post/2011/11/obama-heckled-in-newhampshire/1). Jenkins, S. 2009, July 15. When the Going Gets Tough, the Economists Go Very Quiet. Retrieved October 4, 2011, Kick It Over (http://kickitover.org/2009/07/15/when-goinggets-tough-economists-go-very-quiet). Klein, N. 2011, October 7. Occupy Wall Street: The Most Important Thing in the World Now. Retrieved October 7, 2011, The Nation (http://www.thenation.com/article/ 163844/occupy-wall-street-most-important-thing-world-now). Kling, A. 2011. The Financial Crisis: Moral Failure or Cognitive Failure? Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 33(2):508-18. Lindblom, C. E. 1986. Who Needs What Social Research for Policymaking? Knowledge: Creation, Diffusion, Utilization 7(4):345-65. Lyons, B. J. 2011, October 24. Under Pressure to make Arrests, Police and Troopers push back. Retrieved October 25, 2011, Times Union (http://www.timesunion.com/default/ article/Under-pressure-to-make-arrests-police-and-2232934.php). Maas, A. and C. Suitner. 2011. Spatial Constraints on Social Cognition. Social Psychology 42(3):159-64. Marazzi, C. 2011. The Violence of Financial Capitalism (New Edition ed.). Translated by K. Lebedeva & J. F. McGimsey. Los Angeles: Semiotext(e). Mason, J. 2011. E-mail message to author, October 8. McMillan, G. 2011, October 3. Move Over, Twitter: Occupy Wall Street Activists Feel the Vibe. Retrieved October 8, 2011, Time: Techland (http://techland.time.com/2011/10/ 03/move-over-twitter-occupy-wall-street-activists-feel-the-vibe/). Moynihan, C. 2011, September 18. Protesters Find Wall Street Off Limits. Retrieved October 7, 2011, The New York Times (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html? res9F01E7D91 F3CF93BA2575AC0A9679D8B63).

84

Humanity & Society 36(1)

Occupy Together. 2011, October 8. Occupy Together Meetups Everywhere. Retrieved October 8, 2011, Occupy Together (http://www.meetup.com/occupytogether/). Olson, J. 2007. The Freshness of Fanaticism: The Abolitionist Defense of Zealotry, Perspectives on Politics 5(4):685-701. Petty, T. and J. J. Cooper. 2011, November 14. Occupy Oakland Raided For Second Time By Hundreds Of Police. Retrieved November 22, 2011, Huffington Post (http://www. huffingtonpost.com/2011/11/14/occupy-oakland-raided-police_n_1092649.html). Poole, W. 2010. Causes and Consequences of the Financial Crisis 2007-2009. Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy 33(2):422-41. Rushkoff, D. 2011, October 5. Think Occupy Wall St. Is A Phase? You Dont Get It. Retrieved October 5, 2011, CNN (http://edition.cnn.com/2011/10/05/opinion/rushkoffoccupy-wall-street/index.html). Schwarz, N. and G. L. Clore. 2007. Feelings and Phenomenal Experiences. Pp. 385-407 in Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles, 2nd ed., edited by A. W. Kruglanski & E. T. Higgins. New York: The Guilford Press.