The Occupy Wall Street movement is now set to spread to many countries around the world after it grabbed headlines in the United States recently, with protests in several cities like New York and Los Angeles. These protests are reminiscent of other youth protests in the past like the Arab Spring movements in the Middle East, the recent protests in Greece over the political establishment's failure to manage the economy and to provide good economic safety nets during times of distress, the recent protests in England over economic failures, protests in Seattle and protests in Davos, Switzerland several years ago against the neo-imperialist and elitist implications of new global frameworks being thrust on a global public without the requisite amount of forethought about socioeconomic welfare. Political establishments around the world have been chastened by the recent failures in the global capitalist order. While apologists for elitist economic frameworks still continue to advocate laissez-faire policies, the ardor has decreased. The empirical evidence about the failures of low-tax policies and about lack of regulation of financial markets and about the propensity of economies to experience cataclysmic market failures when lots of economic agents act in an uncoordinated fashion are all too real to ignore. However, while the right-wing intelligentsia reels from the evidence about the massive failures of what is essentially their framework, the left-leaning intelligentsia, or at least that part of the left-leaning intelligentsia that is part of the establishment, has not really been forthcoming with very many smart ideas to solve the crisis or to provide enduring solutions for the future. The general atmosphere is one of a passive acceptance of the crises of the short-run and the pessimism about the long-run and of a lack of intellectual will to understand the dynamics of a changed world and to come up with the right frameworks for it. As for the political establishment in countries which rely on elections as a means of gauging the public will, the attitude seems to be one of acceptance of the failures of the current economic frameworks and of trying to provide stop-gap solutions and to create an atmosphere of business-as-usual. In the background of this state of limbo of the intelligentsia and the political establishment, the youth protest movements are sending out one message at least – that the medicines of the establishment are not working.
But how exactly do the organizers of these protests plan to bring about the requisite change in policies to fix systemic problems in the global economy ? Clearly, they are not trying to overthrow governments in countries, although that has happened recently in several Middle Eastern countries. However, the case of the Middle Eastern countries is slightly different, with a clamor for democratic change in the face of dictatorial frameworks ( while the Arab Spring movement may have succeeded in effecting a change towards formal democracy and away from certain aspects of neo-imperialism, their actual ability to implement requisite socioeconomic reforms, to resist the power of the global neo-imperialist forces and to provide short-term economic succor and long-term economic sustainability can only be judged based on what takes the place of the current regimes and what economic and political frameworks they follow ). In several countries like the United States, India and several European countries, the formal democratic frameworks are there, if by democratic framework we mean periodic elections. However, elitists forces have hijacked these democratic frameworks in pernicious ways and they do not show any clear signs of relenting even after the gargantuan dynamic failures of their policies and their world order came to the fore. Elitist tax cuts continue despite the deep harm they did to the long-term sustainability of public finance in some countries. Right-wing parties still shout about spending cuts as the preferable way to cut deficits rather than tax increases despite unprecedented levels of unemployment and unprecedented levels of economic distress. Right-wing parties are still reluctant to implement deep cuts in defense and war spending when the question of the details of spending cuts arises. The legislative agenda in countries like the United States pussyfoots around the real difficulties surrounding the existing economic frameworks and the need for hard decisions. It is also hostage to the short-term and opportunistic calculations of the politicians who all too often put their re-election considerations above the long-term interests of the nation. In fact, the election-based democracies in countries like the United States and India are highly susceptible to political gimmicks, the lack of will to educate the public about short-term and long-term trade-offs about the economy, the propensity of the politicians to succumb to corporate and business funding and to sacrifice the public interest in favor of the economic elite. The Occupy Wall Street protests need to be analyzed in the background of these political frameworks that serve the elites and have even given up the pretenses of serving the interests of the masses to some extent. In the absence of an agenda of regime change, how do the organizers of these protests aim to fight the recalcitrance of the political establishment and the unresponsiveness of the legislative agenda ?
The protests are likely to serve as a warning to politicians to not push their opportunistic strategies too far. They are also likely to send a signal to the politicians that pro-corporate tax policies need to be re-examined seriously when these countries faces serious short-run fiscal shortages, the prospect of long-run fiscal shortages and unprecedented economic pain. And they will most probably send a message that any attempt to undermine economic safety nets and the persistence of a lack of will to create less volatile economic frameworks can invite retaliation from the masses. While the protests are likely to send these messages to the political establishment, the ability to fix the system in meaningful ways depends on implementing pro-active reforms in the system and not just on playing defense against the machinations of the economic elite and the cynical strategies of the economic elite to promote their interests at the cost of the interests of the masses and the long-term economic stability of these economies.
One problem when it comes to effecting pro-active change in legislative agenda using methods like mass protest is that the way the legislative agenda is set inures it to a large extent from pressure tactics like these. Individual legislators can rely on their staff to provide them with the material for their speeches. But the legislators, at least in the United States, have to consider re-election campaigns and campaign funding. There is no good mechanism to enable them to transcend their myopic political considerations and to consider the interests of the masses. When the economy is good, this lack of a mechanism to put the nation's interest above political careerism is something that the public may be able to tolerate. But the persistence of the same elitist modes of thinking becomes intolerable during times of economic distress. In the United States, the Republican Party almost invariably pushes for pro-corporate policies. The Democratic Party has recently become a party of cynical populism, a kind of populism that tries to mislead the public. And the legislative agenda displays this lack of concern for the country and for the masses in the political establishment. The White House does play a role in setting some of the legislative agenda and it has the power of veto in legislative matters. However, the experts who advise the White House on economic matters, like the members of the Council of Economic Advisers, tend to be drawn from establishments that have their own elitist biases and their own penchant for replacing true advocacy of the interest of the masses with a halfhearted and pusillanimous advocacy of their well-being. The current crisis has shown that both the left-leaning segment and the right-leaning segment of the academic establishment are at a loss for good solutions when ti comes to short-term or long-term fixes. The arguments one hears are business-as-usual arguments, meant for normal times. Whether academics like these serve as advisers to Presidents and as members of Federal Reserve Boards, or whether corporate and Wall Street executives serve in these positions, the mechanisms do not exist to take hard decisions in favor of the masses and in the interest of economic stability when extraordinary times call for such hard decisions. Can a movement like the Occupy Wall Street movement succeed in penetrating this conspiracy of elitism and forcing the political establishment to rise above its short-term interests and make the hard choices that need to be made ? At the present moment, this kind of pro-active outcome seems to be too difficult to achieve using protests like Occupy Wall Street. Something else needs to be added to the mix if the Occupy Wall Street movement is to have pro-active outcomes and not just defensive outcomes. And one crucial element that needs to be added to the mix is a radical reform in the way elections are conducted. If one considers the United States, for example, at the moment, the Green Party and the Reform Party, which are the major alternatives to the two-party system in the United States, do not have the requisite level of presence and activism. Unless the stranglehold of money power on the elections and on the political system is broken, the ability of mass protests or similar movements to effect a change in the nature of the legislative agenda will be limited. In the United States, for example, genuine campaign finance reform is needed if movements like Occupy Wall Street are to stand a good chance of leading to positive transformations in the system. What is needed, in addition to mass protests, is a way to launch effective electoral challenge to the political establishment through candidates that are not beholden to corporate interests. The mass protest movements need to lead to the empowerment of that part of the intelligentsia that still believes in making bold and systematic assessments of the problems and in suggesting solutions that have the interests of the broad masses in mind and that part of the talent pool that believes in using politics as a means of positive social change. One thing that must be kept in mind is that these formal democracies differ widely in how powerful the elitist economic forces are. For example, the balance between elitism and mass interest is not the same in France as it is in the United States. Countries where elitist forces are very powerful will most likely need to undergo very different changes compared to countries which have a better balance between elitism and the well-being of the masses. If the Occupy Wall Street movement does lead to a radical and drastic change in the way politics and economic activity is conducted in these countries, the exact nature and amount of change needs to be country-specific. Whether the mass protest movements do lead to such a sea-change in the political landscape in countries with formal democracies and whether the forces of cynical inaction and of activist elitism can be defeated by the forces of activist political idealism will determine the fundamental character of these societies in the near and the distant future.
But how exactly do the organizers of these protests plan to bring about the requisite change in policies to fix systemic problems in the global economy ? Clearly, they are not trying to overthrow governments in countries, although that has happened recently in several Middle Eastern countries. However, the case of the Middle Eastern countries is slightly different, with a clamor for democratic change in the face of dictatorial frameworks ( while the Arab Spring movement may have succeeded in effecting a change towards formal democracy and away from certain aspects of neo-imperialism, their actual ability to implement requisite socioeconomic reforms, to resist the power of the global neo-imperialist forces and to provide short-term economic succor and long-term economic sustainability can only be judged based on what takes the place of the current regimes and what economic and political frameworks they follow ). In several countries like the United States, India and several European countries, the formal democratic frameworks are there, if by democratic framework we mean periodic elections. However, elitists forces have hijacked these democratic frameworks in pernicious ways and they do not show any clear signs of relenting even after the gargantuan dynamic failures of their policies and their world order came to the fore. Elitist tax cuts continue despite the deep harm they did to the long-term sustainability of public finance in some countries. Right-wing parties still shout about spending cuts as the preferable way to cut deficits rather than tax increases despite unprecedented levels of unemployment and unprecedented levels of economic distress. Right-wing parties are still reluctant to implement deep cuts in defense and war spending when the question of the details of spending cuts arises. The legislative agenda in countries like the United States pussyfoots around the real difficulties surrounding the existing economic frameworks and the need for hard decisions. It is also hostage to the short-term and opportunistic calculations of the politicians who all too often put their re-election considerations above the long-term interests of the nation. In fact, the election-based democracies in countries like the United States and India are highly susceptible to political gimmicks, the lack of will to educate the public about short-term and long-term trade-offs about the economy, the propensity of the politicians to succumb to corporate and business funding and to sacrifice the public interest in favor of the economic elite. The Occupy Wall Street protests need to be analyzed in the background of these political frameworks that serve the elites and have even given up the pretenses of serving the interests of the masses to some extent. In the absence of an agenda of regime change, how do the organizers of these protests aim to fight the recalcitrance of the political establishment and the unresponsiveness of the legislative agenda ?
The protests are likely to serve as a warning to politicians to not push their opportunistic strategies too far. They are also likely to send a signal to the politicians that pro-corporate tax policies need to be re-examined seriously when these countries faces serious short-run fiscal shortages, the prospect of long-run fiscal shortages and unprecedented economic pain. And they will most probably send a message that any attempt to undermine economic safety nets and the persistence of a lack of will to create less volatile economic frameworks can invite retaliation from the masses. While the protests are likely to send these messages to the political establishment, the ability to fix the system in meaningful ways depends on implementing pro-active reforms in the system and not just on playing defense against the machinations of the economic elite and the cynical strategies of the economic elite to promote their interests at the cost of the interests of the masses and the long-term economic stability of these economies.
One problem when it comes to effecting pro-active change in legislative agenda using methods like mass protest is that the way the legislative agenda is set inures it to a large extent from pressure tactics like these. Individual legislators can rely on their staff to provide them with the material for their speeches. But the legislators, at least in the United States, have to consider re-election campaigns and campaign funding. There is no good mechanism to enable them to transcend their myopic political considerations and to consider the interests of the masses. When the economy is good, this lack of a mechanism to put the nation's interest above political careerism is something that the public may be able to tolerate. But the persistence of the same elitist modes of thinking becomes intolerable during times of economic distress. In the United States, the Republican Party almost invariably pushes for pro-corporate policies. The Democratic Party has recently become a party of cynical populism, a kind of populism that tries to mislead the public. And the legislative agenda displays this lack of concern for the country and for the masses in the political establishment. The White House does play a role in setting some of the legislative agenda and it has the power of veto in legislative matters. However, the experts who advise the White House on economic matters, like the members of the Council of Economic Advisers, tend to be drawn from establishments that have their own elitist biases and their own penchant for replacing true advocacy of the interest of the masses with a halfhearted and pusillanimous advocacy of their well-being. The current crisis has shown that both the left-leaning segment and the right-leaning segment of the academic establishment are at a loss for good solutions when ti comes to short-term or long-term fixes. The arguments one hears are business-as-usual arguments, meant for normal times. Whether academics like these serve as advisers to Presidents and as members of Federal Reserve Boards, or whether corporate and Wall Street executives serve in these positions, the mechanisms do not exist to take hard decisions in favor of the masses and in the interest of economic stability when extraordinary times call for such hard decisions. Can a movement like the Occupy Wall Street movement succeed in penetrating this conspiracy of elitism and forcing the political establishment to rise above its short-term interests and make the hard choices that need to be made ? At the present moment, this kind of pro-active outcome seems to be too difficult to achieve using protests like Occupy Wall Street. Something else needs to be added to the mix if the Occupy Wall Street movement is to have pro-active outcomes and not just defensive outcomes. And one crucial element that needs to be added to the mix is a radical reform in the way elections are conducted. If one considers the United States, for example, at the moment, the Green Party and the Reform Party, which are the major alternatives to the two-party system in the United States, do not have the requisite level of presence and activism. Unless the stranglehold of money power on the elections and on the political system is broken, the ability of mass protests or similar movements to effect a change in the nature of the legislative agenda will be limited. In the United States, for example, genuine campaign finance reform is needed if movements like Occupy Wall Street are to stand a good chance of leading to positive transformations in the system. What is needed, in addition to mass protests, is a way to launch effective electoral challenge to the political establishment through candidates that are not beholden to corporate interests. The mass protest movements need to lead to the empowerment of that part of the intelligentsia that still believes in making bold and systematic assessments of the problems and in suggesting solutions that have the interests of the broad masses in mind and that part of the talent pool that believes in using politics as a means of positive social change. One thing that must be kept in mind is that these formal democracies differ widely in how powerful the elitist economic forces are. For example, the balance between elitism and mass interest is not the same in France as it is in the United States. Countries where elitist forces are very powerful will most likely need to undergo very different changes compared to countries which have a better balance between elitism and the well-being of the masses. If the Occupy Wall Street movement does lead to a radical and drastic change in the way politics and economic activity is conducted in these countries, the exact nature and amount of change needs to be country-specific. Whether the mass protest movements do lead to such a sea-change in the political landscape in countries with formal democracies and whether the forces of cynical inaction and of activist elitism can be defeated by the forces of activist political idealism will determine the fundamental character of these societies in the near and the distant future.
by C. Jayant praharaj ( send comments to [email protected] )