occupy

Get Beyond the Bias

04 Dec
by John, posted in #OccupyDenver, #OccupyWallStreet, #OSW, #StandupDenver, Debt, Government Spending, leadership, occupy, Policy   |  10 Comments

I made my third and fourth visits to OccupyDenver last week, including Saturday’s conservative counter-demonstration.  While my visit last Thursday was on an unseasonably warm afternoon, Saturday was bitterly cold after a night of heavy snow fall.  The weather was so miserable that the organizers of the conservative demonstration cancelled it.

Still a rump group of conservatives gathered on the capital steps to listen to informal addresses.  There were about thirty conservatives, twenty state troopers, and a smattering of press and OccupyDenver activists.  Apparently a Democratic Hickenlooper administration focused on costs believes it needs twenty state troopers to guard the capital from thirty conservatives.

It was a respectful gathering that listened to traditional themes of personal responsibility, free market economics, and private charity.  The organizers also invited several OccupyDenver activists to speak and cheered a variety of common themes – love of country and criticism of crony capitalism generated the most enthusiasm.  And there was respectful disagreement as well.

On the conservative side I was particularly impressed with a young conservative radio personality, Jimmy Segenberger. Segenberger offered a critique of student loan debt that both agreed with the OccupyWallStreet movement that a college tuition bubble existed, but differed in seeing federal subsidized student loans as the problem.  Segenberger expressed a belief that the constant increase in federally subsidized student loan availability was driving an increasing demand for college that drove costs skyward. Segenberger focused on the importance of not forgiving loans, personal responsibility, and using his own example of finishing college early in three years as a solution to college debt.  It was eloquent, it was rational, and it may have some legitimacy.

It is just in my four visits to OccupyDenver I have never heard a genuine activist advocate forgiving student loans. Perhaps other Occupy camps are advocating that, but I have not heard OccupyDenver advocating that position.  What I have heard over and over is that the government’s focus on corporate interests is leaving graduates unemployed with heavy debt.

And that really is the rub – if you listen to the OccupyDenver advocates, not the mainstream press and not the mentally ill, high, and other oddities the press obsesses upon you get a coherent message.  It is a message that I often do not share, but it is a very different message than the stereotypes consistently portrayed about OccupyDenver.

Much of the criticism of the movement is that it is dirty, anti-police, violent, and socialist. I spent most of yesterday afternoon reviewing the Denver Post’s and the local television stations’ website coverage of the movement.   Almost every headline and opening of a story is about violence, about filth, about anti-police behavior, about people who are incoherent. And almost always buried at the bottom of the article is a statement from the OccupyDenver activists that the people interviewed or arrested were not associated with OccupyDenver.

None of the serious activists I have spoken to in four separate trips were high or violent. They claimed they were employed with homes.  If you catch them after a night on the sidewalk before they have gone home for clean clothes and a shower, they are disheveled.  Some are indeed socialist, but one female activist that I spoke to at length on last Thursday was quite conservative bordering on libertarian. The only conclusion I can reach is the press likes a good story about violence, drugs, homelessness, and unemployment at the expense of a complete picture including any real coverage of the movement’s basic themes.

My first exposure to this press bias was during a media scrum around Michael Moore’s visit (the subject of my October 30th post).  For over an hour I stood in a crowd of television and print reporters waiting for Moore to arrive.  At no point did any of the mainstream press make any attempt to interview the activists about their views.  But I did listen to two of them (one from the Denver Post and one from the Fox affiliate) openly ridiculing the movement in the now traditional stereotype.

On Thursday I also was able to spend about fifteen minutes speaking with two Denver policemen.  They confirmed to me that since the Mayor ordered the removal of the kitchen, medical clinic, and donation table that crowd had shrunk to mostly genuine activists. The most senior one told me that the activists were not violent, but like the Nazi/skinhead protests of the 1990s in Denver the Occupy movement has drawn violent anarchists.

A critical stereotyping of the OccupyDenver movement is that it is anti-capitalist and has no agenda.  In my four visits I have heard a very clear message each trip from the serious activists.  And it is neither unfocused or reflexively anti-capitalist.  It is strongly against crony capitalism.

The message is relatively simple.  First, corporate money and lobbying are distorting politics.  Polliticians represent corporate interests resulting in bank bailouts, while leaving average Americans to foreclosure and bankruptcy.  Second, the Federal Reserve is operating independent of the people’s government again acting on behalf of corporate and other special interests.  It is a message that is not dissimilar to an early Tea Party message.

Why are they camped out on the sidewalk in front of Civic Center Park?  Rightly or wrongly they believe that the political system is so corrupt that participating in it will result in the system granting them token relief, then absorbing them into the fundamentally corrupt system.  The correct answer to last week’s poll question was Karl Denninger, an early Tea Party activist.   His basic point was the Occupy movement’s refusal to express a specific political agenda allowed it to remain an independent force for change.  That the Tea Party had in large measure been absorbed into the Republican party, had lost control of the message, and been unable to drive real change.  By remaining camped out in front of the symbols of government OccupyDenver seeks to keep the pressure on for real change.

And at some point the the Governor and the Mayor are going to have to realize that while the conservative counter-protesters believe in different remedies, they cannot simply ignore what both sides agree upon.  That the government is operating for special interests.  That it is ineffective policy for the Governor to hand out corporate welfare to companies such as Arrow Electronics, while failing to even meet with the movement or attend one of their General Assemblies.  They are after all his constituents.  He is supposed to work for them, not just the constituents he prefers.

Beyond a disgust with crony capitalism I disagree with much of the Tea Party’s and much of OccupyDenver’s views. But, I do believe the Governor and the mainstream press are tone deaf.  They act like the Pharisees encountering John the Baptist – focused on his odd clothes and diet while missing the importance of his message.

The Governor is for some unfathomable reason proving the point that he works for someone other than all of the people of Colorado.   And as someone that voted for him, I hope he will begin disproving that proposition before the next election.

Can Do, Not Screw You

16 Nov
by John, posted in Rural, Urban Policy   |  2 Comments

This is the time of year where I spend time in rural America.  One of the unforeseen benefits of hunting for birds is you are exposed to ranchers, farmers, and the people that make their living supporting ranchers and farmers.  The divide between urban America and rural America over effective policy is striking.

            Most of the farmers and ranchers I meet in Eastern Colorado, Nebraska, and Kansas are very conservative.  As opposed to fifteen years ago, I just do not meet any Democrats.
            Urban America is obviously more complex.  As readers of this blog know, I have spent some time down at OccupyDenver and the contrast between the protestors and rural America is striking.  If you review the election results in 2010 on a map, you will see a sea of red in the countryside and a sea of blue around most cities.  And it is a divide that freezes our ability to function as a country.
            The one thing I hear universally in rural America is that personal responsibility is the key to the country’s turnaround.  We do not need government action, we need the government to shrink, except if it means shrinking farm subsidies. The one thing I hear universally in urban America is that personal responsibility means you must not only act for yourself, but also on behalf of the whole country, except if the policy benefits lightly populated rural America.  But as I listen I find both sides’ view cannot survive a high school debating society’s scrutiny.
            I have a tremendous admiration for farmers and ranchers.  They work seven days a week.  Much of that work is hard physical labor.  But it is also necessary today that they master free market capitalism – futures and option trading are a key to rural profits.  If you sit in a rural Nebraska restaurant, you will hear ethanol has generated jobs in rural America and crop subsidies are really about national security that keeps our food safe from foreign export manipulation.
            In urban America the conversation is again very complex across all political views, but it is unquestionably more liberal simply because centrists and liberals exist in urban America.  The debate over the merits of healthcare, collective bargaining, or environmental regulation is not monolithic as in rural America.
            But the most striking feature of all these conversations is how little rural and urban America mix with each other.  Friends of mine in New York City are militant about gun control.  They live in a City with an enormous and effective police force partially funded through federal 9/11 dollars where a 911 call produces police in less than five minutes. And because they never spend time in rural America they do not understand that a call to the sheriff will produce help in an hour or two.
            Friends in rural Nebraska or Colorado are militant defenders of Second Amendment rights, but they never will acknowledge to fire a gun in a New York City apartment building is to most likely send a round through the paper-thin walls into the next apartment.  And it is the unwillingness of both sides to acknowledge the validity of both points of view and compromise that leads to public policy on guns being set not in legislatures but in sharply divided courts.
            The most effective government policy we could launch today is an exchange.  We need to create opportunities for urban children to work on a farm, to milk a cow, to dig a fence post, to watch a farmer trading in options, and to sweat out a drought.  We need to send rural kids from Nebraska not to Omaha, but to New York.  To live in a household surrounded by ten million people worried about mass transit, good schools, and pollution.   We need a policy that brings both sides to understand the absolute importance of personal responsibility and its limits.
            To recognize that farm subsidies are not the result of personal responsibility, but collective responsibility.  To recognize that urban school reform is not solely about collective responsibility, but also about individual families taking advantage of the reform. No matter how good the school, if you do not get your child out of bed on time, feed them, and send them off to school with the promise of help on the next night’s homework, reform is meaningless.
            The most challenging thing about interviewing an Occupier or a Tea Partier is to listen to them.  To fight the urge to say, “you are wrong” or “this is what I think”.  If you do listen to them, you hear many of the same things from both sides.  They want a better future for their children.   They want the federal government to work for them not some mysterious special interest group.
            And the most important observation I can make is that this is the country of can do, not screw you.  And around that principal we need to unite, compromise, and move forward.

Why Does #OccupyDenver Frighten the Governor and Mayor?

30 Oct
by John, posted in #OccupyDenver, #OccupyWallStreet, #OSW, occupy   |  No Comments
          While I was finishing this post yesterday,  the regular Saturday protest march in support of #OccupyDenver turned violent.  I hope to visit #OccupyDenver again this week and attend a General Assembly.  After that I will post some thoughts about yesterday’s events.  
            Civic Center Park is a giant open space in downtown Denver that connects City Hall and the State Capitol building.  It hosts many of the most important memorials, museums, and cultural institutions within Colorado.  It is the most public space in Denver and in Colorado.
            This is the home of #OccupyDenver along the eastern boundary of the park and facing across Broadway toward the state owned memorial park.  From the war memorial state troopers in their cruisers are parked on its granite base peering across Broadway at the protestors.   And it is between the power of the State and the less fortunate that #OccupyDenver resides in a mix of tarps, folding tables, and piles of donations.
            The commentary in the mainstream press often highlights the government’s concern with “safety” and “sanitary” issues.  Once you accept that this is a public space that has for years supported a population of homeless and petty criminals it is hard to understand how the protestors are now an incremental safety issue.
            The sanitary issues are a bit more complex.  The park is never going to appear majestic swamped in blue tarps, but if you look at the entire open space between the Capital and the City Hall #OccupyDenver is on perhaps 1% of the space.  Is there really no room in that entire public space where citizens petitioning their government can in fact petition their government?  What is the point of public space that is so regulated the right to petition the government is only allowed if you leave at night?
            I spent three hours on Thursday chatting with whoever had interest in chatting with me.  The police had given #OrganizeDenver some general rules on what temporary structures (folding tables yes, tents/igloos no) and where (on this part of the sidewalk, but not this part) they could work.  And during that entire three hours volunteers were collecting trash, accepting and sorting donations, feeding the crowd including the homeless, and discussing their grievances.
            It has always been the case that Civic Center Park has an odor of ammonia and trash.    If #OrganizeDenver evolves into something more, the combination of its low cost footprint and fundraising prowess could solve a host of problems in the park.  Why not tell #OrganizeDenver you can camp in a limited space, you must provide yourself with portable toilets, haul trash, meet these reasonable standards, and pay for all of it out of donations?
            Why spend money on expensive police presence, nightly compliance raids, and obvious surveillance?  Would not a lot less money buy portable toilets and trash collection?  It really is hard to avoid the conclusion that the City and State have tolerated “sanitary” issues for decades and the government’s intransigence with #OccupyDenver is the real cause of any incremental issues.
            A typical criticism of the #Occupy movement is that it has no organization, no leaders, and no real agenda.  Individual members have individual issues from tar sands to private prisons to re-enactment of the Glass-Steagal law, but the protesters are by their own admission just starting a grass-roots movement.  There is a general theme that the government is not working on behalf of most Americans – the 99%.
            The 99% is not a claim of support, but rather the simple concept that the government works primarily for the wealthiest and most powerful.  It is an expression of disgust at the government’s showering of wealth upon bankrupt banks and the powerful in the hopes that these same institutions and people will re-ignite the economy.
            For this long-term executive and capitalist it was a much more interesting day than I expected.  I had to remember back twenty-five years to the parking lot before a Grateful Dead concert to relax amongst #OccupyDenver.  I had to remember that people that do not look or think as I do petitioning their government are not a “safety” or “sanitary” risk.  They are also part of “We the People”. Would it really matter if they were dressed in khakis and blazers?
            And if the government would engage not oppress, they might hear a message.  You cannot pass more bills giving tax cuts to the wealthy while cutting services and infrastructure.   At long last, will you not do something to help the whole country and not just the rich and powerful?
            Or as one protestor from Leadville summarized, “It’s Fucked Up!  Bullshit!  Bullshit!”
            That is the political accomplishment of the #Occupy movement and it very well may be its only one – the coffin nail in the current economic policies of either party.  If elected officials want to swell the ranks of the #Occupy movement with more and more middle-class voters, try and pass another combination of tax cuts, spending cuts, and bailouts.
            And if the government wants to engage instead of oppress or co-opt the #Occupy movement; make a little room in the public space for them.   Then, get the troopers off a war memorial dedicated to the people who gave their lives for the idea that people have a right to petition their government.