ABoT Vote Nowurbatulsaclassifiedsbutton
  TULSA METRO'S ONLY INDEPENDENT NEWSWEEKLY
UTW Reader Comments  |  Has Something Made You Mad? Tell Us!    
Home » Columns » Rant 'N' Rall
  RSS XML

Revolution Versus Reform

The rift within Occupy


BY TED RALL

Editors and readers expect pundits to weigh in on the brutal eviction of Occupy Wall Street from New York's Zuccotti Park. People will ask: Does this mean the beginning of the end for the Occupy movement?

No.

Now that we've dispensed with that, let's discuss a major rift within the movement: Reformists versus revolutionaries.

Revolutionaries want to overthrow the government. They want to get rid of existing economic, political and social relations and create new ones. Both the Republicans and the Democrats are enemies.

Reformists want radical changes too. For example, Occupiers want to eliminate the corrupting influence of corporate money on politics. Unlike revolutionaries, however, they are OK with the basic structure of the system: the Constitution, Congress, 50 states, capitalism, and so on. They are willing to work with establishment liberals (MoveOn.org, Amy Goodman, The Nation, Mother Jones, etc.) and the Democratic Party.

You can see the reform-vs.-revolution split whenever Occupiers discuss actions and demands.

Reformists say: Let's move our accounts from banks to credit unions. Encourage Black Friday shoppers to buy from locally-owned businesses. Demand that Congress pass a constitutional amendment abolishing corporate personhood. Restore the Glass-Steagall Act.

Those tactics leave revolutionaries cold. They don't want to nibble around the edges of a system they despise. If revolutionaries get their way, there won't be a Congress. Members of the House and Senate will go to jail. No one will need to boycott banks or choose which merchants are least malevolent.

Capitalism won't exist.

Revolution frightens the reformists. They worry about chaos, violence and dislocation. They're right to be concerned.

Bad as things are now, these might look like the good old days after buildings begin burning.

Revolutionaries point to the history of previous reform movements. Sure, progressives win victories during times of social unrest: concessions to labor during the early 1900s, the New Deal of the 1930s, the civil rights, antiwar and social movements of the 1960s.

But they don't stick.

As soon as the crowds of demonstrators go home -- since the 1980s, right-wingers roll back the results of those hard-won battles while liberals stand aside. Democrats like Clinton and Obama even roll back welfare, worker rights, environmental regulations and privacy rights. If you want radical change to last, revolutionaries argue, you have to change everything when you have the chance.

Right now, we have the chance.

2012 is shaping up to be our Year of Revolution.

Reformers see the system as broken and in need of repair. For revolutionaries, whether or not the system can be fixed is beside the point. The system itself is the problem. Revolutionaries don't believe that corporations, unfairness, inequality and violent monstrosities such as the U.S. invasion of Iraq have corrupted an otherwise laudable system. They think the system is inherently unfair, corrupt and violent; that unfairness, corruption and violence are the system.

If you have owned a car, you have considered revolution versus reform.

Motorists whose cars break down from time to time must weigh the same two questions as Occupiers are facing with the political system:

Is it reformable?

Is it redeemable?

For your car the question is: Is it reformable, i.e. worth fixing? Need a new fan belt? Sure. Need a new engine? It might be cheaper (or not cost much more) to buy another car.

The existential question -- is it redeemable? -- goes to the question of whether it was a crappy car in the first place. In other words, should it be fixed? No matter how much work you put into it, a Hummer is still a gas guzzler. Trade it in. Better yet, set it on fire.

Occupation ideology centers around two loci: economic unfairness and corporate influence.

Economic injustice manifests itself in numerous forms. Occupiers focus on income inequality. The richest one percent collect 90 percent of national income, the most on record in the U.S. and one of the highest disparities between rich and poor in the First World.

We think of ourselves as living in a prosperous country -- but few Americans get to live the good life. We like to think the U.S. has a vast middle class. If that was true in the past, it isn't now. New Census data "places 100 million people -- one in three Americans -- either in poverty or in the fretful zone just above it," said a shocking report in the Nov. 18 New York Times.

This is the culmination of a 40-year-old trend. The rich have gotten richer at our expense. The tipping point was reached when the federal government did absolutely nothing to help distressed homeowners. Instead, Bush and Obama doled out hundreds of billions of dollars to the same banks that were pushing fraudulent mortgages, illegally refusing to refinance, and forging fake legal documents to foreclose and evict people who lost their jobs because executives wanted to pay themselves huge raises.

As the Occupy chant goes: "Banks got bailed out; we got sold out!"

As happened in the 1930s and 1960s, enough political and business leaders might become scared enough of the increasingly angry and desperate American citizenry to force through some good things.

The odds of meaningful change coming out of this system are so long that only a psycho would bet on it. The traditional rift among the ruling classes between liberals (be nice to the poor or they'll kill us) and conservatives (kill the poor) has skewed too far to the right. Reform is impossible.

Beyond that, I can't see how reform could last. After they won, the Occupiers would go home. With the pressure turned off, corporate media would renew their systematic campaign of pro-business propaganda coupled with vapid entertainment designed to lull us back into a Prozac-induced waking slumber.

At a recent OWS rally protesters carried signs that read: "I will never be able to buy a house." "I will never get out of debt." "I will never get a job in this economy." Does anyone seriously think that this system -- these Democrats -- these Republicans -- this media -- will fix these problems?

Amending the Constitution won't do the trick. Electing better officials isn't enough.

Yes, the system is broken. But that's not the main point. The system is irredeemable.

Nothing short of revolution will do.

--Ted Rall is the author of "The Anti-American Manifesto." His website is tedrall.com.


Share this article:
 
Google Bookmarks  digg  Del.icio.us  reddit  Yahoo My Web  Newsvine  MySpace 

COMMENTS
3 comments posted for this article
sharonsj
 12/30/2011 - 6:01pm
   Ascent: what's wrong with every system is corruption and Congress is rife with it.
   
   Although I want a revolution, it doesn't mean that I want to overthrow the government. I would like to see these people (politicians and CEOs) dead and gone, but not because they are rich. It is because they profess to follow the Constitution and our laws and then ignore it all to suit their agenda. And in enriching themselves, they are directly and indirectly murdering us.
   
   When drilling platforms and pipelines blow up--or nuclear plants melt down--and kill people, animals, the environment, it's because the regulators looked the other way and the companies cut corners. When the financial industry melts down, it's because of fraud, collusion, and gaming the system.
   
   When those responsible are held accountable, then we'll finally see hope and change.
Report this comment
fragro
 12/27/2011 - 4:20pm
   This writer has completely ignored the real revolutionary force behind this movement, as he obviously has no real experience in OWS. There are more anarchists than communist, and this movement is more likely to produce revolutionary alternative currencies than a communist regime.
   
   An Open Source Democracy is the revolution we need to succeed. Communism? What is this, the early 20th century?
Report this comment
Ascent
 12/10/2011 - 8:24am
   While the article is fair to the difference between the Reform vs. Revolution rift within Occupy, it falls apart after discussing that difference. it was fairly void of any facts. It's just the opinion of one person stating platitudes and making unsupported claims. A real informative article discusses the pros and cons through a discussion of actual facts and their evidence, not conjecture. In other words, I found this article fairly banal and typical of those who can't see past their own political ideology. In this case, communist. I have nothing against communists, as long as they aren't trying to change a system that does work. Communism isn't true socialism, because it removes the choice from the people. This has been proven time and again.
   
   The only thing wrong with the current system is the same thing that's wrong with every system: the human condition. If it weren't for the human condition, every political system would work just fine. Every political system is fixable. The question isn't whether it's fixable. The question is whether its better than other systems being offered. But when you provide drastic change to any system, all you get is regime change after regime change, because the human condition demands that dictators are going to step out of the woodwork to take control, and only after all the dictators have been exhausted after decades of civil war will you finally settle upon a "President" who has finally decided to be fair. Then it's still a toss-up as you end up with would-be dictators who would depose them.
   
   The fact is, democracy works better than any other system. Regulation is what is needed. The Glass-Steagall Act worked up into they started edging in things that directly conflicted with the act and then eventually repealed it. There's only so much back and forth that occurs before people finally settle upon the right way of doing things, but they do eventually settle on it in a democracy.
   
   Now, if you focused your violent revolution upon the corporations, making it costly for them in both money and the lives of the richest 1% who support the status quo, then fine, I'm not going to oppose you. But if you want to attack the government, then when they hunt you down to the last man, I won't be there to help you. I'm going to put a shotgun in your face and give you just enough time to say your prayers.
   
   The fact is, the revolutionary faction is both populist and small and will be put down the second it tries to overthrow government, because it doesn't and will never have enough support. IT will not last. But the reform movement will last for as long as these reforms are needed down to the last issue.
   
   Just don't go shooting people just because they're rich. There are people in the 1% who not only sympathize with the movement, but are supportive of it and are willing to accept higher taxes and more legislation on their businesses and private expenditures. If you start killing people just because they're rich, you'll be making enemies instead of gaining support.
   
   For those of you who think a change in both government and economic system can be had without war, name one instance where this has happened. Don't be mislead. The revolutionaries want war, not peace, not a better way. They want to be in a position of power and this is their power grab.
Report this comment

Post a comment




MORE BY TED RALL
Listen Up
Is there any such thing as privacy anymore? [June 19, 2013]
Turn Up That Damned Music!
The Gen X-Millennial generation gap [June 12, 2013]
Immigration Reform is Treason
High unemployment, and we're importing workers [June 5, 2013]
My Profile | My Settings

Subscriptions Available at $124/yr.

Please allow 4-6 weeks for processing. No refunds are issued. Back issues are available for $10/copy.

We accept Visa, M/C, checks and money orders. Call to charge by phone 918-592-5550. Enter your contact information in the form below and we will contact you.

If ordering by mail, make checks and money orders payable to Urban Tulsa Weekly. Send your payment along with your complete postal delivery address to Urban Tulsa Weekly, Attn: Samantha, PO Box 50499, Tulsa, OK 74150

Name:
Address:
Address2:
City:
State:
Zip Code:
Email:
Phone:
Comments:

 

Urban Tulsa Weekly
1924 E. 6th St.
Tulsa OK 74104
Phone: (918) 592-5550
Fax: (918) 592-5970
e-mail: Subscriptions

Powered by Gyrosite © Copyright 2013, Urban Tulsa Weekly   RSS