The latest polls indicate that approximately 75 percent of Americans agree with the goals of Occupy Wall Street. Nonetheless, only 29 percent consider themselves supporters of OWS. What accounts for this enthusiasm gap?
The October Time magazine poll asked respondents if they agreed with the positions advocated by Occupy Wall Street and discovered extraordinary concurrence. 86 percent agreed that, "Wall Street and its lobbyists have too much influence in Washington." 79 percent agreed that, "The gap between rich and poor in the United States has grown too large." 71 percent agreed with ""Executives of financial institutions responsible for the financial meltdown in 2008 should be prosecuted." And 68 percent agreed that, "The rich should pay more taxes." Nonetheless, there remains a 45-50 percent enthusiasm gap, because the same voters who express these strong positive sentiments say they don't support OWS.
Perhaps these voters don't know enough about OWS. A recent USA Today/Gallup poll found that 59 percent of respondents felt they didn't know enough to approve or disapprove of the movement's goals.
It would be easier to accept the excuse "we don't know enough" if there was not a pattern of passivity. When we consider the past decade we can find many examples where average Americans should have taken action but didn't. In 2000, George W. Bush stole the presidency; many voters were outraged but few of them took to the streets in protest. On September 11, 2001, the US was attacked by terrorists; there were legitimate concerns that the Bush Administration had been asleep at the wheel yet once again Americans were passive observers. The terrorists were traced to Afghanistan and the US launched an attack; in December of 2001 most of the terrorists escaped from Afghanistan into Pakistan -- it was a glaring example of White House ineptitude but most citizens were quiet. Faced with failure in Afghanistan, the Bush Administration turned its attention to Iraq and, on March 20, 2003, launched an invasion; this time there were more protestors but the bulk of Americans stayed at home. Over the next several years there were glaring examples of presidential incompetence -- for example, the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina -- but for the most part voters were quiet. Then the housing bubble burst and, in late September 2008, Wall Street came close to melting down; Americans were stunned and depressed, but few took to the streets. Since the turn of the century, American voters, the 99 percent, have had a lot to be angry about, but have been passive.
Historians contrast this last lost decade with World War II era America where average citizens, the 99 percent, rose up, built the weapons, and fought the fights that defeated the Axis powers. What's happened to us?
Perhaps American workers don't have the time. It's a tough economy and many work two jobs. For the 99 percent it's a grueling daily chore making ends meet. Perhaps they don't have the energy to get involved with OWS.
Perhaps they don't get it. Many observers believe Americans no longer invest in our children and, as a result, many have poor schools, teachers, and study habits. We've raised several generations of "non intellectuals." The average American spends 2.7 hours per day watching TV and only a few minutes reading. Perhaps the 99 percent don't understand what all the fuss is about.
Perhaps they've checked out. The Pew Survey of Religious Affiliation found that 26.3 percent of respondents were evangelical Protestants; this does not include Black and Catholic evangelicals and many observers believe the true number is closer to 40 percent. A recent Pew Research Poll found that 41 percent of respondents believe that Jesus Christ will return to earth by 2050 -- when the rapture will occur. Perhaps the 99 percent are not involved because they are preparing to shuffle off this mortal coil.
Perhaps they're severely damaged. The official US rate for Posttraumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) is 7.8 percent -- with a higher incidence among veterans. However this does not include survivors of violence against women and children. The American Psychological Association reports, "Nearly one in every three adult women experiences at least one physical assault by a partner during adulthood" -- four million US women are assaulted each year. Approximately one third of US children under 18 experience abuse during their childhood - in 2009 6 million children were reported as abused. And then there are the adults that have been economically abused -- laid off because their job was moved overseas or fired and rehired as a temp with no benefits. It's reasonable to assume that a majority of Americans -- a huge segment of the 99 percent -- suffer from PTSD. As a consequence they are depressed, hopeless, and numb. Perhaps these American agree with OWS but can't get it together to participate.
The enthusiasm gap is a result of a combination of these factors. The challenge for Occupy Wall Street is to find new ways to engage members of the 99 percent who agree with OWS objectives, but are too tired or numb to participate.
cowboy mentality still intact and writes a book about how he ran this great country of ours into the ground. We the people were asleep at the wheel when we allowed Bush's presidency and are we not now reeping the rewards of our colossal failure to wake up?
gettum' cowboy mentality still intact and writes a book patting himself on the back for running this great country into the ground. Yes, we the people were asleep at the wheel for allowing Dub-Yuh
to be our president and aren't we now reeping the rewards of this colossal failure to wake up?
Sitting in the plaza isnt the same as Tahrir Square. where simply demonstrating ( with the implied threat of pervasisve violence throughout the nation) was so radical as to shake the regime's foundations. It takes a little more to scare 'em here.
(many of them are quite lean apparently)
I completely understand the disparity. It has to do with what OWS is--formless, fluid, all body and no head--and is not. It is not something that average people can see as a legitimate, identifiable entity. It is, essentially, a cloud op, without center, without leadership, without a form that makes sense to the people being polled. Supporting the ideas of OWS IS supporting OWS, but without an organization, without identifiers, a lot of people will draw a line between the ideas and the group. That makes sense to me, and people who support the concepts but not the campers should not be mocked and demeaned.
How about that the majority of Americans don't agree with OWS's tactics? You might at least have considered that, it is far more plausible than your suggestions.
So, the average Joe looks at the rag-tag mess that's being shown to them on TV and can't really relate. Who can blame them? As the saying goes, "It's got to play in Peoria". And the folks in Peoria are generally sympathetic to the boys in blue because they supposedly keep the peace.
It's for this reason that I think OWS needs to have some visible, clean-cut leaders who can represent the interests of the 99%. I know it seems counter-intuitive for a movement that is anti-game-rigging to play along with typical media relations tactics, but unfortunately, they will have to do so if they want to get the massive support they need to turn things around.
A movement without leaders is a movement without a message.
We the people have to let the corporations know that we will appreciate them hiring Americans to get the Recovery going:
http://www.flixya.com/blog/3201910/Beautiful-Butterflys
And that's the problem. Ask 20 different people in the Occupy movement what the goal of the movement is, and you'll get 20 different answers. What are people supposed to make of that?
You're big into assumptions, I see.