Wall Street has become a battleground, defended by a battalion of New York cops, and under surveillance around the clock. There's a war under way after months of protests and assaults by the nonviolent warriors of Occupy Wall Street.
So, who's winning?
On the surface, despite major layoffs and economic setbacks, you would have to say that the epicenter of our financial markets is alive, if not well. The exchanges and banks remain open for business, even if their costs for security are up, and their long-term optimism is way down.
Attempts by occupiers and activists to "shut it down" have so far failed, but they have slowed it down and forced its defenders on the defensive. A sharp critique of out-of-control capitalism that was barely heard in the media before the movement began. It is now everywhere. The movement has changed the national conversation.
The gluttons of greed are, at least temporarily, on the defensive.
But, is the movement forcing reforms or restraint?. Not yet. Europe's pain so far seems to be America's gain, as bailouts there drive stock prices here higher.
Also, as we are learning, there is not much that the Federal Reserve won't do behind the scenes to keep big banks flourishing. We just found out, 3 years after the fact, that they pumped a whopping $7.7 TRILLION in no interest money into the coffers of financial institutions whose lobbyists and media decry big government intervention and socialism.
Down, the street, the Occupiers are winning a moral victory just by surviving. Their slogan du jour is now "It's So Not Over," even as they lost the park that was their base and have suffered setbacks across the country by what seems like a coordinated municipal counter-offensive.
Public opinion seems to turn against protesters when there's violence or conduct considered outrageous, but the New York Times reports, "The Occupy Wall Street protests continue to spread around the country, highlighting grievances some Americans have about banks, income inequality and a sense that the poor and middle class have been disenfranchised. A recent New York Times/CBS News poll found that almost half of the public thinks the sentiments at the root of the movement generally reflect the views of most Americans."
So, on one level, Wall Street is losing whatever positive reputation in may have enjoyed, even if the movement challenging it still lacks a specific program.
What would winning consist of in this context?
For the financiers and the investors, it's all about money and they are still making it, even if bonuses go down for a while. They continue to deepen inequality by transferring wealth from the rest of us into their pockets. The 1% is hardly hurting the way the 99% is.
Their lobbyists and the politicians that follow their lead have managed to thwart any real financial reforms, mild as they were. Risky derivatives remain risky. The industry has succeeded in keeping a shadowy banking system non-transparent, despite the agencies that are lowering their credit ratings and the State Attorney Generals that are beginning to summon up the courage to file lawsuits.
Sustaining the movement into spring is Occupy's main challenge. Can the movement handle and allocate the funds they raised, and can they raise more? Can they manage and resolve the internal conflicts between cities and activists with differing ideas and physical needs?
Can they build bridges to the mainstream and avoid marginalization?
Critics of Occupy Wall Street want the movement to grow up, be more focused and "pragmatic," as in engaging in policy debates defined by others. In a specious denunciation of "The Decadent Left," Russ Douthat, one of the Times' op ed wags, snipes that the "movement was dreamed up in part by flakes, and populated in part by fantasists."
To him, being political means moving from the outside to the inside and losing the very qualities that built the movement. It means not aligning with unions or building coalitions. It means playing the game.
In contrast, I believe the movement has to stay true to itself, but make all of these issues more personal to the American people who are suffering because of Wall Street's manipulations.
They have to be told who is really responsible for their terrible distress: the loss of jobs, pensions and homes.
The information is there -- but the movement needs to find ways of dramatizing it and communicating it, the more specific and less rhetorical the better.
It's time for an economic justice campaign that names and shames the reprehensible Wall Street elite, a crew that constitutes less than1% of the 1%.
We have to demand three I's and a P:
1. Investigate who stole what
2. Indict wrong doers
3. Prosecute the guilty
4. And Incarcerate White Collar Criminals
That's how to send a signal to Wall Street: Make it personal!
Go after prosecutors in cities, states and the Justice Department to force them to explain why none of the big banksters responsible for our economic misery have, so far, gone to jail. (More than 1,000 fraudsters were imprisoned after the far less serious S&L crisis.)
These CEOs knew what they were doing and they are getting away with it!
This approach won't transform the economy but it will make the targets of the campaign more concrete, visible and immediate. It raises demands for economic fairness that most Americans support.
The current system of agencies agreeing to settlements without anyone admitting responsibility has to stop.
The cover-ups by politicians and the complicit of media have to stop.
We have had bailouts. Now, its time for a "jailout!"
Talk about an issue that so many agree on but yet has been so politicized and so minimized by prosecutors seeking excuses.
Yes, the Industry has a flotilla of high-priced lawyers who know how to evade and avoid justice. Yes, they've rewritten the laws to make it hard to convict.
But, until now, there has been no one in the streets -- with protests or pitchforks -- demanding justice. Occupy Wall Street has shown that you can influence the agenda.
This issue is a no-brainer. Will The Occupy Movement pick it up?
News Dissector Danny Schechter directed the DVD Plunder on financial crimes, (PlundertheCrimeofourtime.com.) His new book OCCUPY, with his many blogs and essays on Occupy Wall Street will be out soon (Newsdissector.com).
Comments to dissector@mediachannel.org.
Follow Danny Schechter on Twitter: www.twitter.com/Dissectorevents
That the top 1% enjoy more than 20% of all the income.
That since 1979, the average income of the top 1% increased by $700,000, while the average income for the bottom 90% actually decreased by $900.
And that this has given America the fifth most unequal distribution of wealth in the entire world.
So – who made it this way? The nurses, fast-food workers, teachers, cashiers, police officers and secretaries? Or the 1 percent at the top?
The little guys are more vulnerable and lead to the big guys. Let's go get 'em.