The Agenda

An Argument Against Taking Occupy Wall Street Seriously

Yesterday, Reihan wrote that labor unions and groups like MoveOn should hesitate before getting into bed with Occupy Wall Street, given its anarchist roots. Then I went on CBC News to debate a representative of OWS, and came away convinced that Reihan is exactly right.

You should watch the video, partly because it is the most (unintentionally) hilarious TV interview I have ever done. You might say that the OWS rep blathers incoherently, but there are actually two important takeaways from his comments.

One is that, as is typical for OWS, he is unwilling to set out any actual policy goals that the movement wants—except for, and this is a direct quote, “a Glass-Steingold Tax, or whatever that is.”

The other is that the structure of his comments is broadly anarchistic—he says OWS doesn’t need policies because they will create social change by “building a model society” in Zuccotti Park, where people share food and sleeping pads according to their needs and arrive at decisions through discussion and consensus. I guess the idea is that the American people will give up capitalism once they see how wonderful it is to camp out in a park and dress up like Zombies.

Matt Yglesias has written that labor unions and other more mainstream left-wing organs need to co-opt the OWS protests as a vessel for a more concrete policy agenda. Presumably, his model is along the lines of the Tea Party, where disparate and sometimes extreme activists have, more often than not, played ball with the Republican Party and its associated entities.

But I’m not sure that will work for OWS, because too many of its participants may simply be too extreme. If you reject the mixed capitalist economy and representative democracy, how do you fit within a political coalition broadly aligned with the Democratic Party, even its left flank? It’s a much more fundamental rejection of the American political and social system than, say, wanting to repeal Social Security.

I suspect that the only thing holding OWS together is policy ambiguity. Some of the protesters want to reform the system; others want to smash it to bits. If you get too specific about policy, how do you keep those people marching together? But Yglesias’s co-option strategy would involve injecting at least some policy specificity.

So, Reihan is right and progressives should be careful where they step, as this dog is not likely to hunt. But the dance between the anarchists and the labor unions will be fun for me to watch from the sidelines. 

Most Popular


In Defense of the Electoral College

Senator Elizabeth Warren has joined a growing chorus within the Democratic party in calling for the abolition of the Electoral College. Speaking at a forum in Mississippi on Monday night, Warren said that she hoped to ensure that “every vote matters” and proposed that “the way we can make that happen is ... Read More

Stick a Fork in O’Rourke

If, as I wrote last week here, Joe Biden may save the Democratic party from a horrible debacle at the polls next year, Beto O’Rourke may be doing the whole process a good turn now. Biden, despite his efforts to masquerade as the vanguard of what is now called progressivism, is politically sane and, if ... Read More
National Security & Defense

In Defense of the Iraq War

Today is the 16th anniversary of the invasion of Iraq, and Twitter is alive with condemnations of the conflict -- countered by precious few defenses. Yet I believed the Iraq War was just and proper in 2003, and I still believe that today. When Donald Trump condemned the war during the 2015 primary campaign and ... Read More

Beto-mania and Our Cult of Personality Politics

Robert “Beto” O’Rourke’s biggest fans and supporters insist he is a forward-thinking, future-oriented visionary, but no contender for the Democratic nomination feels more familiar than the former three-term congressman from El Paso. That’s because he has the highest combined score in both déjà vu ... Read More