Occupy Wall Street's Main Target Has Been

Occupy Wall Street's Main Target: A Multifaceted Analysis

Occupy Wall Street (OWS), the protest movement that captivated global attention in 2011, wasn't simply a singular, easily defined entity. Its decentralized nature and broad-based grievances made pinpointing a single, unified “main target” a complex undertaking. However, analyzing its core demands, rhetoric, and actions reveals a multifaceted target focused primarily on systemic economic inequality and the excessive power of corporations and the wealthy elite within the American political and economic systems. While specific targets varied among individual protesters, the overarching goal consistently revolved around challenging and reforming these deeply entrenched power structures.

Beyond the 1%: Deconstructing the Targets of OWS

While the "1%" became a shorthand symbol for OWS's grievances, it's inaccurate to limit the movement's targets to simply the wealthiest individuals. The movement aimed to dismantle a broader system that allowed for such extreme wealth disparity. This system, in the eyes of OWS protesters, encompassed several key entities and concepts:

1. Corporate Power and Influence:

• Lobbying and Political Corruption: OWS intensely criticized the influence of corporate lobbying and campaign finance on American politics. Protesters argued that this undue influence allowed corporations to shape legislation to their advantage, often at the expense of the public good. This translated to policies that favored deregulation, tax breaks for the wealthy, and weakened worker protections. The focus wasn't just on individual CEOs, but on the entire system that allowed corporate interests to dominate the political landscape.

• Financialization of the Economy: The 2008 financial crisis served as a catalyst for OWS. The movement blamed the unchecked greed and risky practices of financial institutions for the crisis, pointing to the subsequent bailouts as evidence of a rigged system that protected the powerful while leaving ordinary citizens to bear the brunt of the consequences. The "too big to fail" doctrine became a focal point of criticism, highlighting the perceived impunity of major financial corporations.

• Corporate Personhood and its Implications: The concept of corporate personhood, which grants corporations many of the same legal rights and protections as individuals, was a significant target of OWS. Protesters argued that this legal framework allowed corporations to exert disproportionate influence over the political process and escape accountability for their actions. This was seen as a fundamental injustice fueling economic inequality and undermining democratic processes.

2. The Political Establishment:

• Two-Party System and Political Polarization: OWS protesters expressed frustration with the perceived limitations of the two-party system, arguing that it stifled meaningful change and amplified political gridlock. The movement's decentralized nature reflected a rejection of established political channels and a belief that traditional political avenues were inadequate to address the issues at hand.

• Government Regulation and Deregulation: The movement held complex views on government regulation. While some advocated for increased regulation to curb corporate power and protect the environment, others were wary of government overreach and potential for corruption. The emphasis was on effective and accountable regulation, not simply more of it.

• Ineffective Policy Responses to Inequality: The movement's criticism extended to government policies perceived as failing to address economic inequality effectively. This included critiques of tax policies that benefited the wealthy, insufficient social safety nets, and a lack of investment in public services.

3. Systemic Inequality and its Manifestations:

• Income Inequality and Wealth Disparity: The stark disparity in wealth and income distribution was central to OWS's message. Protesters focused on the widening gap between the rich and the poor, highlighting the concentration of wealth in the hands of a small percentage of the population and the resulting economic insecurity faced by the majority.

• Access to Healthcare, Education, and Housing: OWS highlighted the unequal access to essential services like healthcare, education, and affordable housing. These inequalities were seen as direct consequences of the systemic issues the movement challenged. The lack of affordable healthcare, for example, disproportionately impacted the working class, further exacerbating economic vulnerability.

• Student Debt and the Cost of Higher Education: The crippling burden of student loan debt became a significant rallying point for OWS, representing a key aspect of the broader systemic inequality that trapped many young people in a cycle of debt and economic hardship.

The Shifting Sands of OWS's Targets: A Dynamic Movement

It's crucial to acknowledge that OWS wasn't a monolithic entity with unchanging aims. Different factions within the movement prioritized various targets and employed diverse tactics. Some emphasized direct action and confrontation, while others focused on building community and fostering dialogue. This diversity, while contributing to its dynamism, also made it challenging to pinpoint a singular, universally agreed-upon “main target.”

However, the consistent thread running through OWS's diverse expressions was a profound critique of the systems that perpetuate economic inequality and concentrate power in the hands of a few. The “1%” served as a potent symbol, encapsulating the frustration with a system that appeared rigged against the majority. But the movement’s ambitions went beyond simply targeting wealthy individuals; it sought to challenge and transform the underlying structures that produced and sustained this inequality.

The Legacy of Occupy Wall Street: A Lasting Impact?

While OWS ultimately didn't achieve its goals in a direct, immediate sense – like overturning the existing economic system – its impact should not be underestimated. The movement’s influence can be seen in several ways:

• Raising Public Awareness: OWS successfully brought the issue of economic inequality into the mainstream public discourse. The movement's slogan, "We are the 99%", resonated widely, capturing the feeling of economic injustice felt by many.

• Shifting the Political Landscape: While not directly leading to immediate legislative changes, OWS helped shape the political conversation surrounding economic inequality, influencing subsequent political movements and campaigns. The emphasis on income inequality became a significant theme in the 2012 and 2016 presidential elections.

• Inspiring Future Activism: OWS served as a catalyst for other protest movements and social justice initiatives, inspiring activists around the world to engage in similar struggles against economic inequality and corporate power. The movement's decentralized model and emphasis on participatory democracy provided a template for future movements.

• The Enduring Power of the Narrative: Even though the physical encampments were dismantled, the core narrative of OWS – the critique of systemic inequality and the undue power of corporations – remains relevant and resonates strongly with many people today. The movement's legacy lies not just in its specific achievements, but in its contribution to a sustained conversation about the fundamental flaws within the current economic system.

In conclusion, although assigning a single “main target” to Occupy Wall Street is an oversimplification, the movement’s primary focus was undoubtedly the systemic issues underpinning extreme economic inequality and the disproportionate influence of corporations and the wealthy elite. While its immediate political impact may have been limited, its lasting contribution lies in raising public awareness, influencing the political discourse, and inspiring future activism focused on challenging these deeply entrenched power structures. The enduring relevance of its central message demonstrates its profound and lasting impact on the ongoing conversation about economic justice.