Occupy Wall Street: Time to Declare Victory and Head Home

OK. We all know that the Occupy Wall Street demonstrations in NYC and around the country are not going to end well. And perhaps we had a preview of coming attractions in Oakland yesterday when the protests turned violent and the photos making the rounds on the Internet pointed more to a third world country than a city in the USA.

My advice to the protesters: fold up the tents and sleeping bags and head for home. You succeeded in getting the news media and others focused on the unethical and in some cases illegal activities of the Wizards of Wall Street and the Captains of Industry who really do abuse our economic and political system for personal gain. And there is no question that the middle class in this country is disappearing, with most heading below the dividing line with a few prospering and heading above it.

Thomas Friedman opines in the NYT, “Did You Hear the One About the Bankers?“:

CITIGROUP is lucky that Muammar el-Qaddafi was killed when he was. The Libyan leader’s death diverted attention from a lethal article involving Citigroup that deserved more attention because it helps to explain why many average Americans have expressed support for the Occupy Wall Street movement. The news was that Citigroup had to pay a $285 million fine to settle a case in which, with one hand, Citibank sold a package of toxic mortgage-backed securities to unsuspecting customers — securities that it knew were likely to go bust — and, with the other hand, shorted the same securities — that is, bet millions of dollars that they would go bust.

It doesn’t get any more immoral than this. As the Securities and Exchange Commission civil complaint noted, in 2007, Citigroup exercised “significant influence” over choosing $500 million of the $1 billion worth of assets in the deal, and the global bank deliberately chose collateralized debt obligations, or C.D.O.’s, built from mortgage loans almost sure to fail. According to The Wall Street Journal, the S.E.C. complaint quoted one unnamed C.D.O. trader outside Citigroup as describing the portfolio as resembling something your dog leaves on your neighbor’s lawn. “The deal became largely worthless within months of its creation,” The Journal added. “As a result, about 15 hedge funds, investment managers and other firms that invested in the deal lost hundreds of millions of dollars, while Citigroup made $160 million in fees and trading profits.”

Citigroup, which is under new and better management now, settled the case without admitting or denying any wrongdoing. James Stewart, a business columnist for The Times, noted that Citigroup’s flimflam made “Goldman Sachs mortgage traders look like Boy Scouts. In settling its fraud charges for $550 million last year, Goldman was accused by the S.E.C. of being the middleman in a similar deal, allowing the hedge fund manager John Paulson to help choose the mortgages and then bet against them without disclosing this to the other parties. Citigroup dispensed with a Paulson figure altogether, grabbing those lucrative roles for itself.” (Last Thursday, the U.S. District Court judge overseeing the case demanded that the S.E.C. explain how such serious securities fraud could end with the defendant neither admitting nor denying wrongdoing.)

This gets to the core of why all the anti-Wall Street groups around the globe are resonating. I was in Tahrir Square in Cairo for the fall of Hosni Mubarak, and one of the most striking things to me about that demonstration was how apolitical it was. When I talked to Egyptians, it was clear that what animated their protest, first and foremost, was not a quest for democracy — although that was surely a huge factor. It was a quest for “justice.” Many Egyptians were convinced that they lived in a deeply unjust society where the game had been rigged by the Mubarak family and its crony capitalists. Egypt shows what happens when a country adopts free-market capitalism without developing real rule of law and institutions.

But, then, what happened to us? Our financial industry has grown so large and rich it has corrupted our real institutions through political donations. As Senator Richard Durbin, an Illinois Democrat, bluntly said in a 2009 radio interview, despite having caused this crisis, these same financial firms “are still the most powerful lobby on Capitol Hill. And they, frankly, own the place.”

Our Congress today is a forum for legalized bribery. One consumer group using information from Opensecrets.org calculates that the financial services industry, including real estate, spent $2.3 billion on federal campaign contributions from 1990 to 2010, which was more than the health care, energy, defense, agriculture and transportation industries combined. Why are there 61 members on the House Committee on Financial Services? So many congressmen want to be in a position to sell votes to Wall Street.

We can’t afford this any longer. We need to focus on four reforms that don’t require new bureaucracies to implement. 1) If a bank is too big to fail, it is too big and needs to be broken up. We can’t risk another trillion-dollar bailout. 2) If your bank’s deposits are federally insured by U.S. taxpayers, you can’t do any proprietary trading with those deposits — period. 3) Derivatives have to be traded on transparent exchanges where we can see if another A.I.G. is building up enormous risk. 4) Finally, an idea from the blogosphere: U.S. congressmen should have to dress like Nascar drivers and wear the logos of all the banks, investment banks, insurance companies and real estate firms that they’re taking money from. The public needs to know.

Capitalism and free markets are the best engines for generating growth and relieving poverty — provided they are balanced with meaningful transparency, regulation and oversight. We lost that balance in the last decade. If we don’t get it back — and there is now a tidal wave of money resisting that — we will have another crisis. And, if that happens, the cry for justice could turn ugly. Free advice to the financial services industry: Stick to being bulls. Stop being pigs.

Still, the demonstrators can huff and puff, but they ain’t going to blow down the house that shelters the bankers, corporate execs and politicians. Better to hit the streets and go door to door collecting names on petitions and getting people to vote for candidates who are committed to change.

And in the end, I agree with Pat Buchanan who argues that the protests will only get more violent — and consequently in my view accomplish nothing — in the months ahead.

On today’s installment of The McLaughlin Group, conservative commentator Pat Buchanan had some strong words for the Occupy Wall Street movement, and in arguing President Obama would not be wise to embrace the protestors, suggested that as it continues to snow and the weather gets colder, they will pursue more violent means to accomplish their goals.

John McLaughlin asked if the OWS movement would serve as a powerful voting bloc in the upcoming presidential election, or if the protest is simply just “transitory.” Buchanan immediately jumped in, comparing the protestors, as so many othersbefore him have, to the hippie protestors of the 1960s.

It’s going end very, very badly with these folks in the winter, and they’re not going to be getting publicity, they’re going to be acting up, acting badly, like the worst of the demonstrators in the 60s… They’re going to start fighting with the cops.”

Time for the Occupy Wall Street crowd to do what the USA should have done in Iraq and Afghanistan years ago: Declare victory and go home.


8 responses to “Occupy Wall Street: Time to Declare Victory and Head Home

  1. ended up here via a link on a salon.com article. anyway…so…basically you’re 100% wrong. i agree that it seems futile but

    1. you’re assuming americans have any attention span whatsoever. even when events ARE in the news every day, it’s no guarantee anyone will care, so going home would be confining the movement to obscurity.

    2. electoral politics are an anachronism, which is why a lot of protestors chose these methods in the first place. they don’t want to be a lackey for some D or R or even an I and, even if they were duped in 2008, are now very well aware that anyone will say anything to get elected to any office.

  2. Yes it’s been bad a PR day for OWS. It’s a good thing the OWS isn’t about PR it’s about creating a movement. The Civil Rights Movement had bad PR days but what would have happened if we had stopped. If OWS was an established party or a corporation it would be time to quit – and declare victory like Bush on that aircraft carrier….democracy is a risky thing. Bad things happen on the way but democracy is worth it. That’s what we tell soldiers when they go to war for the nation. I’m not saying the violence that broke in Oakland was for democracy – it was not. I’m only saying that people have died for democracy and OWS can’t give up because it had a bad PR day. look – vast majority 99% of the people in Oakland where peaceful, anyone that can not see that doesn’t want to see it.

  3. Pingback: Where’s my poll question? « Big Smoke

  4. Pingback: Is OWS in danger of losing Middle America? | Reviews

  5. Pingback: Imaginary Silence | Just Above Sunset

  6. I expect the protests to continue until things get better, and I don’t see the government making things better. The primary purpose of the protests is to help people realize that we don’t need government. If enough of us stop participating in the existing system, it will fade away and we will replace it with something better.

  7. Iris Vander Pluym

    Hahaha. This is the funniest thing I’ve read in a long time. Thanks for the laughs!

    It’s pieces like this that provide the very best evidence that OWS should not “declare victory and go home” any time soon.

    The more Pat Buchanan and those who agree with him keep $#!tting their pants and whining like concern trolls, the more hope I have for my country.

  8. Albert, what a great quote…”If enough of us stop participating in the existing system it will fade away”…Don’t you understand that is exactly why we are in the situation we are in?? Because enough people don’t Participate in getting up every morning, working 10-12 hours every day and trying to improve their lives? You are absolutly right…there is abetter system that is going to be put in place…its called a constitutional representitive republic…and its going to be implemented in about 365 days. Its based on the concept of small government, individual libert and Presonal reponsibility…maybe you have heard of it. If not Google it..Oh, sorry, I forgot you are against capitalism. Then check out a library…its a big building with books in it. Since I am sure you are now totally confused let me spell it out…you are guarenteed an equal starting point-Not an equal finish. You might actually have to get a job, maybe two jobs, to pay off the loans that you agreed too. You might have to wait a year or two before you move into that half million dollar house that you can’t afford> You might actually have to become amember on the newest movement sweeping the nation..the 53%..That would be the 53% of the people in this country that bust their ass every day so that you and the other 47% can be professional protesters.
    Why don’t you occupy a job, work 60-70 hours a week, take responsibility for your life, stop blaming everyone else, and quit trying to achieve” social justice” by having something handed to you that you didn’t earn?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s