Reply to comment

Systematic critique is what's missing

Thanks for your thoughtful comments, Charlie. I have a less optimistic view of the single-issue groups (like the anti-foreclosure working groups) that have come out of Occupy. It's not untrue that these campaigns serve to train activists and build deeper connections with social layers that Occupy didn't at first connect with. However, the lack of a space to articulate a general systematic critique leaves a huge hole in the movement. To my mind, what was most exciting about Occupy which led to the activation of lots of new people was the visible expression of class anger and political disenchantment with the system as a whole, which is just no longer present. This absence feels like a setback to me, and I think has led to a lot of the people who became involved with Occupy dropping away. To me, the thing which made Occupy interesting and exciting to new activists was the systematic critique. I'm certainly in favor of building single-issue struggles around immediate demands, but viewing that as the primary thing that's necessary seems to me to miss the very feature which made Occupy take off, and which made it appear so promising to me as a revolutionary.
-Nick D. (Baltimore)

Reply

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <b> </b> <br> <br /> <a> </a> <em> </em> <strong> </strong> <cite> </cite> <code> </code> <ul> </ul> <ol> </ol> <li> </li> <dl> </dl> <dt> </dt> <dd> </dd> <div> </div> <img> <style> <font> </font> <blockquote> </blockquote> <hr>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

By submitting this form, you accept the Mollom privacy policy.