The Wall Street Protesters: What the Hell Do They Want?

dudes The Wall Street Protesters: What the Hell Do They Want?

Ummmm...

The sound of drums rang out on Lower Broadway on Wednesday afternoon. Only it wasn’t the extraordinarily percussive and emphatic drum sound one associates with street musicians attacking big plastic five-gallon containers. No, this was different…more grating and disharmonic, more halfhearted and druggy.

This was a protest!

Another clue: the impressive police presence surrounding Zuccotti Park. It might even have been a phalanx. Their motorcycles—or maybe scooters?— weren’t particularly threatening, but they were super-shiny.

Finally, the people were rising up. It’s been a long time coming, we thought. The Tunisians beat us to it. Actually, the Iranians were first, right? And the Thais, with their color war that nobody seems to understand but everyone feels very, very strongly about (it’s true; we’ve asked Thais about this). The French. And the Egyptians, of course. The Bahrainis. The Syrians. The British. The Greeks. The Israelis, for heaven’s sake!

Watching all that unfold (on Twitter), one couldn’t help but wonder…what about us? What are our young people so content about? What were they waiting for, so politely, with their big headphones? What’s wrong with these kids?

Surely our society could use some reforming as well, no? Our political system is a nauseating farce. Economy is a mess. Two wars are still underway, and they’re not going super-great. Our leaders are letting us down. What more do you want? Back in the day, people went nuts over Nicaragua. Really! There were giant puppets, the works.

cops The Wall Street Protesters: What the Hell Do They Want?

Ready for trouble.

The Observer was thrilled. It was really happening! We decided to report from the front lines. We walked up to a protester, a young woman in a plastic yellow rain poncho.

“What are you doing here?” we asked.

“Oh, we’re just here, like, you know, protesting what’s going on,” she replied.

“Cool, what specifically?” we asked.

“Everything going on, I mean. Take your pick!”

Her name was Jenna. We secretly hoped she was from Portland. Turned out she was a New Yorker. She said she worked right down the street.

“So, what would you like to see happen?”

“I really want to send a message, basically.”

Hmm. Okay. She gave us a big smile. We considered interviewing the two guys who were sitting down in the lotus position. Modified lotus. But no. They seemed busy.

We asked Jenna if there was someone—not a leader, per se, or an organizer (we sensed it was best to avoid any buzzwords)…maybe a person with a leaderlike demeanor? Someone she might have heard articulating some strongly held belief or viewpoint of some kind?

“You might talk to that topless girl,” she suggested.

Of course! We headed down the steps into the plaza. It was drizzling. The topless girl was talking to another reporter.

It seemed awkward to just stand there. We approached a guy with his face painted like Heath Ledger as the Joker. He said his name was Esteban V., and he’d spent two nights in the plaza despite the fact that the cops were not allowing anyone to set up tents.

He was mostly protesting because of the mortgage crisis. “People getting kicked out of their homes is just fucked up,” he said. “We don’t even get paid enough to cover those bills, and they do it on purpose.”

He said he was from New York. We asked what he did.

joker The Wall Street Protesters: What the Hell Do They Want?

"What's...so...funny!": Protester Esteban Vasquez.

“Like, jobwise?”

“Yeah.”

There was a pause. It turned out he played music in a band, Gates of Despair. “The initials spell out God,” he pointed out. He was 19, and this was his first protest.

We goaded him into giving us his last name by saying, “Do you really think you’re going to be able to change the world if you’re afraid to stand up and give your name, when you’re not even really advocating anything?”

Vasquez, he said after a minute. Progress! We liked this kid.

A toughie: “So what do you actually want to accomplish? What’s an actual thing you’d like to change?”

“An actual thing…would be…” He hesitated like maybe this was a test. It was. “Common wealth for all levels of culture. You know what I mean? Like we’re the ones working the hardest, benefiting them, but then they just got too obsessed with their level of stature. What’s a big stack of money going to do for you when everyone dies around  you? Is that going to give you pleasure?”

“So, Communism?”

He made a face. “Communism! No! No, man. There are different levels for what people do. Not that everybody should be the same, but it should be more balanced out.”

That sounded good. We were going to say something about him not having a job, but thought better of it. Why bust on the kid? He promised he’d be out here all night, no matter what, even if he was the last one. That was pretty hardcore.

Meanwhile, we looked around for the topless girl, but it was starting to rain and there was always tomorrow.

Comments

  1. Byn Enderton says:

    I’ve been to a lot of protest marches and sit-ins over the last 40 years. This is a typical media “report” from any one of them. Yes, there are always people attending for vague reasons, or not equipped with the sense to mouth nicely honed sound bites to the reporter. But the fact that this one jumps so quickly  to “So, communism?” says considerably more about the shallowness of  the NY Observer’s staff than it does the Wall Street protesters.

  2. Byn Enderton says:

    I’ve been to a lot of protest marches and sit-ins over the last 40 years. This is a typical media “report” from any one of them. Yes, there are always people attending for vague reasons, or not equipped with the sense to mouth nicely honed sound bites to the reporter. But the fact that this one jumps so quickly  to “So, communism?” says considerably more about the shallowness of  the NY Observer’s staff than it does the Wall Street protesters.

    1. Anonymous says:

      Hi Byn, A fair point. I only conducted a interviews before it started pouring, and it’s not enough of a sample to characterize the entire protest (nor do I intend it to represent the Observer’s total coverage of this protest). What Esteban described sounded like Communism, which I consider a legitimate political ideology. You’ll note that China is doing quite well for itself in some respects. So tell me from your point of view: what’s it about?

      1. Anonymous says:

        This is “all about” corporate interests (i.e. wall street) hijacking our political system and using the power of money to skew everything in their favor. It’s about them holding our economy hostage due to their own irresponsibility, and then forcing us to give them trillions in bailout money, while giving their CEOs millions of dollars of bonuses with OUR money. It’s about the corporate owned and controlled media having radio silence on this protest while covering tea party protests with 25 people. Your lazy journalism ends after talking to two morons because it started to rain, while mocking and ridiculing it is just more of the same crap.

      2. Anonymous says:

        lol. Another lefty too stupid to understand economics, who dehumanizes the enemy and wants to burn them alive.

      3. Anonymous says:

        Look, another “righty” who would rather just make dismissive insults than actually address any real points. No wonder you read this site, must feel just like home to you.

      4. Anonymous says:

        lol. Look, another “lefty” who thinks anyone who doesn’t want to enact the complete Communist Manifesto/Mein Kampf world isn’t a lefty.

        Sorry, boy, but just because something isn’t as left wing as you doesn’t mean its not lefty.

      5. Anonymous says:

        “The New York Observer is a weekly newspaper first published in New York City on September 22, 1987, by Arthur L. Carter, a very successful former investment banker with publishing interests. ”

        Why such dismissive, slanted coverage? Owned by a successful former investment banker. What a big surprise.

      6. Ken2 says:

        As opposed to an UNSUCCESSFUL former investment banker? What a big surprise, indeed. How many people does this evil capitalist employ? Perhaps the coverage isn’t dismissive or slanted, but accurate.

      7. Anonymous says:

        I’ve seen PLENTY of coverage on this to know how slanted and dismissive the article is. It would be just as lazy to go to a Tea Party rally, look for the first two toothless idiots with misspelled signs, and use quotes from them to dismiss any argument the movement might have.  You really expect me to believe it’s possible that these idiots are the most intelligent, articulate voices out of a thousand+ people? Come on, that’s ridiculous.

        I’ve seen footage of Tea Party rallies with 25 people being covered in every major news outlet.. you have thousands of people camped out on Wall Street, people being arrested, and NOBODY will even acknowledge it’s happening. Then the Observer’s editor goes on Twitter and points at this article as proof that they aren’t ignoring it too. What a joke.

        Yea, the paper was founded by a rich investment banker, and then purchased by a 25 year old rich kid son of a major NY real estate magnate.  You don’t think it’s possible that this might have SOME effect on how dismissive these articles by the Observer are when it comes to people criticizing Wall St.??? Wake up, you’ve got to be kidding me.

      8. Anonymous says:

        Funny, lefties never bother to complain about slanted coverage in their favor. That’s always “fair and balanced.”

      9. Anonymous says:

        “Fair and balanced” is a Fox News slogan.  I absolutely love how you expose your allegiance to the Fox propaganda machine in your attempts to insult me.

        You know, if every single one of the major (corporately owned) news outlets weren’t completely silent about thousands of people protesting, I wouldn’t give two craps about this kind of hack job article. The Observer’s editor was on Twitter pointing to this article as defense that they weren’t ignoring it too. What joke to call this “coverage”. This whole site is full of gossip shills masquerading as journalism for snobby New York rich “elites”.

      10. Anonymous says:

        Oh, this moron is too much fun:

        “Fair and balanced” is a Fox News slogan. .
        —lol. Lefties never get needling mockery unless its made by Jon Stewart and directed at the non-left. Too bad their brains are too small.

        if every single one of the major (corporately owned) news outlets
        weren’t completely silent about thousands of people protesting, I
        wouldn’t give two craps about this kind of hack job article.

        —you’re right, I hated when they all, save Fox, ignored the entire first year of the Tea Party protests, too.

        What a joke to call this “coverage”.
        –Every lefty thinks everything he does is Teh Most Important Thing Evah! Why won’t Mommy and Daddy pay attention? It must be a conspiracy!

        Burn the witches, baby! Yeah!

      11. Anonymous says:

         Oh yea, it’s also about NYPD violently arresting peaceful protesters using laws from the 1860s for wearing masks in public.  I guess the rain caused you to miss that one too.

      12. Anonymous says:

        right, I’m sure the protesters did nothing to deserve getting arrested.

        Funny how leftists never say that they deserve any legal restraints against them. I guess that’s why they think terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernadette Dorhn are decent folk who shouldn’t be punished for attempted murder. If it’s done in the name of leftism, all is ok.

      13. Anonymous says:

        Look, you unquestioning drone… your undying faith in our police and legal system is pathetic. Ever heard of “‘the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.”

        Find me ONE example of footage or photos where anybody was doing ANYTHING remotely un-peaceful. You can’t. There is plenty of footage of the arrests. They’re dredging up old 1860’s laws about wearing masks in public to justify the arrests.. that is what the protestors were charged with. Those laws are pointless and haven’t been enforced in many decades. It’s a desperate attempt at intimidation by the police. 

        You keep up your good little attitude, maybe you’ll be head slave one day.

      14. Anonymous says:

        lmao. Notice how the lefty logic works—if I ever disagree with him or question him, I’m (contradictorily) an unquestioning drone!

        The right to assemble is based on demonstration within the bounds of the law. Enough lefty protests devolve into violence for an arrest to be unsurprising—you are all violent totalitarians at heart. After all, Bill Ayers and Bernadette Dohrn, attempted murderers, are your heroes.

        Just because a law is old doesn’t mean its invalid. We have old laws about murder, too. Last time I checked, we still prosecute that law.

        Find me how these laws are invalid and we can talk, son. Otherwise, you’re just whistling Dixie.

      15. Sha Sene says:

        China  is doing well because it has turned to captialism via Hong Kong’s portal to the rest of the world.

      16. Ed says:

        no, china is doing well because they pay their workers the equivalent of 2 dollars a day! you can be a very productive country when your workforce is slaves.  everyone is so enamored with chinas high speed trains, shiny buildings, and new infrastructure, but fail to realize it is on the backs of the underpaid, abused citizens and massive environmental pollution. GO CHINA! yeah, that’s really the example we want to follow?

      17. Lucas Miguel says:

        Aaron, 

        You are confusing Communism as a political and economic system with Communism as an ideology. They are not one and the same, to say the least, because as an ideology, specifically one that Marx envisioned, Communism is a failure and has been disproven by many historians. Why? Because Communist revolutions never happened where he thought they would (Germany, industrialized countries), and instead these revolutions occurred in Russia and China, and they never occurred when he imagined. Communism as a political and economic system started, arguably, with the U.S.S.R. and the poster child for that is Stalin, which has morphed into essentially what it is today (a quasi-capitialist-totalitarian state, in China at least). 

        To reiterate, there has never been a “pure” execution of the Communist ideology, and there probably never will, so to classify China’s economic and political system as “Communist,” when in reality it is the aforementioned quasi-capitalist-command economy in a totalitarian state is a bit disingenuous to both the Chinese and Communists.

        Moreover, this article is consistent with others I have read regarding these yuppies, and it was an entirely logical assumption to jump to Communism from his vague assertation of what the group wants., though I myself would have assume Socialism. 

        As for Byn, you realize that the protests started on a Saturday? And that Wall Street, which they are protesting, is closed on such days? What’s more, that many of the leaders viewed the event as a means of coming together to solidify their nascent ideas about why exactly they would be protesting? In other words, they went to protests for protesting sake in hopes they would come up with a good reason. I’m just saying, it seems to me like such fine folk that were interviewed were a microcosm of the event as a whole. 

    2. Anonymous says:

      Hey, Bun?  What, exactly, do you suppose this means:   “Common wealth for all levels of culture.”

      Just me, I’m thinking that Aaron might be on to something with the communism rap.

    3. Rusty Shackleford says:

      So Byn, what do these protesters want?

      1. Anonymous says:

        Magic Unicorn Rainbows and the seas to stop rising, as Mein Obama promised. Also, a pony.

  3. Anonymous says:

    Even though your interviewees were not the most articulate reps, the energy down there the one night I spent with the protesters is a more general “enough is enough”, which means this is not a protest over a singular issue.
    We should be able to relate to that. Where would you even begin?  Wall Street malfeasance before and after the 2008 crash? The economic policies of Presidents Bush and Obama? Citizens United? The absence of a real jobs program, at least until President Obama’s recent proposal that almost certainly won’t pass? The ongoing wars?  The creation of “free speech zones” to stifle protests of all kinds?
    Hard to sum up in a catch-phrase.  Suffice it to say that the protesters and their supporters know that ordinary people are getting screwed, and people and entities in positions of power are doing very little about it.

    1. Anonymous says:

      “Wall Street” (nice dehumanization right there) broke no laws. But I’m sure you’ll make up an ex post facto law soon to burn the witches with.

      Citizens United upheld free speech by groups of people. You’d think you’d like that, freedom of speech.

      Left-wing economics, it is true, caused this crash.

  4. Pj-DC says:

    They have no point, yuppies never really do.

    1. Bon says:

      Yuppies?  You make absolutely no sense.

  5. Pj-DC says:

    Yippies

  6. Pj-DC says:

    I meant

  7. Anonymous says:

    “We were going to say something about him not having a job, but thought better of it. Why bust on the kid?”
    Exactly. That’s what you have commenters for … like me: 

    Umm…Mr. I-Don’t-Have-a-Job-or-a-brain-or-a-mortgage Vasquez? Why are you protesting 300 years of common law property and lending rights when you don’t have a fucking clue what a mortgage is, how to get one, or how to earn money to pay one? Why…precisely? I don’t mean to harsh your buzz, but you are giving unemployed, illiterate, stoned musicians a really bad name right now, and you might want to take it down a notch.

    1. Ifrah Rashid says:

      You are just making the economy worse but pointing that out, just sayin. 

  8. Tim says:

    They’ve got nothing else to do while those evil capitalists Mommy & Daddy put them through 12 years of college and pay all their bills…

    1. William says:

       Its pretty arrogant to call people evil just because they’re capitalists. You’re making a faulty assumption that all capitalists take advantage of the capitalist system to take advantage of other people to make a profit.

      1. Chris says:

        And you obviously don’t understand sarcasm.

  9. Menace to Sobriety says:

    A picture of a jackass with his face painted instead of the topless protester? This will be my last trip to this site.

    1. Ned Reid says:

      Why the tease about a topless protester, unless it was one of those old bags from Code Pink with cans that hang like spanish moss.
      As for a response to “what are you here for” like “take your pick”, that retort went out after Johnny Strabler uttered “What’ve you got?” in The Wild One.

      1. Sandrine says:

        “cans?” 

        you remind me of a howard stern listener aka bot-wannabe – nothing but jabs about appearance, ie,  someone who is insecure, with absolutely no depth and no clue, rises up to smackdown young people by dissing older people’s looks, all of whom are people who at least manage to show up to protest something that is reaching crisis level, nationwide. 

        This THEY do, despite the lack of glamour and material comforts, because, unlike you, they get the fact that there is a need to try to change an epic economic-societal crisis that’s rolling over the majority of Americans (hanging “cans” or not), while a sickeningly slim minority of obscenely wealthy elites keeps glomming more and more of the pie. 

        That deliberately chosen airy “take your pick” chick (chosen to belittle the seriousness of the movement by the writer) has at least shown up, which is more than can be said for you, Ned. And that kid with the face paint, although he lacks well defined specifics, gets the main point of why there needs to be a protest, which is a good place to start… a place you, obviously, cannot seem to find. For that, you’d need to choose intelligence over 7th grade ‘humor.’ 

      2. So…what exactly is the point of the protest? You’ve managed to do a fairly good job of tearing up Ned, but you haven’t explained what the Occupy movement wants to accomplish any better than anyone else in the article. 

        I’m not a hater. I really want to know. And no: Showing up isn’t getting more done than not showing up. If you don’t know what you’re trying to accomplish, you might better figure it out. Show up with real demands and a real plan to fix the problem.

      3. Bon says:

        Sandrine explained the reason in his/her second paragraph very succinctly.  How could you have missed it?  Politicians are not going to do anything about the economic mess this country is in.   They are dependent on   Corporations for handouts come election time.  Protesting…  showing up IS doing something.  It’s bringing attention to the problem of gross inequality, and solidarity strengthens the people’s resolve to rise up against  the unfair   concentration of wealth and power   owned by  only one percent of the population..A plan to fix the problem?  It’s too late to do anything about the elderly and poor who have already lost their homes because of the vultures who preyed on them.,, greedy financiers who were deceitful..selling weak loans.. targeting and  exploiting people neither  intelligent nor sophisticated enough to understand what was happening to them..These big shots committed crimes yet the government rewarded them by bailing them out.  Regulations to prevent this sort of thing from ever happening again would  be good for starters.. maybe  paying their fair share of taxes …  At this point, it’s about raising awareness,,,maybe even waking  up other Americans who like those people who were taken advantage of, have not been able to see how they are being affected by this wide gap between the ridiculously rich and the poor.  If you have a job, with a roof over your head and food in your stomach, you’re luckier than some, but don’t think you are not being kept down.  This is the way they would like to keep things..and the politicians who try to tell you that OWS protesters are nothing but losers, lazy, hippy’s…they are lying…there are veterans from world war II..young veterans…and people in all income brackets from very poor to upper middle class to what many would consider wealthy who support this cause.  Showing up ..exercising freedom of expression…being peaceful..is enough at this point…the more people who understand that we are all victims of an economic system that decidedly favors the extremely wealthy, and feeds off everyone else,  the better..If you really want to hear an eloquent discussion about the reason for this movement..google Chris Hedges, Occupy Wall Street..He is a journalist and author who does support OWS and leaves no stone unturned in explaining how important this movement really is.

      4. Colreee says:

        I understand the arguement here.  The system is indeed flawed.  However, I continue to see a particular reoccuring theme that keeps rearing its head… and that’s the government.  So would it also be fair to wonder if these protests should be directed at Congress and lawmakers and the ones who have issued these failed bailouts, politicians who are contributing to the problem when they have the power to change it by reforming said failed system? 

      5. Jquiroz5 says:

        Basically this is what the protest is all about:The general public is upset because while the middle and lower class societies have been struggling with their finances, the top 1% wealthy have made huge profits – thanks to the Government System. One example is the bailout of the corporations by the Government. Corporations that broke the law by being greedy and taking advantage of needy people for profit. Those corporations were very irresponsible for not taking into account the consequence of a weakening economy. So when things didn’t go right (economically) the U.S. Government bailed them out by using taxpayer’s money. Now the reason for this was due to the belief of the U.S. Government that by bailing them out, the economy would strengthen by keeping people employed at those such corporations that were facing financial difficulties.In my personal opinion, I do understand and agree why the U.S. Government would want to bailout those corporations. Why do I agree? Corporations would not have this problem if the borrowers (the general public) paid their dues in the first place. I mean the general public was not forced to borrow the money to buy that Real Estate property. They too should of taking into account the consequence of a recession.So there you have it:Corporations lent money to people who couldn’t afford their payments due to the recession.In this case both, corporations and borrowers are both to blame. Because both did not take into account a recession or any other type of personal or national economic problems. So this is pretty much an even status. They were both irresponsible.The government intervenes and bailout the corporations with taxpayers money.
        In this case, the innocent people who were not involve in borrowing any money from those corporations Are The True Victims. And not the corporations or the borrowers.Now as for those 1% wealthy filthy rich upper class society who spend millions of dollars on birthday parties, etc, I believe the Government should go one more step forward and raise taxes on them – to even out the pain. Because we are all in this country together, therefore we should all work together period! No ifs, ands, or buts.The Bottom Line:Capitalists are not all to blame – for if it weren’t for them, people wouldn’t be able to go to them as if they were their mommy and daddy and ask them for a loan to buy their nice little house or dream home. After all, corporations default as a result of borrowers not paying back their debts!

      6. Dsraleigh25 says:

        why don’t you go watch an episode of the Kardashians, dingbat!  who pissed in your cornflakes anyway?

    2. sparky50 says:

      best post i have seen in a long time.. Hey easy way to clear them out have Nancy Pelosi run in the middle of the camp naked.. Oh the thought of i go to go throw up..

  10. Anonymous says:

    Ah, the Left: a crisis happened! Someone find a witch so we can burn her!

    1. Squiggy says:

      The left doesn’t burn witches anymore.  Now it’s Christians.

  11. JenniferL says:

    “The Wall Street Protesters: What the Hell Do They Want?”

    Neurons. Wonderful cental nervous system neurons.

    So magical.  So useful.  So totally absent in the skulls of these spoiled arrogant complete fools.

  12. CSpackler says:

    “These men are cowards, Donnie.”

  13. The Youtube video after the article was the exclamation point this piece needed. Good call…

  14. Karl Magnus says:

    And all these years, since the 60s, I’ve believed that the “Summer of Love” had turned into a heroin junkie’s paradise, “The Haight”, for instance.  Apparently there’s still hope for its revival.
    :rolleyes
    Go fer it, boys and girls. Marlon Brando in “The Wild One” at least had a multiple of choice of causes (“whatya got?”) from which to choose. These FNGs have no clue except to get in the way.
    Moms and Dads basements are filled with ‘em.
    ~(Ä)~

  15. Anonymous says:

     “Like we’re the ones working the hardest,..” says a moron who hasn’t worked a day in his 19 years of useless life.
    Hey, and GOD spelt backwards says DOG. Wow man, far out.

  16. Anonymous says:

    Actually, the original idea was to protest against Wall Street corruption. Protesting corruption is not a bad thing, in and of itself.

    A great idea…but, the execution of that idea? Fail.

    1. Anonymous says:

      What laws were broken by “Wall Street?”

  17. Anonymous says:

    As Johnny Strabler said in the “The Wild One” when asked “What are you rebelling against”, he answered “What have you got?”

  18. Edendavisa says:

    I would go with; they want to see the corporate greed in this country end. 

    So what, you can go find someone wearing face paint who is clerkly not a good spokesperson just to make fun of them? How about you actually go out and find someone who knows a thing or two, and could talk circles around you. Not everyone there has to know why they’re there, they could be going to find out, they could just simply want change and want to back an actual voice that’s rising above the snarky yuppy wannabe bloggers like you out there. BTW Anarchy and protests are not even close to one another why would you tag it as such. Man I hate people like you, quick to criticize the youth for doing nothing, then knocking them down and taking away from whatever they do. I hope your head gets bashed in.

  19. Friendlier998 says:

    The New York Observer, What The Hell Does It Want?

  20. Nyc Labrets says:

    Enjoy your pathetic little Über Privileged overdressed and overfed little Snark-A-Thon.While it lasts.You’re on the wrong side of this one.When was the last time, (in the whole of the last 40 years in the USA), when *anything* grew this fast organically? In a span of a mere 16 days?I believe it took Thomas Jefferson longer than 16 days to write The Declaration of Independence once that particular task was assigned to him.And it took a full 13 years from the start of the American Revolutionary War until the US Constitution was finally adopted in a form that most could agree on.This not to mention that the American troops of the Rag-Tag Continental Army that Washington had to work with were such a sloppy and undisciplined mess that he had to go to my relatives to hire away the outside help of General von Steuben to even stand a fighting chance against the British.So, so what if the Protestors aren’t all dressed up in a way, that meets your WORTHLESS approval, for the non-existent Job Interview or to go to Church on Sunday?Who CARES what you SNIDE little PEONS think anyways?Y’all can BITE me.Expecting OWS to have their collective shit together at this juncture just flies in the face of practical reality.Now look you, do you honestly think that the people down there, (and throughout the +100 Cities of America where #OWS Chapters have sprung within the last 2 weeks), DON’T KNOW what is going on?Are you high?What the hell are you people smoking in the offices there of your New York Observer?Have you not been paying attention to what’s going on with YOUR paycheck and YOUR precious 401(k)?Do you really believe that as the economic situation further deteriorates from here on in, which it will, that you’re going to somehow be magically immune from it?I wouldn’t bet on that outcome if I were you.

  21. Cody Stasyk says:

    The article echos how I feel about this.  Protest without understanding or anything specific proposed is a glorified tantrum.

  22. SAPRUITT says:

    I really don’t understand the whole occupy wall street thing. Half don’t even know why they’re there; it’s simply fun and cool to “be a part of something”. The other half wants to bring socialism to the U.S. but never admit it and try to rebrand it as “equality”. Around the fringes there seems to be people that are simply disgruntled but, rightly, want smaller government. Have you read the comments to articles about this stuff, from different websites? I see alot of “I’ve been protesting for 40 years about blah blah blah”. Really? Maybe if you protested less and worked more you wouldn’t have lost your house. Just sayin’.

    1. This is the Woodstock of today. Only there’s no decent music.

  23. so maybe now that you might have done a little bit more research, you realized that the occupation does have a purpose and at least a few concrete ideas to share. how about you update this page, or even write a new post about how your first article on the occupation was premature, uninformed, and poorly researched. then you can go into the more pressing political issues that the occupation is trying to address.

    also, your half assed approach to finding a worthy intellectual at the plaza for an interview is disheartening. whats the matter, is your dignity as a reporter not waterproof? 

  24. Fox12usa says:

    Anonymous Revolution ? Not a Revolution at all! You protest to support socialism and larger government control over the people. You believe the wealthy owe you what you can not provide for your self. Revolution will come if you meet a named opposing force with the distinctive mission of restoring Democracy and capitalism and the last side standing wins.
    Democracy and capitalism have already been proven most effective, how ever a few bad apples over time have been dishonest as well as implanted socialist and communist ideology in to our system and it along with dishonest practices between some have in part taken our nation right down to this current crises. Don’t give up on a already proven effective plan for our nation that so many people died for us to have.

  25. Anonymous says:

    They want to protest. You don’t have to have a tea party and attack seniors in wheel chairs to have a protest. 

  26. Ruby says:

    A lot of people are misinformed. And yes the “ignorant” unemployed are the ones protesting, WHY because the ones who are employed can’t go out and protest for fear of being fired. The people who revere capitalism are blinded by their small wish that one day they too will be rich and part of that 1% perhaps in their blissful wishing they failed to notice how this country has actually turned into a plutocracy, those big banks and big corporates are all suppose to have a highly understanding of the “free market” and economics otherwise why else are they so successful? by a struck of luck? No. They knew what they were doing and yet when their companies started going under and bankrupt who did they ask for help? The government of course, the one that they DON’T want to instate regulation on the “free market” yet they want them to bail them out with billions of dollars, money that obviously comes from taxpayers. And on the housing issue, banks knew regular working class and middle class people would not be able to afford their mortgage payments but by paying the interest on it first for the first 3 or 4 years they were able lure misinformed people and sell sell sell. They too wanted to make a quick buck and they did it, they took it and they lost it, and then made the government pay for it. It’s hard to feel sorry for that 1% responsible for the economic crisis, and instead of really stimulating the economy with the bailout money they are  “coincidentally” giving themselves million dollar bonuses, because they obviously deserve bonuses, it’s not like they messed up the world’s economy or anything, oh wait, they did.

  27. Jquiroz5 says:

    Basically this is what the protest is all about:The general public is upset because while the middle and lower class societies have been struggling with their finances, the top 1% wealthy have made huge profits – thanks to the Government System. One example is the bailout of the corporations by the Government. Corporations that broke the law by being greedy and taking advantage of needy people for profit. Those corporations were very irresponsible for not taking into account the consequence of a weakening economy. So when things didn’t go right (economically) the U.S. Government bailed them out by using taxpayer’s money. Now the reason for this was due to the belief of the U.S. Government that by bailing them out, the economy would strengthen by keeping people employed at those such corporations that were facing financial difficulties.In my personal opinion, I do understand and agree why the U.S. Government would want to bailout those corporations. Why do I agree? Corporations would not have this problem if the borrowers (the general public) paid their dues in the first place. I mean the general public was not forced to borrow the money to buy that Real Estate property. They too should of taking into account the consequence of a recession.So there you have it:Corporations lent money to people who couldn’t afford their payments due to the recession. In this case both, corporations and borrowers are both to blame. Because both did not take into account a recession or any other type of personal or national economic problems. So this is pretty much an even status. They were both irresponsible.The government intervenes and bailout the corporations with taxpayers money.In this case, the innocent people who were not involve in borrowing any money from those corporations Are The True Victims. And not the corporations or the borrowers.Now as for those 1% wealthy filthy rich upper class society who spend millions of dollars on birthday parties, etc, I believe the Government should go one more step forward and raise taxes on them – to even out the pain. Because we are all in this country together, therefore we should all work together period! No ifs, ands, or buts.The Bottom Line:Capitalists are not all to blame – for if it weren’t for them, people wouldn’t be able to go to them as if they were their mommy and daddy and ask them for a loan to buy their nice little house or dream home. After all, corporations default as a result of borrowers not paying back the

  28. Bmj986 says:

    yealll nigaassssssssss do not go  livesssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssszss

  29. Bmj986 says:

    yeallllll nigass suck my dick

  30. Chasenbishoff says:

    anarchy!!!!!