Last October, I noted in this post on the occupy movement, "I actually agree with a few of the protestors' positions.... But why does anyone think
extended occupation of public spaces is an effective way to achieve
anything?"
Today the USA Today editorial page, which I don't often agree with, has this:
Today the USA Today editorial page, which I don't often agree with, has this:
When the "Occupy" movement was launched last year, it garnered considerable attention and enthusiasm. Labor unions, in particular, were amazed at how Occupy managed to put Wall Street institutions on the defensive, something the liberals had been trying to do for years.
But with the recent clearing of encampments in Washington, D.C.-- one of the last cities in which they still existed -- a movement that came in with a bang appears to be going out with a whimper. Future political operatives might view it as a case study in how not to organize a lasting movement.
Leave a comment