| Preoccupation with Occupy Denver |
|
 |
|
A preoccupation with Occupy Denver has found its own space in the consciousness of the American public. Almost every morning as I sip on my hot cup of coffee, watching the early morning news, I am mesmerized by the coverage of the occupations of public space taking place in large American cities. It appears that nationally occupiers have moved in a more radical approach, transforming themselves into squatters. Their targets have become vacant homes, lost in the shuffle of economic recession. My guess is that if occupy movement supporters had jobs, they wouldn’t have time to be on the streets, ranting and raving about how 1% of the population controls a major part of the economy while 99% are suffering the maladies of what appears to be a nosedive into a depression.
The Denver Post in its November 29th editorial basically encouraged Occupy Denver Movement to take a break. They are arguing occupants have made their point in public, should pick up their marbles and go home, vote and be good Americans for the winter and return on a sunny afternoon. A juicy piece of yellow journalism may go down the drain if this happens. No peace treaty has been signed. In Denver, activists have taken the issue into the courts. They have initially convinced judges that their first amendment rights have been violated. Rage against the machine continues.
The newspaper has consistently characterized Occupy Denver activists as a group of ragtag anarchists, underemployed, unemployed, middle class Americans. National and local newspapers have stated the movement’s mission is obscure. Occupy Movement organizers haven’t filled out paperwork at the Secretary of State’s Office to obtain a (501) © (3) status and haven’t written a vision and mission statement with goals and objectives. Ludicrous, perhaps; although designed with social justice and democracy as palatable values, nonprofit organizations are not immune from sidestepping what is right, especially when money is involved. Maybe it is better for the occupiers to stay loosely coupled as a group.
One has to wonder if the tentacles of the Occupy Movement are long enough to invite immigrant rights organizations to ban together, especially following the suicide of Joaquin Luna, who cited “his undocumented status as a barrier to pursuing his dreams.” Generally, immigrants have become the scapegoats for the ills in America’s economy. I wonder how the occupiers see this. Building bridges with them might lead to some interesting backlash by the machine.
If power brokers and policy pundits had intervened before the market crashed with just economic distributive policies to deal with the corrupt behavior from top level technocrats, business tycoons and political leaders or if government administrators had practiced monitoring policies, the movement would never have begun. What remains on the political center stage is the standoff between Democrats and Republicans, between those who insist that government has gotten to big, except to dole out pork barrels to political constituents, and those that argue government, with all of its pitfalls is needed as watch dogs against the greedy.
The rumor mill that violence might ensue was rampant as the machine geared up for intervention. Conspiracy theorists argue the system needs a justification or a rationalization to bring in the troops, giving them institutional permission to quell the “Rebellion.” It is not unusual for infiltrators to penetrate movements with hidden agendas. However, we should never assume they came from inside. Outside agitators, at times egged on by the power structure have been known to infiltrate. Oh! Oh! Did I overstep my journalistic boundaries? Here come the spy files again.
When is it justifiable to defy an unjust law? Social theorists argue when laws uphold tyranny, free people have either a responsibility or a duty to defy or break an unjust law. Is there a moral law that transcends and supersedes the law of the land? Religious people, men/women of the cloth and theologians talk about moral law surpassing any other law. It was inscribed in stone on some mountain. What do you do when there is no law or when purported watchdogs turn a blind eye as theft, deception and outright stealing from the American public coffers takes place while innocent people are blamed?
The fulcrum point between blindly following an unjust law and flaunting outright defiance, sometimes referred to as civil disobedience, has yet to be balanced by the administration and the occupiers. At the end of the day, a free person must exercise his/her free will but must commensurately be willing to pay the price, which might be spending a night in jail. Occupiers have clarity, discernment and courage to follow their convictions. Comeuppance should fall on those who have truly committed wrongs.
The state is powerful, able to muster up whatever force is necessary to squash any perception of social disorder, even if the perception is in the eye of the beholder; and more so, when it is in the eye of the power structure. The state controls police departments, militias, national guards and the military. When its’ might is confronted, it will exercise its wrath by trouncing on common people.
I think the occupiers who continue to struggle for space and place have a right to remain in its occupied space until jobs and access to opportunity to fulfill the American dream becomes a reality; hopefully, before it becomes more of a nightmare.
Dr. Ramón Del Castillo is an Independent Journalist.
©2011 The Weekly Issue/El Semanario, Inc.
|
←
Back
|
|
|
|
view more photos
view more videos
El Semanario New Mexico 
El Chicago Hispano 
El Semanario