Monthly Archives: September 2012

Israel’s Red Line: An Absurd Threshold for Iranian Nuclear Containment

30 Sunday Sep 2012

Posted by in Middle East, War

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , , ,


The United Nations General Assembly has seen its fair share of ridiculous speeches. However, this past week, the UN General Assembly witnessed something truly rare. The prime minister of a developed, Western, democratic nation spreading propaganda on a global forum.  On Thursday, September 27, Benyamin Netanyahu delivered an overly simplified account of Iran’s nuclear armament in which he explicitly drew a red line for military intervention in Iran.

This move likely comes after Israel faced criticism for calling upon the United States to clearly define a red line for Iranian intervention while failing to do so itself.

The fact of the matter is that it is very difficult to draw a red line. Netanyahu said that a line should be drawn once Iran has completed medium uranium enrichment. He explained that the process of making a nuclear weapon includes three stages of uranium enrichment: low, medium, and high concentration. He said that Iran had finished the low enrichment process, comprising 70% of a nuclear weapon. Once Iran is 90% complete in forming a nuclear weapon, once it completes the medium enrichment step, Israel will intervene militarily. What Netanyahu seemingly fails to realize is that Iran has consistently failed to agree to IAEA inspections. Without these inspections, it will be nearly impossible to accurately assess Iran’s nuclear developments. In other words, Israeli intelligence, likely influenced by Netanyahu, could easily fabricate their assessments in order to intervene in Iran militarily at their will.

Netanyahu went on to say that a nuclear-armed Iran would be just as dangerous as a nuclear-armed Al Qaeda. He said that there was not much difference between the world’s worst terrorist group and the world’s worst terrorist state. This was a completely hyperbolic claim. Though Iran has supported terrorism in the past, Iran is somewhat democratic. It is possible that Ahmadinejad will relinquish power after his second and final term ends in less than a year. Moreover, Iran has a deterrent to nuclear provocation that Al Qaeda does not. The world would likely respond to Iranian nuclear action with nuclear or military action. However, Al Qaeda is a complex organization with roots stretching from Libya to Afghanistan and beyond. The international community would almost certainly not wage a war on the entire Middle East region simply to get revenge for the action of certain individuals.

As with all wars historically, the United States and the international community must use reasonable judgment to decide when to intervene. It is entirely likely that military intervention in Iran will not be necessary. Perhaps, like North Korea at the moment, Iran is too radical and too much of a threat to the world’s oil flow and international peace to risk military intervention. Like Washington’s position on Pyongyang, it may prove far cheaper and safer for the United States to avoid military action on Iran and instead gain a tentative alliance with Tehran through sizeable foreign aid.

Of course, that is not a permanent action plan. However, much like the Kim Jong-un regime, the Ahmadinejad regime appears to be on its last legs. As proven throughout history, regimes that support crimes against humanity, terrorism, and repression tend to be overthrown within decades. His second “presidential” term is set to expire in less than a year. Thereafter, he will not be eligible for re-election. There is, of course, the threat that he will usurp power illegally as he likely did in the widely disputed 2009 elections. Nevertheless, the Arab Springs provide another alternative for regime change. Having seen their neighbors stand up for their democratic rights, Iranians could be persuaded to rebel against the regime. It is very likely that if such a protest were to erupt, the United States and its NATO allies would help to finance the rebels as they are currently doing in Syria. If Washington gets its timing right, foreign aid will precede a soon-to-come rebellion against the regime.

Thus, it is unwise to draw a red line for Iranian military action at the moment. Such a decision should be based on the context of the region and nuclear developments at the time of intervention, two factors that cannot be accurately predicted at the moment. The United States and the rest of the world should not follow suit with Israel’s absurd red line declaration at the UN General Assembly.

About these ads

Iran’s Virtual Iron Curtain

29 Saturday Sep 2012

Posted by in Government, Middle East

≈ Leave a Comment

Tags

, , ,


In response to the video “Innocence of Muslims,” the inflammatory amateur film that depicted Prophet Muhammad poorly resulting in anti-American protests in the Middle East and beyond, Iran’s radical leader Ahmadinejad has decided to ban Internet giant Google’s search and mail features.

It should be noted that Innocence of Muslims was not the reason for this decision. The video merely provides a justification for Ahmadinejad to gain an even stronger hold on its citizens. The Iranian regime has, in fact, censored social media sites, especially during times when a high volume of anti-regime dissent erupts internationally. Just over a year ago, Ahmadinejad even suggested that Iran should have an Internet disconnected from the rest of the world to encourage Muslim values and ethics.

What exactly does Iran censoring its Internet mean for the rest of the world? At first glance: nothing good. After all, Iran is distancing itself further from the Western world. The likely conclusion would be that it is aligning itself with other rogue states such as North Korea and Russia in the process.

However, there is hope within this move. After all, Iran’s decision to censor the Internet indicates that the regime is unable to handle dissent. Obviously, Iran’s ruling regime is extremely vulnerable to dissent at the moment.

As a result, a carefully orchestrated rebellion could easily topple the regime at the moment. The agent to organize such a rebellion should be a NATO coalition, but the rebels themselves should be Iranian to ensure that such a revolt is truly in the interest of Iranian citizens. This organization would ensure that the mistakes in other Arab Springs revolts do not plague Iran. Most importantly, such a structure would help the rebels to organize themselves and establish a common set of goals. This, in turn, would create a stronger rebellion and a more unified post-conflict society.

Of course, the United States has historically been weak at organizing rebellions. In 1954, for example, the CIA planted a coup against the democratic constitution monarch Mohammad Mosaddegh. The United States instead instituted the authoritarian Mohammad-Reza Shah Pahlavi. The goal of this was to institute a Middle Eastern leader loyal to the United States in order to contain Communism from spreading to the Middle East.

In the case of Iran at the moment, the United States and its NATO allies must balance their self-interests with Iranian interests. A more peaceful Iran is surely in America’s interests, and the only way to achieve peace and democracy in Iran is to maintain long-term aid there. In Iran in 1987, after the United States had managed to support Mujahedeen rebels in ousting the Soviet Union, the United States immediately cut its extensive foreign aid to Iran. As a result, the government was unable to make up the costs from the war and invest in much needed infrastructure. Therefore, Iran built up anti-American sentiment.

While NATO should provide more extensive funding to Iran during a potential NATO orchestrated rebellion against the regime, NATO foreign aid to Iran should continue for at least ten years. This would serve NATO goals by ensuring that the ruling party to emerge from the rebellion would be friendly towards the United States. It would also strike a balance of American self-interest and Iranian interest by providing Iran the resources it needs to westernize both politically and economically.

The Cost of Diplomacy: New Fundraising Initiatives for the UN

28 Friday Sep 2012

Posted by in Economy, Foreign Relations

≈ 1 Comment

Tags

, , ,


Within countries, the issue of progressive taxing is quite controversial. Now, impose a progressive tax internationally and political turmoil is ensured. The United Nations is currently discussing proposals to impose progressive taxes internationally to raise funds for its initiatives. This is a move that conservatives will not look favorably upon; after all, the point of the measures is to redistribute wealth from developed economies to underdeveloped and developing ones.

Much of these measures target the richest for the rich. For example, the UN hopes to impose a 1% income tax on billionaires, a tax on trading the Yen, the Euro, the US dollar and the Pound Sterling among other currencies from developed nations. They also plan a miniscule tax on all financial transactions, stock and bond trading, and trading in financial derivatives. Additionally, as a joint venture to raise funds and meet environmental goals, the UN plans to mandate a tax on airplane tickets and carbon emissions.

Now, the question arises: will these new measures be more beneficial to he international community as a whole compared to fundraising measures that the United Nations already has in place. At the moment, all Member States are required to pay their fair share of dues for the United Nations’ services. Their dues are based on a complex formula ratified by Member States. The main difference between the current method of financing and the proposed measures is that the current measures allow for a greater degree of flexibility for individual Member States. So, essentially, Member States can choose how they want to raise this capital whether it be through a flat tax, a mildly progressive tax, a regressive tax, or a very liberal tax system. Most nations in the world currently employ a mildly progressive tax while the proposed measures call for extremely liberal tax systems targeting only the super wealthy.

Two questions must be asked: what role does the United Nations have in direct funding and is a liberal tax system in line with the UN’s goals.

Each UN Member State holds coveted national sovereignty, a principle by which they have autonomy over their nation. However, upon joining the UN, partial sovereignty is granted to the United Nations. It is questionable whether or not the United Nations has the power to directly tax citizens. After all, unlike individual governments, it derives its power from UN Member States as opposed to citizens. Thus, the UN should abide by its current methods of fundraising in order to stay within the bounds of its objectives and powers

The other issue, of course, is on the method of taxing. Should the rich be providing nearly all the money for the United Nations? After al, it is mainly the poor who benefit from the UN services so it seems that the rich. The current method of obtaining funding indirectly from individuals through governments is invariably the fairest and most effective method of fundraising as it allows for a less radically liberal method of fundraising in the majority of UN Member States and does not infringe upon national sovereignty. Therefore, the United Nations should not reform its methods of fundraising by imposing direct taxes on individuals.

Welfare Queens? The Reality of a Social Safety Net

25 Tuesday Sep 2012

Posted by in Economy, The Americas

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , ,


Poverty. Homelessness. Being forced to eat from garbage bins. These are all well-known realities in Africa and Southeast Asia. Perhaps less known, though, is that these disparities are occurring in Western ‘developed’ nations like Greece and Spain forced to cut social welfare systems due to austerity measures.

The United States is a firm believer in self-reliance and, as such, has a very limited social welfare system relative to its economic prosperity. Its belief in individualism renders the nation blind to the cycle of poverty that is a harsh reality to tens of millions of the working poor in America.  Of course, welfare queens, those who are content to mooch off of a vast social system without contributing to society, would be inevitable with a greater social safety net and already exist in the United States. However, they would be few and far between. In Europe, a large social welfare system has worked perfectly. There have been few ‘welfare queens’ compromising the system. The United States’ adoption of a social welfare system would likely be even more successful considering the Protestant work ethic that has driven American economic growth for centuries.

In Spain, the unemployment rates for the young is at 50%. Due to austerity measures, unemployment benefits have been cut. The combination of a lack of jobs and a lack of benefits for the unemployed has created dangerous trends. About 1/3 of people using social welfare systems there had never used them before the recession. Those using the current social safety net, too, are at risk. Austerity has rendered the social safety net unable to provide all the basic rights and social welfare programs are limited in time. With no end to the recession and unemployment in sight, there appears no hope for the Spanish.

These lessons are directly relatable to the presidential campaign. Barack Obama has recently been portrayed badly by right wing for a comment he made 16 years ago arguing for some level of redistribution of wealth. It is difficult to understand why this video comes as a surprise: Obama has constantly argued for increasing tax on the top tax brackets to expand social welfare programs for the poor. While communism has never worked, socialism or heavily regulated capitalism, when paired with democracy, has been proven to promote economic growth. On the flip side, while Communism has never worked, neither has laissez faire capitalism. What policymakers in the United States must realize is that neither party is arguing for either of these systems. Both parties are quite moderate and are arguing for capitalist free market systems with slightly different levels of regulation.

In Spain, as in the United States, social welfare programs must be prioritized to a great degree. After all, a country is only as strong as its working class. A nation’s development is marked by the quality of life for its citizens, not by its overall wealth concentrated at the very top of society.

Capitalist North Korea: The Power Conundrum

24 Monday Sep 2012

Posted by in Asia/ Pacific, Economy

≈ Leave a Comment

Tags

, , ,


Image

Yousuke, Yamamoto. Korea-North. Digital image. Flickr.com. N.p., 6 Feb. 2012. Web. 24 Sept. 2012. .
Despite his illusion of power, any of Kim Jong-un’s reformation ideas will be dependent upon the North Korean military’s approval.

After decades of collectivized agriculture, North Korea appears likely to open up to partial privatization of the agricultural sector.

The new privatization policies are not yet confirmed, but reports from top North Korean officials imply that the reforms will almost certainly pass. On Tuesday, September 25, North Korean parliament will convene and likely clear up the doubts. The very fact that parliament is convening for the second time this year indicates that something out of the usual has likely occurred; parliament meetings in North Korea are sporadic, infrequent, and largely unproductive due to the North Korean military and Kim Jong-un’s undue power in North Korea.

This appears to be one of a series of steps toward capitalist, free market reform that North Korea is set to adopt from China. Ever since Kim Jong-un came to power, North Korea has grown ever more dependent on China for trade and foreign relations. It has embarked on a remarkably different path from that which it followed under Kim Jong-un’s predecessors Kim Il-sung and Kim-Jung.

Obviously, the question now arises: to what extent will North Korea continue to develop. While Kim Jong-un will almost surely allow for economic development, he will be hard-pressed to stagnate any potential diplomatic or political developments.

The most significant political and diplomatic trends that Kim Jong-un will be forced to uphold include anti-Western foreign policy, a swollen military budget, propaganda campaigns touting his regime, and aristocratic single-party rule. The fact of the matter is that Kim Jong-un is quite unpopular among the politically powerful KPA (Korean People’s Army), the North Korean military, who is allegiant mainly to the country’s First and Supreme Leader Kim Il-sung and, to a lesser extent, Kim Jong-un. From his assumption of power, they have feared his reforms to the strictly controlled North Korean state, worrying rightly so that the reforms could jeopardize their power and role in North Korean society.

Despite the misconception of North Korea as an autocratic state, Kim Jong-un has relatively little power for a dictator. He is entirely at the mercy of the KPA who could usurp power from him at any given moment. As such, any reforms he makes will be limited. Kim Jong-un would never dare to make political or diplomatic reforms to North Korea. Even the economic reforms he makes will likely be limited. A North Korean farmer claimed that Kim Jong-un would allow farmers to take 30%-50% of their crop output each year for private use. It is unclear on what basis he has made these claims. In all likelihood, even if Kim Jong-un does privatize the agricultural sector, there will be no paradigm economic shift. It seems unlikely that any farmer in North Korea would be able to use more than 10% of output for private use. Kim Jong-un is one of North Korea’s most astute leaders and will surely adhere to his political power limits.

Syria: The Lone Arab Spring Success Story

22 Saturday Sep 2012

Posted by in Middle East, Regime Change

≈ Leave a Comment

Tags

, , , ,


The Arab Springs were undoubtedly a failure. In Egypt, the ruling party is currently an Islamist regime under Mohammad Morsi, and the military continues to have undue power in the nation. The Libyan and Tunisian federal governments are weak which has allowed militant groups like Al Qaeda to gain strength in the nations. However, Syria, despite the seeming ceaseless battle between rebels and pro-regime forces, holds promise to be an isolated success story.

 

Sutherland, Don. Burning of American Flag. Digital image. Wikimedia Commons. N.p., n.d. Web. 22 Sept. 2012. <http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:DemonstrationRaketenStationierung1982.jpg&gt;.
Syria has the potential to become the first Arab Springs nation friendly to the United States.

Today, Riad al-Asaad, the leader of the Free Syrian Army has confirmed that the rebel group, the strongest and most unified of the many Syrian rebel groups, will move its operations from Turkey to liberated regions of Syria. The move had two main goals: demonstrating the rebel groups’ accomplishments thus far in securing liberated regions and promoting greater unity with the other rebel groups operating in Syria.

The fighting will likely take at least another 6 months until the regime is toppled considering Bashar al-Assad’s support from Russia and Iran among other anti-Western nations. The key to Syria’s success in the Arab Springs will be the Turkish influences in the Free Syrian Army, the most likely group to emerge from the Arab Springs to govern Syria.

Nearly all of the other Arab Spring nations have replaced secular regimes with Islamist regimes. Many of these nations also harbor terrorism or maintain authoritarian elements. However, Turkish influences in the Free Syrian Army will likely lead to the Free Syrian Army instituting a secular, democratic regime.

The main issue distinguishing Syria from the other Arab Springs nations is the sheer damage to the country. Commerce in Syria has been halted greatly by the violence and the death toll in Syria is incomprehensible, estimated at around 30,000 according to the Syrian Observatory of Human Rights.  By the end of the conflict, that number could feasibly double. Also, Syria faces sectarian violence not likely to end with al-Assad’s downfall. The Free Syrian Army must prepare itself to handle these situations among others. The most logical way to solve these issues and establish order amidst the power vacuum that will surround the downfall of the al-Assad regime is through Turkish support. The rebel group should maintain contact with and support from Turkey. Turkey could invaluable to Syria in forming a transitional government and providing Syria its Constitution to use as a framework for its own government based on secularism and democracy.

Walmart and India: The Deadly Duo

21 Friday Sep 2012

Posted by in Asia/ Pacific, Economy

≈ 2 Comments

Tags

, , , , ,


Stuckert, Ricardo. Manmohan Singh. Digital image. Wikimedia Commons. N.p., 5 June 2007. Web. 19 Sept. 2012. .
Manmohan Singh has been heavily involved in Indian politics for decades and is well-known in India for many of the ‘radical’ free market economic policy changes he has enacted in India.

Contrary to common rhetoric, current Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh’s recent economic policy changes are not the best steps forward for the nation. Economists around the world have hailed his recent steps as the keys to developing the Indian economy, but in fact they are more detrimental than beneficial to India.

Manmohan Singh’s policies have 3 main impacts. Firstly, they cut diesel subsidies which will disproportionately pinch the poor. Secondly, they privatize the Indian economy, particularly in the energy sector. Third, and most importantly, they allow foreign retailers to invest up to 51% in India’s retail industry.

First and foremost, these new economic reforms threaten political unity in India. Many parties from Singh’s ruling coalition have already dropped out and many large parties may soon follow suit. Bureaucracy already plagues India. It is currently ranked the most bureaucratic nation in Asia, and further political party division will only make Indian Congress less efficient and in greater discord with the populace. Moreover, the decision to enact the portion of the bill allowing foreign retailers to gain a majority stake in India’s retail industry is given to individual states. At the moment, less than half of India’s states plan to enact the bill. While it is undoubtedly necessary to have a division of power between state governments and national governments, macroeconomic decisions such as economic regulation should be left entirely up to the government in order to have the greatest possible impact.

Secondly, these policies seek to undercut small businesses, the very backbone of India’s economy. Currently, the retail industry in India primarily consists of small retail businesses. However, with these new changes, large multinational corporations will likely dominate India’s retail landscape as is currently the case in the West. This will indeed serve to reduce the overall number of jobs in the retail industry although those employed by multinationals will likely have far higher wages than they would as small business owners.

Clearly, economists need to reconsider their statements. While increased FDI is necessary to improving India’s economy, a marginally stronger economy is certainly not worth the cost of political division and higher unemployment. India, like the rest of the Tiger Asian economies, has been far too growth focused rather than welfare focused over the past decade or so. Economic growth is important, but India must prioritize the quality of life of its citizens by repealing Singh’s bill.

Internet Control: Why the United States and the World at Large Should Support Violations of Freedom of Expression

20 Thursday Sep 2012

Posted by in Government

≈ 4 Comments

Tags

, , , , ,


YouTube has banned the viewing of the video trailer of Innocence of Muslims- the video that sparked anti-American protest in more than 12 countries– in Egypt and Libya in an effort to subdue the hostilities.

The question now arises: to what extent does YouTube and, for that matter other websites, have sovereignty over their content? At the moment, websites have almost complete control over their content. However, as in this case, websites often fail to manage their content adequately. As soon as the anti-American protests began in the Middle East, the content should have been removed. However, YouTube continued to profit from the viral video that currently has over 15 million views (including views on the copies of the original) and decided not to remove it even currently. Currently, certain governments have requested YouTube to remove the video from viewing in their nation, but YouTube has taken far too long to accommodate these requests and has still not complied with many requests at the moment. However, these nations cannot take the video down globally which presents two main problems. Firstly, many of the nations where the uprisings are taking place, such as Sri Lanka, believe in complete freedom of expression and would not be able legally to take the video down. Also, many nations, such as Pakistan and Egypt, have political reasons to support this widespread anti-Western sentiment.

Clearly, a more efficient third party needs to manage the content of the Internet in cases such as this one. The logical choice for an Internet controller would be the United States, the current world superpower who also serves as the international police in many regards. Though, the United States should not be trusted with the unilateral power to control the Internet.

Instead, the Internet should be controlled as a cooperative between the 5 Permanent Members of the United Nations- the United States, France, the UK, Russia, and China. A joint venture between these 5 nations would be able to create a moderately controlled Internet instead of the current system that abides by virtually no regulations. These 5 nations ideologically represent the majority of the world and would thus be great candidates for maintaining a global system like the Internet.

Response to the 99%: Mitt Romney’s 47% Comment

18 Tuesday Sep 2012

Posted by in Government, The Americas

≈ 6 Comments

Tags

, , ,


Piascik, Chris. America According to Romney. Digital image. Flickr.com. N.p., n.d. Web. 20 Sept. 2012. <http://www.flickr.com/photos/chrispiascik/8001762067/sizes/z/in/photostream/&gt;.
In a speech in May that was recently aired on Mother Jones, Mitt Romney claimed that his jobs is not to care about the 47% of American voters who don’t pay income tax.

 

Mitt Romney was clearly intelligent enough to make a big name for himself in the private sector, but in the public sector, he appears to lack basic intelligence and common sense. Take, for example, his claim that the 47% of American voters who do not pay income tax mooch off of the American social safety net. At first glance, this number seems extremely high and it seems that in fact there are too many Americans who find loopholes in the tax system who deserve to be reprimanded publicly. On second look, though, it appears that Romney has included retirees in this figure. With an ageing population and retirement ages in many companies as low as 60 or 62, it is absurd to hold these individuals responsible for ‘mooching’ off of American institutions even they consume more money from the federal budget through social welfare sectors such as Medicare and Social Security than they put back in.

It appears that Romney has not considered the fact that the elderly were a key part of his constituency. Perhaps in Bain Capital, where Romney made a killing in the private sector, insulting employees was a sign of dominance or power. In the political sphere, though, those ‘below’ him are the very ones who will determine his fate.

If this were Romney’s only blunder, perhaps it would have little impact on his campaign. Though, he has made countless remarks like this over his presidency that paint a picture of a man without compassion. If he doesn’t even believe in his constituents, the argument goes, he cannot believe in the country they stand for. One of his most notable comments was his claim that the Middle Eastern unrest over the Prophet Muhammad video can be attributed to Obama’s foreign policy. Another notable logical fallacy that Romney made that may or may not have caused him to lose constituents was when he took Obama’s quote about the collective nature of the American economic system out of context. Romney made it seem as if Obama had implied that business owners could not take credit for their achievement when in fact Obama had simply stipulated that successful entrepreneurs relied on American collectivized infrastructure and other institutions.

Romney has many great policy initiatives, especially economically. His plans to reduce the corporate tax rate to 25% and reduce the top income tax bracket to 28% will surely bring much needed capital and jobs to America. Additionally, his strong stance on illegal immigration and his foreign policy initiatives in the Middle East could have positive lasting impacts for the United States. However, he will have to show his personality and humility in order to ensure the votes of the Americans. Without popular support, he will be unable to show that he can represent the people well. It is invariably difficult to be objective in an election, and personal biases will almost certainly cloud many independent voters’ perspectives and lead them to vote Obama instead of Romney simply because of Romney’s lack of compassion.

Occupy Wall Street: One Year On

17 Monday Sep 2012

Posted by in Economy, Government, The Americas

≈ Leave a Comment

Tags

, , , , ,


Today marks the one-year anniversary of Occupy Wall Street, a grassroots movement aimed at increasing income equality. Occupy Wall Street had great potential and support from wealthy and powerful figures when it started, but it is currently a small group consisting mainly of unemployed, riled up college graduates. It is remarkably similar to the hippy movement in the 1970s given that it was once a huge organization with great potential, but its membership dwindled due to the harsh realities of a lack of a formal leadership structure and concrete goals.

 

The Whistling Monkey. Occupy Wall Street 2064. Digital image. Flickr.com. N.p., 8 Oct. 2011. Web. 23 Sept. 2012. <http://www.flickr.com/photos/whistlingmonkey/6227538114/&gt;.
The Occupy Wall Street was based on anger over income inequality in the United States

 

To draw a parallel, a similar, though ideologically very different, movement began gaining popularity around the same time as the Occupy Wall Street movement: the Tea Party. Occupy Wall Streets aims to institute a vast social safety net for Americans in order to level the playing field. On the other hand, the Tea Party seeks to reduce taxes, citing individual resolve and hard work as the key to America’s success.

It seems that Occupy Wall Street could have been more popular at the time it was launched. The top income tax bracket in America in 2011, when the movement was launched, was the lowest since the Great Depression in 1932-33 barring George H. W. Bush’s four year stint as president from 1988 to 1992 when the top income tax bracket fell more than 10% to an unprecedented 28%. Income inequality, largely as a result of the nearly flat tax system, was also the highest since the Great Depression. Although Occupy Wall Street clearly had a more believable case for economic reform, it failed due to a lack of unity and leadership.

Occupy Wall Street, from its inception, had no major goals. It attempted to spread awareness about the perils of corporate greed, for sure, but it never to significant steps to get elements of its platform adopted by Washington. Conversely, the Tea Party has had several of its members attain political office as mayors and congressmen, especially in notoriously Republican states.

Occupy Wall Street was also inherently plagued with being liberal. Major political contributors often affiliate themselves with the Republican Party, the Tea Party, or other conservative platforms that benefit them economically. After all, for the super rich, saving money that could be used to raise the economic standard of society as a whole is more important than social or foreign policy issues. Due to their success, they often believe that the United States has incredible equality of opportunity even if they were only able to become successful through resources from their families.

It is safe to say that Occupy Wall Street was a failure. It should serve as an example that grassroots movements have little potential. After all, though Tea Partiers refer to their organization as a grassroots movement, it has a leadership structure largely determined by the amount donated to the cause. The Koch brothers, for example, hold huge power in the organization. It is sad that a movement with great ideals such as Occupy Wall Street was undermined by its disorganization.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 170 other followers