FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

CEOs Contemplate the Occupy Movement

by RALPH NADER

Stetson J. Bradford III met up with his fellow CEO F. Reginald Lawless for a brow-to-brow lunch at the Penthouse Reverie Room high above Wall and Broad Streets in New York. As charter members of the 40-year Corporate Supremes Club, they had serious business to discuss before Thanksgiving weekend in 2011.

The topic numero uno was: Is the Occupy Wall Street movement and its around the country the precursor to the giant peoples upheaval that they and their brethren have feared ever since Wall Street collapsed the American economy in 2008 and sent the bill to the taxpayers?

Over their large whiskey sours prior to consuming their lobster lunch, they shared their innermost thoughts in nearly whispered tones and grave visages:

Bradford: “I’m worried, Reg, that this could be the big one all of us have been dreading. It is always the ruffians and the demagogues who are the vanguard. Remember the sacking of the Bastille?”

Lawless: “I beg to differ, Stet. It is always the middle class that raises the banner of revolt, at least in the past couple of centuries. These people down at Zuccotti Park aren’t relatable to the majority of people, what with their sanitation
problems and worsening influx of the homeless and vagrant crowd in their public spaces.”

Bradford: “Maybe so, but look at the daily mass media coverage of these people calling themselves the 99 percent. I’ve never seen anything like the TV and newspaper reports on these encampments everywhere. Also the polls show they have more support for their message against inequality than the Tea Partiers did. Recall what Abraham Lincoln said about what can be done with the ‘public sentiment.’”

Lawless: “Let me calm you, Stet. We know from our disheveled infiltrators what is going on in all these encampments, except maybe small ones like in little Niles, Michigan. It’s our sort of jobs program. Barring some flash provocation caught on video, like a sneering Wall Street trader kicking a child beggar into the gutter, the Occupiers will soon be frozen off the public consciousness both by winter’s coming and a bored media.”

Bradford: “Why do you say this? They must be very determined to stay and sleep in these uncomfortable parks night and day, setting up tables for first aid, legal aid and even a library. You know, libraries with radical materials have historically been dangerous influences on the multitudes.”

Lawless: “Time out, Stet. Let me show you why they are here today and will mostly be gone tomorrow. Do they have leaders? No, they proudly reject leaders and even the very trait of leadership. Show me a successful movement or business or union drive, and I’ll show you leaders. It can’t happen without leaders to give form and direction over time, no matter how unpleasant they may be.”

Bradford: “You’re right up to a point. But a mob doesn’t have to have leaders. It just has to have emotion, motive, a target and a sudden jolt or spark that can come from anywhere.”

Lawless: “With modern, high-tech crowd controls, mobs can be spotted very early with corner surveillance cameras and dispersed in a hundred ways. Our good police – public and private – get tremendous adrenaline bursts in the face of advancing mobs.”

“But Stet, there is more. Occupy has no agenda or program that millions can relate to. Sure ‘inequality, inequality, 99 percent, 99 percent’ make good slogans because people believe them to be true. After all, don’t we really? But without either a religious fervor, some kind of ideological ‘ism,’ – both out of tune with the times – all they’re left with are actual reforms for which they have little interest or patience. This is where they’re really missing the boat and the vehicle of change. Because they detest politics.”

Bradford: “What do you mean?”

Lawless: “Stet, why do you think our higher class spends so much money and time and influence on Congress? Because that is where the desired action or inaction reside in our governmental system. Arouse Congress and we get tax breaks, subsidies, bailouts, contracts, giveaways and little enforcement of the laws against us. Freeze Congress and the masses get nothing, worse they get rollbacks of protections for their economic well-being, health, safety, children and their shrinking pay, jobs and pensions.

So, by detesting politics, they avoid surrounding members of Congress at their offices back home or on Capitol Hill. They avoid the single victory that could be theirs in this election year. And that is raising the federal minimum wage to $10 per hour to where it was, inflation adjusted, in 1968.

And that doesn’t count doubling worker productivity whose health our class regularly appropriated for our coffers. You know, Stet, over 70 percent of people polled support keeping the minimum wage raises current with inflation. Hundreds of groups of influence want it – at least they are on the record like the AFL-CIO, the National Council of La Raza, the NAACP, social service and religious charity groups – just about everybody.

But none are on the ramparts. Like a long train ready to go without the fuel. Guess who can supply the fiery energy? The Occupiers. And they can galvanize all these groups to pour it out on members of Congress. Imagine the gratitude of 35 million workers who are now making ten dollars or less per hour for their families. Imagine a victory in an ocean of gridlock to whet the appetite of tens of millions of Americans for more of what they call their fair share. Once the masses get moving, as you know, they’re hard to stop.”

Bradford: “Well, why don’t they go with all those tens of billions of dollars that can go into the pockets of these people now earning between $7.25 and $10? Seems obvious. And it’s not going to affect our business. Our golfing buddies may be making several thousand dollars an hour, but none of our employees make less than $10, except maybe for the janitors in our offices.”

Lawless: “I’ll tell you why, but pardon the repetition. The Occupy people are increasingly bickering amongst themselves in an imploding way while dispiriting themselves with the endless democratic assemblies where majority rule is out. They do not want leaders, or a real-life agenda. They are tussling with anarchists and hired provocateurs, and they disdain any discipline, much less paying full-time organizers. One might uncharitably say they are not serious about anything described as victory – even one in their hands that will bring them great admiration.”

Bradford: “You almost make me feel sorry for them. They could be our sons and daughters, Reg. They mean well.”

Lawless: “Let them mean well. I’ll give them that, any day, so long as they don’t mean much more of anything else. How about another whiskey sour, Stet, before we get to those credit default swaps in Greece.”

Bradford: “Cheers, Reg. Cheers.”

(Stetson J. Bradford III and Reginald Lawless are fictional representations of Fortune 500 CEOs)

Ralph Nader is a consumer advocate, lawyer and author of Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us! He is a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion, forthcoming from AK Press.

 

Ralph Nader is a consumer advocate, lawyer and author of Only the Super-Rich Can Save Us! 

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

December 07, 2016
Lawrence Davidson
U.S. Reactions to the Death of Fidel Castro
John Garvey - Noel Ignatiev
Abolitionism: a Study Guide
Clancy Sigal
Caution: Conspiracy Theory Ahead!
December 06, 2016
Anthony DiMaggio
Post-Fact Politics: Reviewing the History of Fake News and Propaganda
Richard Moser
Standing Rock: Challenge to the Establishment, School for the Social Movements
Behrooz Ghamari Tabrizi
Warmongering 99 – Common Sense 0: the Senate’s Unanimous Renewable of Iran Sanctions Act
Norman Solomon
Media Complicity is Key to Blacklisting Websites
Michael J. Sainato
Elizabeth Warren’s Shameful Exploitation of Standing Rock Victory
David Rosen
State Power and Terror: From Wounded Knee to Standing Rock
Kim Ives
Deconstructing Another Right-Wing Victory in Haiti
Nile Bowie
South Korea’s Presidency On A Knife-Edge
Mateo Pimentel
Some Notes and a Song for Standing Rock
CJ Hopkins
Manufacturing Normality
Bill Fletcher Jr – Bob Wing
Fighting Back Against the White Revolt of 2016
Peter Lee
Is America Ready for a War on White Privilege?
Pepe Escobar
The Rules of the (Trump) Game
W. T. Whitney
No Peace Yet in Colombia Despite War’s End
Mark Weisbrot
Castro Was Right About US Policy in Latin America
David Swanson
New Rogue Anti-Russia Committee Created in “Intelligence” Act
George Ochenski
Forests of the Future: Local or National Control?
December 05, 2016
Bill Martin
Stalingrad at Standing Rock?
Mark A. Lause
Recounting a Presidential Election: the Backstory
Mel Goodman
Mad Dog Mattis and Trump’s “Seven Days in May”
Matthew Hannah
Standing Rock and the Ideology of Oppressors: Conversations with a Morton County Commissioner
Kevin Zeese - Margaret Flowers
#NoDAPL Scores Major Victory: No Final Permit For Pipeline
Fran Shor
The End of the Indispensable Nation
Michael Yates
Vietnam: the War That Won’t Go Away
Michael Uhl
Notes on a Trip to Cuba
Robert Hunziker
Huge Antarctica Glacier in Serious Trouble
John Steppling
Screen Life
David Macaray
Trump vs. America’s Labor Unions
Yoav Litvin
Break Free and Lead, or Resign: a Letter to Bernie Sanders
Norman Pollack
Taiwan: A Pustule on International Politics
Kevin Martin
Nuclear Weapons Modernization: a New Nuclear Arms Race? Who Voted for it? Who Will Benefit from It?
David Mattson
3% is not Enough: Towards Restoring Grizzly Bears
Howard Lisnoff
The Person Who Deciphered the Order to Shoot at Kent State
Dave Archambault II
Standing Rock Sioux Tribe Statement on Dakota Access Pipeline Decision
Nick Pemberton
Make America Late Again
Weekend Edition
December 02, 2016
Friday - Sunday
John Pilger
The Coming War on China
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: The CIA’s Plots to Kill Castro
Paul Street
The Iron Heel at Home: Force Matters
Pam Martens - Russ Martens
Timberg’s Tale: Washington Post Reporter Spreads Blacklist of Independent Journalist Sites
Andrew Levine
Must We Now Rethink the Hillary Question? Absolutely, Not
Joshua Frank
CounterPunch as Russian Propagandists: the Washington Post’s Shallow Smear
David Rosen
The Return of HUAC?
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail