FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Not Your Typical Shareholders’ Meeting

by MARK VORPAHL

At the annual Wells Fargo Shareholders’ meeting in San Francisco on Tuesday April 24, 2012, at least 150 “shareholders” were denied their lawful right to attend by means of the use of police force and barricades. True, none of them were big shareholders and their priorities in attending were not to cheerlead the continuing massive profits Wells Fargo rakes in. Instead they hoped to bring to light the predatory role of Wells Fargo in pursuit of these profits — a role that is economically devastating countless working families and their future.

The concerns of these excluded shareholders did not go unheard. They were loudly shouted by a crowd of about 1,200 Occupy, trade union, and community activists in the streets 15 stories below where the shareholders’ meeting was to take place. It was part of a carefully considered plan to use the shareholders meeting as an opportunity to confront the 1% both on their turf, in the exquisite halls of their corporate headquarters, and on ours, the streets.

This tactic has also been employed at a GE Shareholders meeting in Detroit, Michigan and will be used in cities across the nation, targeting a variety of corporate behemoths. It is hoped that this campaign will help to build broad active unity, in the spirit of when Occupy transformed into a mass movement to challenge the priorities of the economic elite and their control of the political system.

It is easy to see why Wells Fargo is one among many of these targets. After having received a bailout of $36.9 billion for an economic crisis their actions helped to create, Wells Fargo continues to hoard billions rather than invest them in job creation efforts. For the last four years Wells Fargo has been taxed at 3.8 percent, saving them $21.6 billion at a time when needed social programs, such as Medicaid and Medicare, are being slashed because of an alleged lack of revenue. They are one of the top banks engaged in foreclosing homes, charging fat interest rates and fees on student loans regardless of the loaned person’s circumstances, issuing predatory loans, as well as rewarding their top executives tens of millions of dollars annually while attacking the living standards of ordinary working people. Privatizing prisons, supporting racist anti-immigrant politicians, funding the growth of inhumane detention centers — the list could go on and on for the ways Wells Fargo has been and continues to be profiting off the misery of the 99%’s. Their actions are far from unique as far as big banks and corporations go, but Wells Fargo is exceptionally successful in pursuing their cold-blooded, short sighted, greedy priorities.

Clearly the corporations are fair game for any mass social movement that seeks to right the wrongs they are inflicting. However, the demands of the protestors at Wells Fargo headquarters, such as the call for progressive taxation and a moratorium on home foreclosures, are not the kind of actions you would ever expect a major corporation to take. This would be like asking a shark to stop hunting its prey.

These are working class political demands and require the targeting of the politicians who have the constitutional power to set the tax rates. The Wall Street funded Republican and Democratic Parties are opposed to such demands, though some Democratic politicians are willing to give them lip service in hopes of garnering a few votes. Nevertheless, these politicians must be judged on their actions, not their words, and the Democratic Party’s inaction on such demands, even while they held the presidency and the majority in both the Congress and Senate, tells us a lot more about their priorities than hours of campaign speeches.

There can be no doubt that some of the architects behind the 99% Spring and the tactic of taking on corporations at their shareholder meetings are hoping to create a political climate that will push the Democrats to the left in a campaign year and get them elected. What is needed, however, is a politically independent social movement large and united enough to continue to struggle for our own demands rather than limit them to what the Wall Street politicians say is possible, even while they pretend to defend our interests. What matters is how we organize for the fight we are facing, regardless of who gets elected.

Shortly after the November election, $2.2 trillion in cuts to Medicare, Medicaid, and other needed public programs are slated to go into effect. There will be growing bi-partisan pressure to cut an additional $2 — $4 trillion and go after Social Security. While these social safety nets have been threatened, there have been no serious proposals to address the issue of unemployment with a real jobs program. Consequently, it is of paramount importance that working people build a powerful social movement that remains independent — when formulating its demands and tactics — of both political parties, since both have shown no hesitation in gutting these vital social programs. If we do not chart an independent course, the social movement will shrivel, if it manages to grow at all, in despair and betrayal.

To achieve the largest social movement possible, it is necessary to focus on demands that will promote the broadest unity. At the Wells Fargo Action this approach appeared to be muddled. There was no demand addressing the need for a publicly funded jobs program, though the high rate of unemployment is the number one concern of most U.S. citizens. Also, while in poll after poll there has been wide agreement on the need for progressive taxation (“tax the rich”), this demand was put forward as though it was of equal importance, in terms of building broad-based unity, as stopping the privatization of prisons, for instance. Most U.S. workers are not familiar with this latter issue at this time. Consequently, there needs to be more of an educational process if it is to become a point of unity for a large social movement to galvanize around. It is best to focus on what the majority is ready to move on now in order to create a movement in which the maximum number of people can become exposed to such issues as stopping the privatization of prisons.

It is clear that most of the participants in the events at the corporate shareholder meeting are acting in accordance with the best of Occupy. That is, they are working to build a movement of the 99% that can take on the 1%. If we are going to take on the 1%, though, we need to take on both their political parties as well.

Mark Vorpahl is an union steward, social justice activist, and writer for Workers’ Action – www.workerscompass.org. He can be reached atPortland@workerscompass.org.


 

Mark Vorpahl is a union steward, social justice activist and a writer for Workers Action and Occupy.com. He can be reached at Portland@workerscompass.org.

More articles by:

CounterPunch Magazine

minimag-edit

bernie-the-sandernistas-cover-344x550

zen economics

February 20, 2017
Bruce E. Levine
Humiliation Porn: Trump’s Gift to His Faithful…and Now the Blowback
Melvin Goodman
“Wag the Dog,” Revisited
Robert Hunziker
Fukushima: a Lurking Global Catastrophe?
David Smith-Ferri
Resistance and Resolve in Russia: Memorial HRC
Kenneth Surin
Global India?
Norman Pollack
Fascistization Crashing Down: Driving the Cleaver into Social Welfare
Patrick Cockburn
Trump v. the Media: a Fight to the Death
Susan Babbitt
Shooting Arrows at Heaven: Why is There Debate About Battle Imagery in Health?
Matt Peppe
New York Times Openly Promotes Formal Apartheid Regime By Israel
David Swanson
Understanding Robert E. Lee Supporters
Michael Brenner
The Narcissism of Donald Trump
Martin Billheimer
Capital of Pain
Thomas Knapp
Florida’s Shenanigans Make a Great Case for (Re-)Separation of Ballot and State
Jordan Flaherty
Best Films of 2016: Black Excellence Versus White Mediocrity
Weekend Edition
February 17, 2017
Friday - Sunday
David Price
Rogue Elephant Rising: The CIA as Kingslayer
Matthew Stevenson
Is Trump the Worst President Ever?
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Flynn?
John Wight
Brexit and Trump: Why Right is Not the New Left
Diana Johnstone
France: Another Ghastly Presidential Election Campaign; the Deep State Rises to the Surface
Neve Gordon
Trump’s One-State Option
Roger Harris
Emperor Trump Has No Clothes: Time to Organize!
Joan Roelofs
What Else is Wrong with Globalization
Andrew Levine
Why Trump’s Muslim Travel Ban?
Mike Whitney
Blood in the Water: the Trump Revolution Ends in a Whimper
Vijay Prashad
Trump, Turmoil and Resistance
Ron Jacobs
U.S. Imperial War Personified
David Swanson
Can the Climate Survive Adherence to War and Partisanship?
Andre Vltchek
Governor of Jakarta: Get Re-elected or Die!
Patrick Cockburn
The Coming Destruction of Mosul
Norman Pollack
Self-Devouring Reaction: Governmental Impasse
Steve Horn
What Do a Louisiana Pipeline Explosion and Dakota Access Pipeline Have in Common? Phillips 66
Brian Saady
Why Corporations are Too Big to Jail in the Drug War
Graham Peebles
Ethiopia: Peaceful Protest to Armed Uprising
Luke Meyer
The Case of Tony: Inside a Lifer Hearing
Binoy Kampmark
Adolf, The Donald and History
Robert Koehler
The Great American Awakening
Murray Dobbin
Canadians at Odds With Their Government on Israel
Fariborz Saremi
A Whole New World?
Joyce Nelson
Japan’s Abe, Trump & Illegal Leaks
Christopher Brauchli
Trump 1, Tillerson 0
Yves Engler
Is This Hate Speech?
Dan Bacher
Trump Administration Exempts Three CA Oil Fields From Water Protection Rule at Jerry Brown’s Request
Richard Klin
Solid Gold
Melissa Garriga
Anti-Abortion and Anti-Fascist Movements: More in Common Than Meets the Eye
Thomas Knapp
The Absurd Consequences of a “Right to Privacy”
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail