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

May 23, 2017
Dimitris Konstantakopoulos
The European Left and the Greek Tragedy
Laura Leigh
This Land is Your Land, Except If You’re a Wild Horse Advocate
Hervé Kempf
Macron, Old World President
Michael J. Sainato
Devos Takes Out Her Hatchet
L. Ali Khan
I’m a Human and I’m a Cartoon
May 22, 2017
Diana Johnstone
All Power to the Banks! The Winners-Take-All Regime of Emmanuel Macron
Robert Fisk
Hypocrisy and Condescension: Trump’s Speech to the Middle East
John Grant
Jeff Sessions, Jesus Christ and the Return of Reefer Madness
Nozomi Hayase
Trump and the Resurgence of Colonial Racism
Rev. William Alberts
The Normalizing of Authoritarianism in America
Frank Stricker
Getting Full Employment: the Fake Way and the Right Way 
Jamie Davidson
Red Terror: Anti-Corbynism and Double Standards
Binoy Kampmark
Julian Assange, Sweden, and Continuing Battles
Robert Jensen
Beyond Liberal Pieties: the Radical Challenge for Journalism
Patrick Cockburn
Trump’s Extravagant Saudi Trip Distracts from His Crisis at Home
Angie Beeman
Gig Economy or Odd Jobs: What May Seem Trendy to Privileged City Dwellers and Suburbanites is as Old as Poverty
Colin Todhunter
The Public Or The Agrochemical Industry: Who Does The European Chemicals Agency Serve?
Jerrod A. Laber
Somalia’s Worsening Drought: Blowback From US Policy
Michael J. Sainato
Police Claimed Black Man Who Died in Custody Was Faking It
Clancy Sigal
I’m a Trump Guy, So What?
Gerry Condon
In Defense of Tulsi Gabbard
Weekend Edition
May 19, 2017
Friday - Sunday
John Pilger
Getting Assange: the Untold Story
Jeffrey St. Clair
The Secret Sharer
Charles Pierson
Trump’s First Hundred Days of War Crimes
Paul Street
How Russia Became “Our Adversary” Again
Andrew Levine
Legitimation Crises
Mike Whitney
Seth Rich, Craig Murray and the Sinister Stewards of the National Security State 
Robert Hunziker
Early-Stage Antarctica Death Rattle Sparks NY Times Journalists Trip
Ken Levy
Why – How – Do They Still Love Trump?
Bruce E. Levine
“Hegemony How-To”: Rethinking Activism and Embracing Power
Robert Fisk
The Real Aim of Trump’s Trip to Saudi Arabia
Christiane Saliba
Slavery Now: Migrant Labor in the Persian Gulf and Saudi Arabia
Chris Gilbert
The Chávez Hypothesis: Vicissitudes of a Strategic Project
Howard Lisnoff
Pay No Attention to That Man Behind the Curtain
Brian Cloughley
Propaganda Feeds Fear and Loathing
Stephen Cooper
Is Alabama Hiding Evidence It Tortured Two of Its Citizens?
Sheldon Richman
The Real Danger From Trump is Ignored
Jay Moore
Learning from History: Resistance in the 1850s and Today
Matthew Stevenson
Down and Out in London and Paris With Macron, May, Trump and Gatsby
David Jaffee
Rolling Back Democracy
Fred Gardner
Irrefutable Proof: Russian Election Meddling Documented!
Jess Guh
Neurology Study Reveals What We Already Know: People of Color Get Worse Healthcare
Joseph Natoli
A Culture of Narcissism, a Politics of Personality
David Rosen
Politics and the Agent of Social Change
Ian Almond
The Secret Joke of Our Democracy: Britain’s Elephant in the Boardroom
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail