Occupy Oakland

Before this blog was assigned, I was not well informed about the events that transpired in Oakland concerning the occupy movement.  After doing some research, reading articles, watching videos taken by protestors, viewing news reals, and seeing how the movement was about the inequities of the distribution of wealth in America, I am better able to make an informed opinion.  The premise for the movement was sound.  I am in complete agreement as to why this protest was set into movement.  It is unfair that the majority of Americans face such inequalities.  The rich keep getting richer and the poor keep getting poorer.  Light needs to be shed on the atrocities of our government’s action on the bank bailout.  I am stunned by the fact that minimum punishment was doled out on the individuals who were stealing thousands if not millions of dollars.  If one of the 99% gets caught for stealing a loaf of bread to feed their family they are harshly punished and now have a black stain upon their background.  However, if those CEO’s/businessmen steal thousands of dollars, their actions are not only ignored, they are given more money by our own government and stockholders.  I feel the occupy Wall Street movement in New York City did a good job of bringing attention to this situation in America. 

While this occupy movement was sending a good message, it was poorly orchestrated.  There was no leadership, no counsel, and really no direction.  The protestors had a message and wanted it heard.  If they had a structure their message would have been heard louder instead of being heard as a cacophony of hypocrisy, violence, and unguided direction.  This was not the same for the occupy Wall Street protests.  The Wall Street occupy did a much better job than Oakland for getting the message across.  In my opinion, the occupy Oakland movement was a mess on all fronts.  The protestors did not adhere to the message.  They called the square they occupied after Oscar Grant.  This brought in a racial undertone.  Other groups joined the movement just to incite violence and looting.  They had their own personal agenda apart from Occupy.  On the other hand Mayor Jean Quan made this an even bigger mess with her indecisiveness and inability to act.  She started out with a clear and strong message to stop the protests.  She cleared the square and put a halt to the protests, but later succumbed to political pressure and changed her “hard lined” approach.  As a response they re-occupied the Ogawa Plaza which caused even more problems.  Even though the movement calls for a recognition of the inequalities of salaries for the 99%, the movement shutdown the Port of Oakland causing exactly those 99% they were fighting for to lose out on more money because of missed pay due to the protests.  Between the Mayor and the protestors, this was the “perfect storm” of how not to try to get your message recognized. 

This protest had a lot of unnecessary violence.  Was the violence justified?  To some degree I agree that is was.  There are countless videos on YouTube showing the protestors literally throwing the first stone.  The violence shown by the police force was way too aggressive and should not have been taken to that degree.  These protestors were civil, peaceful and just wanted their voices to be heard.  I believe the Mayor over reacted and caused a lot of the problems associated with the violence.  It is unfortunate that this got so out of control in Oakland.  The overall message for the occupy movement was positive, but the message seemed to have become lost in Oakland.