On October 6, 2011, Naomi Klein, journalist, activist, author (most recently of The Shock Doctrine) addressed Occupy Wall Street. Her powerful and moving speech was truncated due to the need to filter it through the so-called "human microphone."
She has permitted me to post the uncut version below:
I love you.
And I didn’t just say that so that hundreds of you would shout “I love
you” back, though that is obviously a bonus feature of the human
microphone. Say unto others what you would have them say unto you, only
way louder.
Yesterday, one of the speakers at the labor rally said: “We found each
other.” That sentiment captures the beauty of what is being created
here. A wide-open space (as well as an idea so big it can’t be contained
by any space) for all the people who want a better world to find each
other. We are so grateful.
If there is one thing I know, it is that the 1 percent loves a crisis.
When people are panicked and desperate and no one seems to know what to
do, that is the ideal time to push through their wish list of
pro-corporate policies: privatizing education and social security,
slashing public services, getting rid of the last constraints on
corporate power. Amidst the economic crisis, this is happening the world
over.
And there is only one thing that can block this tactic, and fortunately,
it’s a very big thing: the 99 percent. And that 99 percent is taking to
the streets from Madison to Madrid to say “No. We will not pay for your
crisis.”
That slogan began in Italy in 2008. It ricocheted to Greece and France
and Ireland and finally it has made its way to the square mile where the
crisis began.
“Why are they protesting?” ask the baffled pundits on TV. Meanwhile, the
rest of the world asks: “What took you so long?” “We’ve been wondering
when you were going to show up.” And most of all: “Welcome.”
Many people have drawn parallels between Occupy Wall Street and the
so-called anti-globalization protests that came to world attention in
Seattle in 1999. That was the last time a global, youth-led,
decentralized movement took direct aim at corporate power. And I am
proud to have been part of what we called “the movement of movements.”
But there are important differences too. For instance, we chose summits
as our targets: the World Trade Organization, the International Monetary
Fund, the G8. Summits are transient by their nature, they only last a
week. That made us transient too. We’d appear, grab world headlines,
then disappear. And in the frenzy of hyper patriotism and militarism
that followed the 9/11 attacks, it was easy to sweep us away completely,
at least in North America.
Occupy Wall Street, on the other hand, has chosen a fixed target. And
you have put no end date on your presence here. This is wise. Only when
you stay put can you grow roots. This is crucial. It is a fact of the
information age that too many movements spring up like beautiful flowers
but quickly die off. It’s because they don’t have roots. And they don’t
have long term plans for how they are going to sustain themselves. So
when storms come, they get washed away.
Being horizontal and deeply democratic is wonderful. But these
principles are compatible with the hard work of building structures and
institutions that are sturdy enough to weather the storms ahead. I have
great faith that this will happen.
Something else this movement is doing right: You have committed
yourselves to non-violence. You have refused to give the media the
images of broken windows and street fights it craves so desperately. And
that tremendous discipline has meant that, again and again, the story
has been the disgraceful and unprovoked police brutality. Which we saw
more of just last night. Meanwhile, support for this movement grows and
grows. More wisdom.
But the biggest difference a decade makes is that in 1999, we were
taking on capitalism at the peak of a frenzied economic boom.
Unemployment was low, stock portfolios were bulging. The media was drunk
on easy money. Back then it was all about start-ups, not shut downs.
We pointed out that the deregulation behind the frenzy came at a price.
It was damaging to labor standards. It was damaging to environmental
standards. Corporations were becoming more powerful than governments and
that was damaging to our democracies. But to be honest with you, while
the good times rolled, taking on an economic system based on greed was a
tough sell, at least in rich countries.
Ten years later, it seems as if there aren’t any more rich countries.
Just a whole lot of rich people. People who got rich looting the public
wealth and exhausting natural resources around the world.
The point is, today everyone can see that the system is deeply unjust
and careening out of control. Unfettered greed has trashed the global
economy. And it is trashing the natural world as well. We are
overfishing our oceans, polluting our water with fracking and deepwater
drilling, turning to the dirtiest forms of energy on the planet, like
the Alberta tar sands. And the atmosphere cannot absorb the amount of
carbon we are putting into it, creating dangerous warming. The new
normal is serial disasters: economic and ecological.
These are the facts on the ground. They are so blatant, so obvious, that
it is a lot easier to connect with the public than it was in 1999, and
to build the movement quickly.
We all know, or at least sense, that the world is upside down: we act as
if there is no end to what is actually finite -- fossil fuels and the
atmospheric space to absorb their emissions. And we act as if there are
strict and immovable limits to what is actually bountiful -- the
financial resources to build the kind of society we need.
The task of our time is to turn this around: to challenge this false
scarcity. To insist that we can afford to build a decent, inclusive
society – while at the same time, respect the real limits to what the
earth can take.
What climate change means is that we have to do this on a deadline. This
time our movement cannot get distracted, divided, burned out or swept
away by events. This time we have to succeed. And I’m not talking about
regulating the banks and increasing taxes on the rich, though that’s
important.
I am talking about changing the underlying values that govern our
society. That is hard to fit into a single media-friendly demand, and
it’s also hard to figure out how to do it. But it is no less urgent for
being difficult.
That is what I see happening in this square. In the way you are feeding
each other, keeping each other warm, sharing information freely and
proving health care, meditation classes and empowerment training. My
favorite sign here says “I care about you.” In a culture that trains
people to avoid each other’s gaze, to say, “Let them die,” that is a
deeply radical statement.
A few final thoughts. In this great struggle, here are some things that don’t matter.
- What we wear.
- Whether we shake our fists or make peace signs.
- Whether we can fit our dreams for a better world into a media soundbite.
And here are a few things that do matter.
- Our courage.
- Our moral compass.
- How we treat each other.
We have picked a fight with the most powerful economic and political
forces on the planet. That’s frightening. And as this movement grows
from strength to strength, it will get more frightening. Always be aware
that there will be a temptation to shift to smaller targets – like,
say, the person sitting next to you at this meeting. After all, that is a
battle that’s easier to win.
Don’t give in to the temptation. I’m not saying don’t call each other on
shit. But this time, let’s treat each other as if we plan to work side
by side in struggle for many, many years to come. Because the task
before will demand nothing less.
Let’s treat this beautiful movement as if it is most important thing in the world. Because it is. It really is.
Saturday, October 29, 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments
(
Atom
)
1 comments :
This is great. As I read it, my eye was caught by the little icon in the right column for the ACLU - an organization I admire in many, many, many ways. Indeed some of my dearest friends and liberal heroes work for the ACLU. Is anybody talking to them about their defense of money as speech in the context of this movement? Ira Glasser published an impassioned defense (!!!) of Citizens United v. FEC on the Huffington Post. I'm thinking this falls into the category of stuff referred to in Ms. Klein's penultimate paragraph: "I'm not saying don't call each other on shit. But this time let's treat each other as if we plan to work side by side in struggle for many, many years to come."
Post a Comment