The New Republic makes clear that respectable Liberals will find no common cause with the anti-capitalist rhetoric and group think of Occupy Wall Street(OWS): for after all Liberals believe in Capitalism as key to the survival of their philosophy, of themselves as political beings. And a threat to Capitalism is a threat to their very existence as political actors in the civic space of the Republic. In sum, the charge that the editors of this august publication make is that the movement is both politically trivial and that it is nihilistic: if it is trivial, why bother to write an editorial? If it is nihilistic and trivial, not to speak of marginal, will it not implode as a significant political force, as a result of this self-destructive intellectual/political trajectory? The answer to why OWS has gained momentum might be argued as: “Liberals”, the “Left”, even, “Centrists” have finally given up any hope that the Rhetorical Obama would supersede the Political Obama, in the face of the grim economy; that is growing into the self-fulfilling economic prophecy of a Lost Generation. Is it not the citizens of that Lost Generation that constitute large portions of OWS? And that rhetorical hyperbole is a well worn methodology in mass political movements? These assertions seem to resemble a certain kind of clear thinking, not available to the manufacturers of a usable political hysteria in defense of a Liberalism and a Capitalism for members only.
Political Observer
StephenKMackSD's Blog 