Occupy Wall Street movement a failure one year later

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • county mom Monroe, UT
    Sept. 24, 2012 4:51 p.m.

    West Granger, you are correct! All cummunism and socialism does is keep the poor, poor and make the rest poor too. So only the top government leaders have all the wealth! As a matter of fact Marxist beliefs make the poor even poorer, and stifle growth and inovation. It cost West Germany billions and billions of euros to bring East Germany up into this century, with just infastructure, so they could be united as one nation and all free. Well as free as any European country.

  • Mountanman Hayden, ID
    Sept. 23, 2012 8:55 a.m.

    Test them for drugs and you will see who this OWS movement attracted!

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Sept. 23, 2012 12:50 a.m.

    Does America now know who the 1% are?
    Does America now know who the 99% are?


  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Sept. 22, 2012 7:03 p.m.

    Lost in DC..seriously..only in your mind.

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    Sept. 22, 2012 2:34 p.m.

    No, it has not been a failure in that the bottom 90% finally understand they have less equity - combined - than the top 1%. This is something we on the left have been trying to explain for year - Occupy finally succeeded.

  • Rikitikitavi Cardston, Alberta
    Sept. 22, 2012 8:48 a.m.

    Consider on whose presidential watch this OWS movement had it's origin. Therein lies the failure. There are only so many public sector jobs to go around. Can't have every left-lib voter on government payroll.

  • Mike in Cedar City Cedar City, Utah
    Sept. 22, 2012 8:19 a.m.

    The occupy wall street movement's principal objective was to point out Wall Street excesses. It has met that goal and will no doubt continue to point out the destructive practices that continue on a daily basis.

    I find it untoward at the least that the DN would write an smug self agrandizing editorial disparaging what was and is a populist movement to publicize Wall Street's eternal greed. The editorial reeks with sublime joy that the movement seems to have waned after its first year.

    If you are not for economic fairness DN then you are against it. I guess you are against it.

  • DVD Taylorsville, 00
    Sept. 22, 2012 8:01 a.m.

    @the comments on the civil rights movement: That they had something that they stood for, in addition to what they stood against was something that helped them succeed. The message was generally cohesive and understood. And persistent. That's the last thing that would make 'Occupy' a failure, is if it is abandoned when we are still seeing such problems that need addressing. FDR in the 1930s was more right than wrong, despite the naysayers of the time, and we need more ideas and action in our time as well. Occupy is the currently the main focus of action in our time.

  • WestGranger West Valley City, Utah
    Sept. 22, 2012 1:54 a.m.

    Note to Occupy Crowd: Throughout American history general the people have valued equality of opportunity over forced "equality". The history of Socialist style governments has consistently demonstrated that forced equality turns out to be forced misery for the masses and wealth only for top party members in government. Most importantly we have seen that "social justice" results in a lack of freedom and lack of justice for citizens. Hugo Chavez promised a democracy and redistribution of wealth but what resulted was a fascist regime devoid of even basic God-given freedoms and rights. The people aren't better off. The poor are still poor. Countless hosts of people have come to the United States poor and have been able to succeed. Undocumented Mexicans come here by the millions so their children can have a better future. Equality of opportunity and freedom to the individual has unleashed the most successful and compassionate group of people in the history of the world. Why would we let an impersonal government control and stifle it all?

  • boxerdog915 Clearfield, UT
    Sept. 21, 2012 6:11 p.m.

    I think it's pitiful these people are walking around with American flags. They are protesting America itself, the freedom to make something of yourself, which is what capitalism is. If you're rich, you're rich. If you're poor, you're poor. Just cause you don't have what your neighbor has, doesn't make you less becasue you still have the same rights. There are rights and there are privileges, and the occupy Wall Street is all about protesting for what they don't have (privileges), all the while causing thousands of dollars in damages. We all need to realize rights and privileges are not the same thing!

  • Ultra Bob Cottonwood Heights, UT
    Sept. 21, 2012 4:35 p.m.

    Up to a point money will always win. The gross uneven distribution of the wealth created by all the people and taken by the few, has provided some with the ability to silence and deflect the cries of the people suppressed. Using their ability to spread false information they drowned the voices of people in the mud of communism, socialism, class hatred and the such.

    Somehow, sometime and somewhere the ordinary people will allow themselves to be pushed not further. Then like the Arab world, they will revolt not only against their oppressors but against those who made it possible for their own to suppress them. Do we really think that all the guns, bombs, planes and tanks we gave to their leaders would be used to benefit their own people?

    The republican media says that the military is there to protect American interests. But the voice didn’t continue the explanation that the American interest he was talking about was business interests and their profits. By helping their unscrupulous governments to suppress them and keep them quiet, we have become their number 1 enemy.

  • dalefarr South Jordan, Utah
    Sept. 21, 2012 12:55 p.m.

    Ok, so the D-News editorializes that the Occupy Movement is a dismal failure. So what? Is its failure a good thing or a bad thing and why?

  • sergio Phoenix, AZ
    Sept. 21, 2012 12:32 p.m.

    In a society as venal as America is it is hard to fight money. Money talks, social justice walks. That is what keeps most politicians in office.

  • lost in DC West Jordan, UT
    Sept. 21, 2012 12:17 p.m.

    No, to say the Occupy movement is a failure one year later is not quite correct. To say it is a dismal failure from the start would be more accurate.

    In your note to the teaParty, I guess you forgot the results of the 2010 elections.

    Thanks for insulting the civil rights movement

    To say they did not have big money backing them is not exactly true; they had the budgets of all the liberal cities that tolerated them and the liberal media that gave them all the press.

    You are right, we need a government that serves all the people, not the current misadministration that seeks to divide us for political gain.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Sept. 21, 2012 12:11 p.m.

    To "Esquire" you are right, Occupy didn't have the same backing that the Tea Party had. They had even bigger backing, with deeper pockets. See "$3.6 Million from Soros Backs 'Occupy Wall Street', Media Ignore or Downplay Connection" at Newsbusters. You also have the millionairs that founded Ben and Jerry's.

    I don't thing Soros got his money's worth out of his movement.

  • T. Party Pleasant Grove, UT
    Sept. 21, 2012 11:40 a.m.

    @Eric Samuelsen "We need an economy that serves the needs of all Americans...."

    And you think socialism is the answer? It sure has a poor track record.

  • Eric Samuelsen Provo, UT
    Sept. 21, 2012 10:52 a.m.

    The Occupy message continues to resonate. That message will inform public discourse for the next twenty years. We need an economy that serves the needs of all Americans, not just the super-rich.

  • What in Tucket? Provo, UT
    Sept. 21, 2012 10:45 a.m.

    The Tea Party wants prosperity for America and every having a job, full employment. IN order to get this we have to remove a lot of regulations , reduce the Federal workforce and lower salaries and pensions of govt workers, cut taxes. This idea of the mega rich running things is baloney. If you took all the money of the rich it would hardly help us 2 or 3 months. 1% pay nearly 40% of the income tax. If you want socialism vote for Obama.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Sept. 21, 2012 9:20 a.m.

    @ Social Mod Fiscal Con, I don't argue that Occupy didn't pull it together, probably in large part due to the fact it did not have big money backing it like the Tea Party did (and it did, very organized Washington based special interest groups). But that begs the question of the message, which was suppressed by the establishment. And that's what should concern us all.

  • JohnH Cedar City, UT
    Sept. 21, 2012 9:19 a.m.

    Failure is too strong a word. They did succeed in exposing themselves for what they really are.

  • T. Party Pleasant Grove, UT
    Sept. 21, 2012 8:32 a.m.

    Editor: "...the tea party also has begun to lose energy."

    Don't count on it. You may not always see "Tea Party" on the label, but we're still at work. We're thinking about our children and our grandchildren, and this gives us plenty of energy for the long game.

  • pragmatistferlife salt lake city, utah
    Sept. 21, 2012 8:03 a.m.

    A year after the first civil rights march it was a failure I suppose.

  • Screwdriver Casa Grande, AZ
    Sept. 21, 2012 8:02 a.m.

    Take note Tea Party - if you don't get what you want you are a failure.

    So when Obama wins just rememeber this article.

  • Social Mod Fiscal Con West Jordan, UT
    Sept. 21, 2012 7:55 a.m.

    The point of the article is that as Americans we only have so much tolerance for a movement that can't get itself together enough to DO something. Occupy never even came up with a cohesive statement. We all know what Occupy stood against, but to this day nobody knows what they stood for.
    Whether or not Occupy was valuable should be evaluated on what it accomplished, or what it is still likely to accomplish. As the article points out, that is very little.

  • Esquire Springville, UT
    Sept. 21, 2012 6:24 a.m.

    So if a protest movement fails, it is silly? Or is it that you favor the mega rich who dominate at the expense of the majority of us? Aren't you really saying that the powerful and wealthy are winning the battle, in a time of increasing income disparity? Perhaps more than ever we need to run from voting for Wall Street's candidate, your hero Romney. Instead of disparaging, perhaps a little substance from you on the principles involved would be more useful.