You Don't Say You Want a Revolution

          I have been fascinated by the Occupy protests because they to some degree seen to get at the heart of the “problem” in our country. They appear to have two main messages, both rather salient. The American system of governance has been hijacked by corporations and that System is stacked against the Middle Class. I hope I’ve represented their message succinctly.

          Contrast these messages to that of the Tea Party, which fixated on debt, deficits, and smaller government. The Tea Party was able to change political discourse by interjecting these issues. The Occupy movement, even in  its infancy, despite a lack of “leaders”, popular spokespeople, and even consistent coherent messages, has injected the issue of injustice into our political dialogue, and is performing a valuable service within our civic life. These guys are changing the political landscape just by consistently hanging out.

          But look at the underlying thesis of the Occupy movement, Government has been wrested from the hands of the People. This is a profound, even revolutionary perspective. It’s implications are probably below the awareness or intention of the protestors, but a revolutionary worldview demands a revolutionary response. That is the dark at the end of the road. One can struggle against the darkness if true to the course set by the bright light of liberty, the notion of We the People. If this light is lost, only the darkness remains.

          There may well be an underlying rage underpinning the peaceful Occupy ethos. Gentle readers should not be surprised if acts of irrational violence and destruction emerge. Such violence and deaths have begun over the last few weeks. While the Tea Party struggles for control over spending, the Occupy struggle is for freedom itself. If their assessment of political reality is accurate, the Occupy fight is not for the balance sheet, but for the soul of the Nation. That is the implication of their message.

          While their overt focus is on inequality, are there deeper drivers of the Occupy movement? The American people have historically endured great socio-economic inequality, yet have remained an aspirational people. Americans aspire to further themselves and to further the lives of their children. This reflects the American Dream. This aspiration provided hope, a reason for the struggle and sacrifice. Remove the hope of the American Dream, and one simply struggles, one is a victim…of politicians…. or the rich….or corporate avarice….whatever is ascribed.

          So is Occupy a revolution? Revolutions are not born of Governments, or even of popular discontent. Revolutions are borne of hope, and from hope to shared vision, from vision to resolve, and from resolve to courage and concerted action. Without hope, all that is left is despair and rage. The Occupy movement may not have leaders and messages because it may the social thrashing of a wounded beast, unsure what action to take to assuage itself. How is the decline of the American Dream related to the populist Occupy protests? There is a converging view that a key social driver is the decline in social mobility, which is at the heart of the American Dream.

          Last year, for the first time in our nation’s history, a majority of Americans reported believing that opportunities for their children would diminish rather than increase. This visceral awareness within the populace reflects what the numbers are just beginning to reveal. Social mobility in America is declining. A Newsweek cover story points out in popular language what social scientists had been monitoring. For a person born in 1970 in the bottom 2/5ths of our economy, 50% of these people remained in the bottom 2/5ths of the economy. They are likely to remain there for life. Contrast this to 30% in England and 20% in Sweden and Denmark. What explains the decline in US social mobility…..a decline in the quality of our educational system.

         

          Quality of education might be defined as preparing students for the real world. As Fareed Zakaria points out, when Steve Jobs graduated high school, the California educational system was the finest in the world. This system enabled the high tech revolution and formation of silicon valley, telecommunications, computing, and the internet. There was more effective government partnership with business and education in those days. Now the California educational system is a disaster, with the State spending twice as much on prisons as education.

          In the 1980s, national standardized testing was introduced and the quality of education declined across the board. The politicians and teacher unions which broke the system continue to advocate the same course which broke it.  Contrast this to the high quality of education in Northern Europe, which still remains consistently high. One may not be surprised to learn that the quality of education is the best predictive correlate of social mobility.  

          Our national institutions are obsolete and broken. They are one the “wrong track” and require renewing. This nation was founded on the unique premise that average people could create their own nation and govern through the rule of law. Can the People once more regain the helm of their governance? It is possible to take back our national institutions, but it will no doubt be a long and “messy business” to do so.