Occupy the Future
Delivering a Howard Zinn lecture is a bittersweet experience for me. I regret that he’s not here to take part in and invigorate a movement that would have been the dream of his life. Indeed, he laid a lot of the groundwork for it.
If the bonds and associations being established in these remarkable events can be sustained through a long, hard period ahead – victories don’t come quickly – the Occupy protests could mark a significant moment in American history.
I’ve never seen anything quite like the Occupy movement in scale and character, here and worldwide. The Occupy outposts are trying to create cooperative communities that just might be the basis for the kinds of lasting organizations necessary to overcome the barriers ahead and the backlash that’s already coming.
That the Occupy movement is unprecedented seems appropriate because this is an unprecedented era, not just at this moment but since the 1970s.
The 1970s marked a turning point for the United States. Since the country began, it had been a developing society, not always in very pretty ways, but with general progress toward industrialization and wealth.
Even in dark times, the expectation was that the progress would continue. I’m just old enough to remember the Great Depression. By the mid-1930s, even though the situation was objectively much harsher than today, the spirit was quite different.
A militant labor movement was organizing – the CIO (Congress of Industrial Organizations) and others – and workers were staging sit-down strikes, just one step from taking over the factories and running them themselves.
Under popular pressure, New Deal legislation was passed. The prevailing sense was that we would get out of the hard times.
Now there’s a sense of hopelessness, sometimes despair. This is quite new in our history. During the 1930s, working people could anticipate that the jobs would come back. Today, if you’re a worker in manufacturing, with unemployment practically at Depression levels, you know that those jobs may be gone forever if current policies persist.
That change in the American outlook has evolved since the 1970s. In a reversal, several centuries of industrialization turned to de-industrialization. Of course manufacturing continued, but overseas – very profitable, though harmful to the workforce.
The economy shifted to financialization. Financial institutions expanded enormously. A vicious cycle between finance and politics accelerated. Increasingly, wealth concentrated in the financial sector. Politicians, faced with the rising cost of campaigns, were driven ever deeper into the pockets of wealthy backers.
And the politicians rewarded them with policies favorable to Wall Street: deregulation, tax changes, relaxation of rules of corporate governance, which intensified the vicious cycle. Collapse was inevitable. In 2008, the government once again came to the rescue of Wall Street firms presumably too big to fail, with leaders too big to jail.
Today, for the one-tenth of 1 percent of the population who benefited most from these decades of greed and deceit, everything is fine.
In 2005, Citigroup – which, by the way, has repeatedly been saved by government bailouts – saw the wealthy as a growth opportunity.
The bank released a brochure for investors that urged them to put their money into something called the Plutonomy Index, which identified stocks in companies that cater to the luxury market.
“The world is dividing into two blocs – the plutonomy and the rest,” Citigroup summarized. “The U.S., U.K. and Canada are the key plutonomies – economies powered by the wealthy.”
As for the non-rich, they’re sometimes called the precariat – people who live a precarious existence at the periphery of society. The “periphery,” however, has become a substantial proportion of the population in the U.S. and elsewhere.
So we have the plutonomy and the precariat: the 1 percent and the 99 percent, as Occupy sees it – not literal numbers, but the right picture.
The historic reversal in people’s confidence about the future is a reflection of tendencies that could become irreversible. The Occupy protests are the first major popular reaction that could change the dynamic.
I’ve kept to domestic issues. But two dangerous developments in the international arena overshadow everything else.
For the first time in human history, there are real threats to the survival of the human species. Since 1945 we have had nuclear weapons, and it seems a miracle we have survived them. But policies of the Obama administration and its allies are encouraging escalation.
The other threat, of course, is environmental catastrophe. Practically every country in the world is taking at least halting steps to do something about it. The United States is taking steps backward. A propaganda system, openly acknowledged by the business community, declares that climate change is all a liberal hoax: Why pay attention to these scientists?
If this intransigence continues in the richest, most powerful country in the world, the catastrophe won’t be averted.
Something must be done in a disciplined, sustained way, and soon. It won’t be easy to proceed. There will be hardships and failures – it’s inevitable. But unless the process that’s taking place here and elsewhere in the country and around the world continues to grow and becomes a major force in society and politics, the chances for a decent future are bleak.
You can’t achieve significant initiatives without a large, active, popular base. It’s necessary to get out into the country and help people understand what the Occupy movement is about – what they themselves can do, and what the consequences are of not doing anything.
Organizing such a base involves education and activism. Education doesn’t mean telling people what to believe – it means learning from them and with them.
Karl Marx said, “The task is not just to understand the world but to change it.” A variant to keep in mind is that if you want to change the world you’d better try to understand it. That doesn’t mean listening to a talk or reading a book, though that’s helpful sometimes. You learn from participating. You learn from others. You learn from the people you’re trying to organize. We all have to gain the understanding and the experience to formulate and implement ideas.
The most exciting aspect of the Occupy movement is the construction of the linkages that are taking place all over. If they can be sustained and expanded, Occupy can lead to dedicated efforts to set society on a more humane course.
© 2011 Noam ChomskyDistributed by The New York Times Syndicate.
CONNECT















44 comments on "Occupy the Future"
November 27, 2011 11:29am
I just want to say that Diane should re-read the paragraph with the Marx quote. Mr. Chomsky was actually advocating the opposite of what Marx said. At least that's how I read it.
November 05, 2011 5:42am
Mr. Chompsky used Marx's quote simply as stated; not as a call for Marxism in the US or anywhere else. Also, unfortunately, President Obama has revealed himself as more of a Hawk than a Dove. But, as I understAND HIS POLICIES; HE IS ATTEMPTING DESTRUCTURING OF NUCLEAR WARHEADS.
November 05, 2011 3:05am
More and more people are involved and educated about wanting and implementing change because their lives are being affected and a survival instinct kicks in along with a good dose of fear. But with global support we feel able and motivated! There are some people who think they are not affected greatly and will continue to bury their heads in the sand for as long as possible. These people are frightened of change and although some of these people are seen as our enemy, bankers and the like, we must help to educate them. We must work at finding ways in which to do this. Ways for them to understand that money isn't everything.
November 04, 2011 2:24pm
The demonization of Karl Marx reflects the painful absence of critical thinking that is so prominent in the anti-intellectual media-driven climate of the United States. Good luck to us all - we surely need it.
November 03, 2011 12:27pm
No Child is born to become the kinds of abusers we see in Governance.. It's a learned behaviour, and it can be unlearned. Neuroplasticity is evidence for this...
The status quo is a learned status quo, and within it are many, many people who are willing to learn, given the appropriate environment, information and support. We need to isolate those who refuse this choice, and a) NOT ELECT them b) make those who have acted abusively accountable - George Bush etc.... and not as revenge but as part of the process of restorative justice that leads towards prevention.
November 03, 2011 12:24pm
The psychology of any given society is both revealed and perpetuated in how that Society relates to and treats children.
In order to change the future, we have to recognise this, and change how we relate to and treat children.
Failure to recognise this, on the personal and collective level will result in continued 'revolutions' - turnings on fixed point, with each generation oppressing by virtue of their imposed 'good rules'.
Those with empathy intact have no need for rules.. That's not to say there ought be no rules, no guidelines, but to suggest that a deeper critical analysis of the roots of the problem is required for a fuller understanding of the situation.
This applies to Institutions, Religious and Secular as much as it applies to families and communities.
Participative Democracy is about individuals taking on responsibility and being accountable to each other, and this can start at home and in schools...
The General Assemblies are a start in this direction. Sudbury Valley School is living proof that it can work....
We do not have to wait for the overarching Hierarchical structures to change to do this...
And yes, Noam, this is the work of many decades, of generations : I am working today for my great grandchildren... this gives me a level of clarity, and a deep, deep stamina.....
November 03, 2011 1:36pm
When almost 50% do not even bother to vote, how can one have a participatory democracy. Of those 50%, probably less than half had gotten into trouble to understand various issues.
Chomsky is a depressed old man who unfortunately never solved anything aside from linguistics living in his ivory tower and only looking from above on the real world. His view of Israel and Jews and misunderstanding of Islam are notoriously ignorant. His suggestions of Marxism are absurd. It does not matter what the ideology is, but the facts of lives of working people. The best thing we have running in America is checks and balances so that nobody can become to entrenched and we can trow the SOBs out, when they stop serving the people.
As Churchill said, democracy is terribly messy system, but there is none better. Would you rather have medieval sharia and its Borg-like, Nazi-like ideology of SUBMISSION?
When everybody starts collecting solar, and wind energy and rain water from their roofs than we can drive the fossil industries out of business and same with the large banking, hospital, military.industrial conglomerates. Small is beautiful and we need to bring free market back where producers and consumers are not robbed by the intermediaries but deal directly.
November 03, 2011 10:57am
the future of the world is so gloomy, any development such as the Occupiers is a breath of fresh air. yes, they are still without an articulated list of demands, but they're the only hope.
November 03, 2011 10:02am
I'm afraid Ms. McKinley has confused the theories of Marx with Stalinism. I seek in vain to find couched within the glorious sentiment that is socialism by definition, any mention of the kind of atrocities visited upon the victims of Stalin's Gulag.
November 03, 2011 7:21am
That's the only part of this article I questioned as well.
November 03, 2011 5:46am
Dr. Chomsky, as usual, I agree with almost all of your commentaries. This one, however, leads to the following question: which of the President's administration's policies are "encouraging [the] escalation" of nuclear weapons?
Zeke Hanzl
November 03, 2011 3:52am
I am thinking too that the economic system of profit is the problem it makes greed and slavery inherent. Many decisions are made because of money. We need to do the right thing regardless of money. It is madness, we waste our lives producing things no one needs and filling the land and ocean with garbage. If an economic collapse would stop even coca cola from producing billions of plastic bottles a day we would be heading in the right direction.
November 03, 2011 3:08am
With so many woman political writer, the number of male dominated comments and opinions is absurd. Counterpunch has a huge mix of males and females. Why not you? There is Holly Sklar, Angela Davis,Barbara Smith,Marsha Coleman-Adebayo, Barbara Ehrenreich, just to name a few women which can write for you. How do you intend to integrate the 99%, if your newspaper only includes the likes of the 1% that exploit us all?
Conil, Cádiz
November 03, 2011 2:43am
Real change can only come from a completely new system of economic values.
I have come to believe one way forward is have an economic system of values based on calories.
Almost everything can be measured in calories, therefore they can be used as a means of exchange. We all need a certain number of calories to survive each day. Not only do we burn calories as we work, we burn them as we drive, and we burn them to keep warm. We eat calories; calories are used in manufacturing industries, and calories are wasted on some things more than others. In other words, we can pay, or reward, ourselves in calories. Our buildings can be assigned calorific values, the amount of calories in the materials and their production, and the amount of calories expended in their construction.
Everything has a basic calorific value, which is not based on supply and demand.
Through use of such a measure our whole system of values would change. Necessity would play as big a part in our economic system as reward. Waste could be cut away, and equality could become a reality.
Of course, this is not necessarily a complete solution - I am sure there are some serious flaws - but can be the beginning of a debate. For real change we have to look at things in a completely different way. Without that, we are destined to repeat the same mistakes.
November 05, 2011 3:17am
Wont calories become as sought after as money?
"My building has more calories than yours nah nah"?! Etc etc
BUT I love your idea! You are correct, we must find another way. You mention the word exchange. Back in the day that's what people did - exchange and barter, pre-money. Our society is based on greed, material possessions, money, fear, loss of control. It's not right is it?? We need love, care and unselfish gestures.
November 03, 2011 12:47am
Noam Chomsky is a disgrace. To advocate anything Karl Marx has said is insulting to 21st century people. Marx's ideas were compelling at one time (1950), but the results of implementing them has been disastrous. His concepts of COMMUNISM have resulted in more humans suffering than just about any political or social idea in history. Millions were killed in the USSR, Cambodia, North Vietnam, and North Korea, etc... Communism should be dead as an alternative to just about any form of societal governance.
November 03, 2011 4:07am
Communism has proved itself suppressive...perhaps evil is the word. So, WHY are we blessing communist countries with US jobs? China, for instance? Wall Street has no great morality in regard to performing economic treason against workers in the US. Wall Street has now proved that deregulated and unregulated they are only pigs at the trough who know no difference between democracy, morality, communism, on their quest to scam the world...and the US. If you love capitalism, regulate it. Otherwise, its latest excuse, "free" trade also needs to go. Requiring that people actually make a product in the US and provide "fair trade" with non-communist countries would be a start. That used to work.
November 03, 2011 2:03am
YOU madam are a disgrace. Instead of picking on one point and turning it into a diatribe against Communism (which I sure we all agree was ineffectivbe and a curse on humanity) you should look at the overall point Chomsky is making and give him credit for being on the side of humanity over greed. Unfettered Capitalism is every bit as evil and divisive as Communism. Its only redeeming grace in the past has been that it has been regulated to prevent its excesses. Any system of governance when allowed to get out of control will always result in two classes of citiznes: the wealthy and the rest. What we have today is the flip side of Soviet-style Communism and its end result is worse! At least in countries like Poland there was a safety net for the poor. Here? Damn the poor to hell for all Capitalism cares.
November 02, 2011 9:24pm
Why Chomsky refuses to support the 9/11 truth movement is beyond me Can't he and all too many Americans see that 9/11 is the Achilles heel of the Cabal that has brought all this evil about? Should the truth of that false-flag operation be exposed, the 99% would at last come together with a vengence.Hal O'LearyWheeling, WV
November 03, 2011 2:04am
When I pondered the fact that Obama and his crew are considering immunity for the bankers who stole our future, my first thought was, "They just don't get it do they?" Or do they? They're all going on as if nothing has changed, as if the people out in the streets are just annoying flies, to be swatted and ignored. Obama got millions of young people excited about the political process three years ago, and he's betrayed them into a state of cynicism and despair. I've recently listened to the promises he made on the campaign trail, and I realize that he does understand or else he couldn't have said the things he did. So, when I see him brazenly embracing the rich at the expense of everyone else, I see a hypocrite, an Uncle Tom who makes Herman Cain look like a mere simpleton, but at least Cain doesn't pretend to be on our side.
This system is broken and needs to be rebuilt. The 0.1% have won this game, they own this government (except for maybe Bernie Sanders) hook, line and sinker, and I come back once again to the position that so many others are embracing: non participation in the current political process.
I watched "Lifting The Veil" Full Length HQ Film?" on Youtube yesterday. It exposes how the Democratic Party co-opted all the Progressive movements of the past century and dis-empowered them, always leading inexorably towards domination by the bankers and the mega rich. (It's not an anti Democrat video. In the end it concludes that Democracy and Capitalism are incompatible.) It will try to do the same to the Occupy movement. That must be avoided at all costs.
The bottom line, even though I sign the petitions and rail against the system, as George Carlin so eloquently stated: "THEY DON'T GIVE A FUCK ABOUT YOU!" They carry on doing their own thing as if we didn't exist. I see now why they mock us. They have the government under their control and the politicians aren't interested in our voice. If they get replaced it will be by another corporate go-fer and they'll get a great job for vast amounts of money working for one of the companies who paid for them to get elected. It's no longer about getting re-elected, but about getting on the right side of the rich folk and getting a piece of their pie. Politics is just a stepping stone for many (if not most) of them today. American politics is utterly corrupt, utterly morally bankrupt, and no longer has any redeeming qualities.
The young people are right. THEY ARE all the same. They just talk differently.
November 03, 2011 2:03am
Oh stop it!
November 03, 2011 12:08am
Ye shall know the false prophets by their deeds - Chomsky aint about to point a finger at his ilk ! The protests are actually about 911 and who REALLY has the power in America, but nobody has the guts to come out and say it. In the meantime they will be side tracked by claims of the charms of Shariah Lawley and the power of the evil muzzies (on food stamps !!) who want to take over America. Its the media ownership, stupid !
November 02, 2011 9:05pm
Noam Chomsky and George Carlin are the two greatest minds to ever occupy my 62 years of existence. I've savored every notion they've come up with. George had a wider exposure which speaks to the entertainment nature of our ignorance. Michael Moore's new book gives insight into perhaps their legacy.
November 02, 2011 9:01pm
Noam Chomsky and George Carlin are the two greatest minds to ever occupy my 62 years of existence. I've savored every notion they've come up with. George had a wider exposure which speaks to the entertainment nature of our ignorance. Michael Moore's new book gives insight into perhaps their legacy.
November 02, 2011 7:08pm
This Just In!!! Eric Cartman is the 1% Mascot!!!
November 02, 2011 6:48pm
I agree with Mr. Karnaugh. Removing economic dominance in civil society can open the door for another criteria for culture...like respect for human dignity over an ability to pay to play.
November 02, 2011 6:41pm
I thank God we had Howard Zinn, and yet have Noam Chomsky in our lives! How dark life would have been without these two brave men who have consistently enlightened our minds and kept us strong in our faith that truth will in the end, prevail. God bless. xx
November 02, 2011 6:27pm
There are many different currents in cultural evolution but one seems to stand out in the current circumstance: the tendency for capital accumulation to accelerate by means of co-opting armies of willing professionals and politicians. Metaphorically, money is in charge. The greatest danger is in the influence of money over politics. The Banksters now own the political establishment, with help from other industries having very deep pockets.If a single theme is needed for the Occupy movement, getting money out of politics would be a very good starting point. I am not sure whether the public will appreciate that or whether it may be too abstract.
November 02, 2011 4:38pm
This is a level of thought that few are able--and willing to engage. It requires critical thinking,and that is, also, greatly missing in our culture of entertainment. thank you
November 02, 2011 4:27pm
Without Marx we won't even be thinking in these terms.The best thing is to take the best of everyone's teachings, I think!
November 02, 2011 3:34pm
There is a conflict between "growth" and the "environment". With 7 billion people on a limited world, our economic activity cannot continue as is without eroding nature's services. Our growth paradigm simply assumes nature is not a limit -- supposedly it is merely a sub component of 'capital'... to be 'used'. The time frame we are faced with will force us to collective action (to save ourselves). This idea of collective action is fiercely opposed by the 1% who feel the least amount of urgency and have the most resources to stop beneficial change. I agree that this 99% movement just might be the basis for what we need to survive:
November 02, 2011 3:20pm
I see where your coming from but there is a big difference between Stalin and Marx just as there is a big difference between Citicorp and Adam Smith. Marx is only human but his ideas were essential for the formation of what we see today as the progressive movement. Don't throw his ideas out because of Stalin and Mau just like one doesn't throw out the message of peace from Jesus just because the KKK used crosses.
November 02, 2011 3:20pm
I see where your coming from but there is a big difference between Stalin and Marx just as there is a big difference between Citicorp and Adam Smith. Marx is only human but his ideas were essential for the formation of what we see today as the progressive movement. Don't throw his ideas out because of Stalin and Mau just like one doesn't throw out the message of peace from Jesus just because the KKK used crosses.
November 02, 2011 3:20pm
I see where your coming from but there is a big difference between Stalin and Marx just as there is a big difference between Citicorp and Adam Smith. Marx is only human but his ideas were essential for the formation of what we see today as the progressive movement. Don't throw his ideas out because of Stalin and Mau just like one doesn't throw out the message of peace from Jesus just because the KKK used crosses.
November 02, 2011 3:19pm
I see where your coming from but there is a big difference between Stalin and Marx just as there is a big difference between Citicorp and Adam Smith. Marx is only human but his ideas were essential for the formation of what we see today as the progressive movement. Don't throw his ideas out because of Stalin and Mau just like one doesn't throw out the message of peace from Jesus just because the KKK used crosses.
November 03, 2011 2:08am
Well said DEK42. It is my opinion that Marx would have been devastated to see what Stalin et al wrought as a result of the Russian Revolution. I agree, Marx was about as responsible for the Communism that came about as was Jesus for the evils of modern day fundamentalist Christianity in the USA.
November 02, 2011 2:38pm
Thank you Mr. Chomsky for your continuing contributions to humanity. I also agree that we are at a crossroads in terms of our long term survival. And I completely agree with you in terms of the importance of "the linkages that are taking place" between individuals and groups. This will absolutely be the most important tool with which we can use in order to help save our species.
November 02, 2011 2:17pm
Rules for Radicals: A Pragmatic Primer for Realistic Radicals. Random House. 1971. ISBN 0-394-44341-1. Vintage books paperback: ISBN 0-679-72113-4
November 02, 2011 2:16pm
Frankly, the Occupy movement can do without Karl Marx and the way he sought to change the world. Your variant of the quote is actually more reasonable than what Marx said. A variant on yours, that I propose is : We must understand the world before ever attempting to change it. Otherwise we risk to change it for the benefit of the wrong people, as it happened in the Communist Soviet Union and their satellites.
Finally you said :"..Occupy can lead to dedicated efforts to set society on a more humane course." Amen to that! But keep Marx, Engels, Lenin and Stalin, Mao too, out of those efforts if you want any humane outcome.
November 02, 2011 3:45pm
Due to the shortsighted greed of the captains of capitalism, socialism seems to be a possible road for the future. In fact one could say that republicans are the most influential communists in America, they have single handedly destroyed the ability of American industry to serve as a motor of progress and instead have promoted its destruction.
Socialism is the only road for the future that has a destination that we would want to arrive at.
The one single thing that we lack now that we have had throughout our entire history is a frontier.
I really would like to know why no one is talking about this at all as it sits at the very center of our psyche. We have always had a 'west' or a 'far north' or 'far south' to challenge us as a species and 'expand' into. There is a real NEED got this in all large cultures on our planet-that's how they got large...
There is a significant portion of the population that requires a frontier to conquer. We see them all around us. The hyper aggressive-both inside and outside the law. The sociopathic, the disenfranchised masses with advancement in their eyes. Expansion. The problem AND the solution!
If we had kept the space race going it would have given us a 'frontier' as well as an ongoing wellspring of innovative ideas to stretch what resources we have, massive high tech employment and social engagement-A GOAL WE CAN ALL SHARE-for people at every level of society and in every country of the world.
It would have the extremely valuable added benefit of getting all of our 'eggs' out of this one basket we live on AND provide new sources of raw materials.
Opinions! Comments?
Please read Saul Alinsky's book. I can't say what it is cuz I'll be blocked.
November 02, 2011 1:29pm
Yes, a pity that Howard Zinn didn't live to see this.It is truly a people's revolution -- without leadership, without dogma, without precedent.Let us hope it prevails.
November 03, 2011 3:11am
This is not a truly peopleºs revolution. This is a storm where the white liberals started feeling the same troubles that non white america and most non white worldºs citizen have been experiencing for a long time. Look at the people in the park, look at the people who write for Nation of Change, mostly maleand white, when there are so many very good non white and female writers.. As brother Gil Scott Heron said: '' The revolution is not going to be televised...''