The Occupy Wall Street Movement The Occupy Wall Street Movement is a movement that has garnered extensive popularity in the last few months. The movement has been covered by all the major news agencies and magazines of our time and is considered to be an iconic representative of the unrest that is steadily accumulating and reaching bursting point in the masses. The movement has been the subject of countless debates that have sought to determine if the movement is justified or if it is an exploitation of the freedom of free speech and the right to protest.
The discussion will highlight the moral and economic implications involved in the movement; while analyzing (with support from examples and evidence) each of the implications identified above against the utilitarian, Kantian, and virtue ethics to determine which theory best applies to the movement. In order to do so adequately, the discussion will explore who is responsible for income inequality and wealth distribution in the U. S. This will be followed by the suggestion of an equitable outcome from the movement that would be appropriate for our capitalistic society.
The discussion will come to a conclusion by predicting whether the movement will continue, fad away, or turn into something else. Occupy Wall Street Movement was a movement that began as a result of social unrest amongst the masses. It is perhaps because of the same reason that the Occupy Wall Street Movement was frequently supported with slogans that sought to highlight the fact that the masses were behind the movement. The moral and economic implications behind the movie are diverse (Klein, 2011).
Firstly, the moral implications are apparent in the fact that the protestors have been recorded to engage in numerous unethical protest practices during the Occupy Wall Street Movement. In addition, there is a need to understand the fact that the Occupy Wall Street Movement is essentially a protest that is looking to bring about a radical change at an equally radical pace. Change management principles make it clear that change can never be expected to yield a positive outcome when it takes place with such a sudden intensity (Rushkoff, 2011).
In fact, if the demands of the Occupy Wall Street Movement are to be met and implemented, it would be only fair to expect a complete collapse of economy since the demands will require radical changes that will leave economic elements incompatible with the functioning of the global economy. Occupy Wall Street Movement demands that wealth is distributed adequately and justly, but common sense dictates that if wealth has indeed been siphoned off to a select few in the last few decades, then it is unreasonable to expect that the situation will turn around within a few weeks or a few months (Jones, 2011).
The rationale behind the Occupy Wall Street Movement may be reasonable and just in its own right, but the demands that the movement is propagating cannot possibly be considered applicable. In fact, the moral nature of the Occupy Wall Street Movement is that which is similar to the morals of a kidnapping. In essence, a threat of civil conflict has been created and is being used to blackmail the authorities into a position where it seems they must comply with the demands of the movement.
In addition, the large numbers in which the Occupy Wall Street Movement executes its protests also closely resembles the same dynamics that one would expect to find in a mob. The scary thing about that is a mob can be reasonably expected to go astray at any moment and cause widespread damage. The distribution of wealth, which is widely considered to be unfair by movements such as the Occupy Wall Street Movement, is a process that took place over a period of time that ps decades.
Organizations matured and expanded as each new individual who came and went from the corridor of economic power played out his/her part. Some feel policies were formed and amended with the passage of time in order to create the set of circumstances that (in retrospect) appear to be clearly responsible for ensuring that wealth remains in the hands of a limited few. In addition, it is also perceived that the unjustified and biased distribution of wealth is also a sign of corruption. The current form of the economic system has been developed as a result of centuries of experience (Stewart, 2011).
The policies and regulations that constitute this economic system have been developed after careful consideration of the experiences and expertise that have been collected during the past. As a result, there are mechanisms that may appear to be redundant at first sight but are actually in place to prevent the incidence of events that led to unwanted and disastrous consequences in the past. It is because of this reason that an alteration in today’s economic system cannot be allowed unless there are sound and undeniable grounds for the amendment.
The Occupy Wall Street Movement calls for a revisiting of the economic system in order to benefit the masses that have not benefited from it in the last century. The movement identifies that the current economic system has done little more than ensure that wealth and monetary proficiency remains in the hands of a selected segment. In the same vein, the Occupy Wall Street Movement cites corruption, greed, intentional social inequality and other such elements to be the cause of the unjust distribution of wealth.
The Occupy Wall Street Movement has a near infinite supply of motivation since a large volume of the individuals who support it are those who consider that they have been treated unfairly, and that they have not been given the rights that were due to them. In addition, the individuals who found and support Occupy Wall Street Movement also perceive that they were stripped of what they have earned. Such individuals continue to drive the Occupy Wall Street Movement and other movements that have taken root from it (Watson, 2012).
There are now countless movements spread out across the globe with similar mandates and procedures. They have objectives for which they hold protests when they believe that they have been wronged. There is a need to understand that there is no immediate plan that can be implemented to make things better for this group of people. There is no gun-shot solution that can be applied to the scenario in an attempt to better the condition of the individuals who perceive that they have been wronged.
A more adequate solution would be one in which the protestors taking part in the Occupy Wall Street Movement organize and utilize their combined expertise and experience to form an organization that serves as a watch-dog and fights for cases in which individuals have been deprived of their rights to a prosperous life. If the members of the Occupy Wall Street Movement have reservations against the manner in which the corporate kings are running the show, then sitting on the street is not the right way to go about it.
The people taking part in the Occupy Wall Street Movement need to realize that if they fantasize about bringing a major change in the way society functions. This will not happen through protests and/or strikes. There is a need for organization, direction and formalization so that changes in the system can be made the right way. This discussion will attempt to present a holistic elaboration of the Occupy Wall Street Movement and the characteristics of the movement that merit consideration.
The above discussion shows that the Occupy Wall Street Movement may have its heart in the right place but it is not going about its objectives in an adequate fashion. The movement needs to revisit its modus operandi. In essence, the people running the “Occupy Wall Street Movement” are misguided if they think that Wall Street can be occupied by sitting on the Wall Street side-walks. The current financial and economic system that is functioning in the US shares cause-and-effect variables with countless international connections.
A single change in the US economy has an extensive chain reaction in the most ordinary of circumstances. As a result, it will not come as a surprise to some if the Occupy Wall Street Movement eventually fades away after a few years. Other movements may sprout from it, but the movement itself will cease to exist since the present system demands a formal and proper approach to the resolution of reservations; which is something that the Occupy Wall Street Movement is not following at the moment. The mandate is there, but the method is not. References Jones, J. M. (2011).
Most Americans Uncertain About “Occupy Wall Street” Goals. Retrieved November 15, 2012, from Gallup, Inc. : http://www. gallup. com/poll/150164/americans-uncertain-occupy-wall-street-goals. aspx Klein, E. (2011). ‘Occupy Wall Street’ protests gain steam, but movement’s goals remain unclear. Retrieved November 15, 2012, from The Washington Post: http://www. washingtonpost. com/business/occupy-wall-street-protests-gain-steam-but-movements-goals-remain-unclear/2011/10/03/gIQAjZNjIL_story. html Rushkoff, D. (2011). Think Occupy Wall St. is a phase? You don’t get it.
Retrieved November 15, 2012, from Cable News Network: http://edition. cnn. com/2011/10/05/opinion/rushkoff-occupy-wall-street/index. html Stewart, J. B. (2011). An Uprising With Plenty of Potential. Retrieved Novembe 14, 2012, from The New York Times Company: http://www. nytimes. com/2011/11/19/business/occupy-wall-street-has-plenty-of-potential. html? _r=0 Watson, T. (2012). Occupy Wall Street’s Year: Three Outcomes for the History Books. Retrieved November 14, 2012, from Forbes. com LLC: http://www. forbes. com/sites/tomwatson/2012/09/17/occupy-wall-streets-year/