Going global

As images rolled in this week of the Egyptian authorities' assault on protesters in Tahrir Square, observers in the United States could not escape thoughts of the official violence that had very recently been wrought on Wall Street occupiers in New York City and around the country. Civilians beaten with clubs, dragged by their hair, subject to tear gas, watching their tents demolished, returning to the square they were occupying only to be beaten back again - all that spoke well of and distinguished American police was their death toll of zero.

Then came Sultan Al Qassemi's report that an Egyptian State TV anchor had confessed the inspiration Egyptian military and security forces drew from "the firm stance the US took" against occupiers, and it all made perfect sense. The Egyptian authorities, even in the post-Mubarak period, look to America for leadership.

 Recall that, in the run-up to Mubarak's downfall, the dictator's strategy at every turn followed American advice. First, the Obama-Clinton foreign policy statements urged Mubarak to "seek dialogue," which he dutifully offered to do. That did not appease the protesters, so the US instructed him not to run again. His obedient announcement that he would not was insufficient to quell the unrest. The US then advised Mubarak to make a load of "concessions," and Mubarak's included appointing a vice president and insisting that his son Gamal would not seek the presidency. The Egyptians, however were intent on meaningful democratic revolution, and the State Department's puppeteering was all for naught.

As Egyptian authorities continue to take cues from American authorities, American protesters continue to take cues from Egyptian protesters. In the spring, I reported on an evening meeting between Ahmed Maher and Waleed Rashed, of Egypt's April 6 Youth Movement and a group of American activists that included a number of people instrumental in getting Occupy Wall Street off the ground, activists intent, like their Egyptian brothers and sisters, on wresting democracy from the grip of a corrupt ownership class intent on accumulating wealth and power no matter the human cost. "Don't worry if the revolution doesn't come tomorrow," the Egyptian comrades told us on that occasion. "It will come. It is only a matter of time. Just keep working."

Read the rest at TruthOut

Occupying Wall Street and Tahrir Square: Feathers of the Same Bird

by J.A. Myerson, Truthout | News Analysis

It's getting ugly out there.

As economic contraction intensifies leaving millions without work or means of support, and as governments continue with their brutal austerity and wealth transfers to the rich, the protests are becoming violent.

Is the OWS movement being slyly manipulated?

It seems like OWS is acquiescing to calls to "hone their message" rather than keep their protest more about generic social and economic inequality and injustice. (Which I believe is a far more effective strategy judging from the rapid, global spread of the movement.)

By caving in to media and elitist demands that they specifically define and communicate their grievances (we've all heard the idiotic and phony, "What are they protesting about?" lines), they are rapidly destroying their efficacy, at least in my opinion.

When they declare one of their goals to be "Bringing down the deficit and the debt," they are clearly speaking, unkowingly perhaps, against their own interests. Screw the debt! This is about inequality and the entrenched policies that sustain it! The debt is not the problem!

When they start talking about reducing the debt they are buying into the same propaganda that the 1% has used so effectively to sustain the flow of income and wealth directly their way at the expense of the other 99%.

That being said, I did see this one sign (h/t Ritholtz blog) that correctly sums up at least one grievance (albeit a very large one). I thought I'd share.

If that doesn't clearly state one of the bigger problems, then I don't know what does.