GOOD

The Occupy Wall Street Bible Is Out, and It's Good

Occupying Wall Street, the first thorough book about OWS, is a must-read for anyone interested in understanding the movement.


It’s probably no accident that the minimalist brown cover of Occupying Wall Street, the new title from OR Books about the now world-famous Manhattan movement, resembles the posters that, for a few months in 2011, came to define Zuccotti Park’s skyline. The title and subtitle—"The Inside Story of an Action that Changed America"—are written in black scrawl, adding extra authenticity to the stylization. It’s not just a book you’re holding, a reader soon realizes, it’s also a mini-protest sign.

Fair warning up front: A little rectangular box on the back cover reads, "All profits from this book will be donated to Occupy Wall Street." If you’re certain you disagree with OWS and don’t want to support their cause, then this book is probably not for you. But if you’re at all interested in how the now-global movement began, there’s probably no better resource than this.


Though Occupying’s author is a collective of roughly 60 unnamed people calling themselves "Writers for the 99%," the book is not a disjointed assortment of individual essays. Rather, and perhaps surprisingly, it acts as a concise historical account that sheds light on the varied and interesting minutia of OWS, covering everything from the guidelines of the General Assembly to the infamous Brooklyn Bridge protest to the drama created by class and racial tensions within the movement. So thorough is Occupying that even the thousands of people who lived in Zuccotti’s tent city themselves last year could probably learn something about the inner workings of the mass they once helped compose, or reinvigorate the fire that brought them there in the first place.

The authors admit at the beginning of Occupying that they could not cover every story that went on in and around Zuccotti during OWS—the days of the protest were too filled with action, and the protesters too numerous. They also warn that in no way should their book be considered an "official statement" from OWS, saying that "claims to formal representation of a horizontal movement such as OWS [are] both inappropriate and impossible." Caveats aside, however, Occupying offers a vivid and worthy start to the eventual OWS canon.

To be sure, Occupying’s 200 pages are not for anyone looking for a general overview. The book’s attention to detail could be an overload for those interested in a quick read, as it covers nearly every vestige of the camp, from the art of Zuccotti to the General Assembly hand signals to the nearby supporters who opened up their apartments so campers could shower. Preventing the text from falling into drab guidebook territory, however, are the individual accounts of protesters. These add much-needed depth to the more unemotional minutia.

Occupying is, overall, as welcoming and peaceful as the movement itself, providing commentary and a backbone to a protest often scoffed at as a "movement without a mission." That said, anyone looking to this book for a big reveal about Occupy’s mission will be let down. The closest thing to a defined purpose provided within Occupying comes from Mark Bray, a member of OWS’ press relations working group, who says OWS sought “economic justice and a more democratic, accountable form of politics that was beholden to citizens rather than to corporations.” Bray later adds that OWS has no definable "demands," because it "was seeking a conversation about the current state of the country, not presenting a finite list of goals."

The OWS book isn't perfect, just as the OWS protest wasn’t. It’s slow at times, and perhaps a bit self-congratulatory. But the spirit of the 99 percent shines through, and it’s obvious that that’s what matters to the authors, who write, "What unified this disparate throng was a tangible sense of solidarity, a commitment to the cause of the occupation, but also an evident commitment to each other. … No one can deny the tensions within OWS and the broader Occupy movement, but so far a shared analysis and common language has bound the different strands together." What Occupying ultimately provides is an unprecedented look back at this generation’s most notable movement. At its best, it sheds light on the diversity of faces, stories, and voices that composed OWS, and it immortalizes the protests in a way nothing has yet. "You can’t evict an idea," was an OWS battle call. And Occupying Wall Street is full of great ideas.

Photo via (cc) Flickr user _PaulS_

Articles
via Honor Africans / Twitter

The problem with American Sign Language (ASL) is that over 500,000 people in the U.S. use it, but the country has over 330 million people.

So for those with hearing loss, the chances of coming into contact with someone who uses the language are rare. Especially outside of the deaf community.

Keep Reading Show less

Looking back, the year 1995 seems like such an innocent time. America was in the midst of its longest streak of peace and prosperity. September 11, 2001 was six years away, and the internet didn't seem like much more than a passing fad.

Twenty-four years ago, 18 million U.S. homes had modem-equipped computers, 7 million more than the year before. Most logged in through America Online where they got their email or communicated with random strangers in chat rooms.

According to a Pew Research study that year, only 32% of those who go online say they would miss it "a lot" if no longer available.

Imagine what those poll numbers would look like if the question was asked today.

RELATED: Bill and Melinda Gates had a surprising answer when asked about a 70 percent tax on the wealthiest Americans

"Few see online activities as essential to them, and no single online feature, with the exception of E-Mail, is used with any regularity," the Pew article said. "Consumers have yet to begin purchasing goods and services online, and there is little indication that online news features are changing traditional news consumption patterns."

"Late Night" host David Letterman had Microsoft founder and, at that time the richest man in the world, on his show for an interview in '95 to discuss the "the big new thing."

During the interview Letterman chided Gates about the usefulness of the new technology, comparing it to radio and tape recorders.

Gates seems excited by the internet because it will soon allow people to listen to a baseball game on their computer. To which Letterman smugly replies, "Does radio ring a bell?" to laughter from the crowd.

But Gates presses Letterman saying that the new technology allows you to listen to the game "whenever you want," to which Letterman responds, "Do tape recorders ring a bell?"

Gates then tells Letterman he can keep up with the latest in his favorite hobbies such as cigar smoking or race cars through the internet. Letterman shuts him down saying that he reads about his interests in magazines.

RELATED: Bill Gates has five books he thinks you should read this summer.

The discussion ends with the two laughing over meeting like-minded people in "troubled loner chat room on the internet."

The clip brings to mind a 1994 segment on "The Today Show" where host Bryant Gumbel and Katie Couric have a similar discussion.

"What is internet anyway?" an exasperated Gumball asks. "What do you write to it like mail?"

"It's a computer billboard but it's nationwide and it's several universities all joined together and it's getting bigger and bigger all the time," a producer explains from off-stage.





Culture
Photo by Li-An Lim on Unsplash

The future generations will have to live on this Earth for years to come, and, not surprisingly, they're very concerned about the fate of our planet. We've seen a rise in youth activists, such as Greta Thunberg, who are raising awareness for climate change. A recent survey indicates that those efforts are working, as more and more Americans (especially young Americans) feel concerned about climate change.

A new CBS News poll found that 70% of Americans between 18 and 29 feel climate change is a crisis or a serious problem, while 58% of Americans over the age of 65 share those beliefs. Additionally, younger generations are more likely to feel like it's their personal responsibility to address climate change, as well as think that transitioning to 100% renewable energy is viable. Overall, 25% of Americans feel that climate change is a "crisis," and 35% feel it is a "serious problem." 10% of Americans said they think climate change is a minor problem, and 16% of Americans feel it is not a problem that worries them.

The poll found that concern for the environment isn't a partisan issue – or at least when it comes to younger generations. Two-thirds of Republicans under the age of 45 feel that addressing climate change is their duty, sentiments shared by only 38% of Republicans over the age of 45.

Keep Reading Show less
The Planet