Using The Democratic Vote

The Occupy movement began with a sense of collective outrage over the disparities that exist, have always existed, but have latterly become more overtly extensive, between the haves in society and the have-nots. The 'haves' having, in fact, an intolerable excess of the riches that society is capable of providing, aptly and amply proving, yet again, that riches beget further riches.

There is simply too much social inequity in most societies in most countries of the world. That it has always been so is an unalterable truth. That it will always be so, is yet another inconvenient truth. There are those who generate money, and in the process while enriching themselves they often provide opportunities for others far less fortunate to find employment in the general scheme of things.

Society itself, that is to say, governments acting at the behest of the societies they govern, understand their obligation to materially, if marginally, support the existential needs of the underclass, those who work for subsistence wages, the unemployed, the unemployable, those with critical disabilities.

There is a need for a re-alignment to take place, to redress the balance so that the avarice of those who bank an unacceptably-large proportion of any country's riches, is held in check, enabling others to make some inroads into taking advantage of possibilities that will lift them too into the 'have' class, if only somewhat.

So the need for a re-structuring of the economic pie is there. Whether or what can constructively be done to adjust the obviously maladjusted picture is moot. Just as society is top-heavy with greed, those at the bottom rungs are no less greedy, they are simply incapable of converting their greed into actual realization. They haven't got what it takes to get ahead.

Sometimes it is opportunity that is lacking, and this is an area where constructive measures can be taken. Not everyone who is under-employed is content to live on social welfare handouts, although many are. And, it seems that the Occupy (OWS) sub-groups have become heavy with the presence of political agitators, the homeless ill, substance abusers, and aggrieved university students.

They're a motley crew, with an amorphous, watered-down message, with their single point of agreement being that they are dissatisfied. They have served their purpose in calling attention to social inequities, and causing much to be written in the news, stimulating public concern and debate. But their insistence on remaining in city parks has become a festering sore.

Much more can be accomplished with political activism that works, by voting and encouraging others to vote, to reflect the values they insist they hold dear. These public camp-outs allowing another venue for partying and drug overdoses, anarchic message-mongering and young people proving they can pout and act the victim in the end will produce nothing but resentment.

Inspired by what was seen as youth rising in anger over life in totalitarian societies - where freedom to speak and assemble has been denied them, where unemployment is rife and life is costly, but death is cheap - the urge to congregate and park themselves in tents was communicated by what was seen occurring in the Middle East.

Just as democracy has found infertile soil there, not readily transportable from the West, the 'Arab spring' hasn't exported too well in the West; the reasons are completely dissimilar, and the solutions are, as well. In a free society those who celebrate their consciences as being clearly superior to those who govern have a vote.

They should use it well.