Is the Anti-Wall Street Movement the Democrats' Tea Party?
Published in Le Monde
(France) on 7 October 2011
by Charlotte Chabas (link to original)
As the movement of outraged anti-Wall Street protesters gains momentum, the American press is asking more and more questions about the political implications of this spontaneous mobilization. Just a few months ahead of the presidential election, the White House has sent a strong signal to the protesters. At a press conference, Barack Obama considered that these protests — that he has "seen on television" — express "the frustrations that the American people feel." A statement which proves that the movement has emerged from the "media blackout" denounced by journalist Keith Olbermann, known for his pro-Democratic positions.
Although the Obama camp seems to be gradually taking stock of this mobilization, the influence of these militants is a cause of embarrassment for Democrats. When asked about the similarities between the anti-Wall Streeters and the tea party movement, the president preferred to dodge the question. But his vice-president, Joe Biden, was less reserved, declaring that the two movements "have a lot in common," according to the Los Angeles Times. United by a common rejection of the political system, a certain mass spontaneity and their decentralized organization, the two movements could play a major role in the upcoming election.
Since its emergence in 2009, the tea party has proven to be an important ally for the Republicans, notably contributing to their victory in the 2010 congressional elections. But now, the movement is "pulling GOP presidential candidates to the right in a way that may prove problematic in next year's general election," notes the Los Angeles Times. The movement was therefore a "mixed blessing," which could well repeat itself on the Democratic side this time.
"Double-Edged" Exploitation
"Beleaguered liberals [...] may, unexpectedly, be witnessing the redefinition of a coming election year that was supposed to be all about an ‘enthusiasm gap’ for Democrats against charged-up Republicans," according to the Los Angeles Times' analysis. Quoting a liberal strategist, the daily declares that "you don't have to be a genius to see that you can overlay what is going on with Occupy Wall Street to energize and mobilize a Democratic base." This exploitation of the movement is in keeping with the dual role adopted by Obama lately, both learned and "populist," according to the journalists from Politico.
But many Democratic Party members prefer to remain silent on this growing street movement, "wary of embracing a protest movement whose aims and goals are unclear," notes the Wall Street Journal. The party could indeed lose "moderate, middle-class swing voters, as well as wealthy Democratic Wall Street donors," by too openly supporting the "more radical" protesters, states the daily. Comparing the Obama camp's policy to a "populist puzzle," the Wall Street Journal notes that the Democratic Party is "seeking to tap [the movement's] energy without opening the party to charges of class warfare."
The "Irresponsibility" of the Democrats
The Republicans for their part are trying to exploit the "radical" side of the protests to rally the moderates to their cause. Fox News, known for its right-wing positions, gives voice to Peter King, Republican representative for New York's 3rd district, who highlights the "irresponsibility" of Obama's statements. "[The protesters] should be denounced; they're breaking the law; they're serving no real purpose at all. And for the president or anyone else to give them any credence or credibility is also irresponsible," thundered the representative.
Some Republicans who expressed more nuanced opinions are trying to attract the anti-Wall Street protesters to their camp. In this respect, a spokesman for Republican primary candidate Rick Perry explains in the Wall Street Journal, "we understand the frustration with the Obama economy, but the protests don’t make sense or help create jobs."
What Futures for the Movement?
While the American media were slow to take interest in the movement, they are now asking questions about its future. "The protests have slowly grown in size and attention over more than two weeks, with the president's acknowledgment at a news conference a sign they might be jelling into a political movement," highlights the Chicago Tribune.
But the movement's future remains unpredictable, according to all the American papers. The anti-Wall Street movement remains an obscure movement that will struggle to find its place in today's American political landscape. Especially since the mobilization is not without contradiction. In this respect, the Christian Science Monitor notes ironically that the anti-Wall Street demonstrators "boo CEOs, but mourn Steve Jobs," the founder of Apple who died last Wednesday. On social network Twitter — the movement's main tool — the protesters' official account declared "much of Occupy Wall Street and the tech community respect you & will miss you." Later, under the movement's dedicated keyword, a protester even wrote, "RIP to a creative genius who helped make ALL these movements possible."
Although the Obama camp seems to be gradually taking stock of this mobilization, the influence of these militants is a cause of embarrassment for Democrats. When asked about the similarities between the anti-Wall Streeters and the tea party movement, the president preferred to dodge the question. But his vice-president, Joe Biden, was less reserved, declaring that the two movements "have a lot in common," according to the Los Angeles Times. United by a common rejection of the political system, a certain mass spontaneity and their decentralized organization, the two movements could play a major role in the upcoming election.
Since its emergence in 2009, the tea party has proven to be an important ally for the Republicans, notably contributing to their victory in the 2010 congressional elections. But now, the movement is "pulling GOP presidential candidates to the right in a way that may prove problematic in next year's general election," notes the Los Angeles Times. The movement was therefore a "mixed blessing," which could well repeat itself on the Democratic side this time.
"Double-Edged" Exploitation
"Beleaguered liberals [...] may, unexpectedly, be witnessing the redefinition of a coming election year that was supposed to be all about an ‘enthusiasm gap’ for Democrats against charged-up Republicans," according to the Los Angeles Times' analysis. Quoting a liberal strategist, the daily declares that "you don't have to be a genius to see that you can overlay what is going on with Occupy Wall Street to energize and mobilize a Democratic base." This exploitation of the movement is in keeping with the dual role adopted by Obama lately, both learned and "populist," according to the journalists from Politico.
But many Democratic Party members prefer to remain silent on this growing street movement, "wary of embracing a protest movement whose aims and goals are unclear," notes the Wall Street Journal. The party could indeed lose "moderate, middle-class swing voters, as well as wealthy Democratic Wall Street donors," by too openly supporting the "more radical" protesters, states the daily. Comparing the Obama camp's policy to a "populist puzzle," the Wall Street Journal notes that the Democratic Party is "seeking to tap [the movement's] energy without opening the party to charges of class warfare."
The "Irresponsibility" of the Democrats
The Republicans for their part are trying to exploit the "radical" side of the protests to rally the moderates to their cause. Fox News, known for its right-wing positions, gives voice to Peter King, Republican representative for New York's 3rd district, who highlights the "irresponsibility" of Obama's statements. "[The protesters] should be denounced; they're breaking the law; they're serving no real purpose at all. And for the president or anyone else to give them any credence or credibility is also irresponsible," thundered the representative.
Some Republicans who expressed more nuanced opinions are trying to attract the anti-Wall Street protesters to their camp. In this respect, a spokesman for Republican primary candidate Rick Perry explains in the Wall Street Journal, "we understand the frustration with the Obama economy, but the protests don’t make sense or help create jobs."
What Futures for the Movement?
While the American media were slow to take interest in the movement, they are now asking questions about its future. "The protests have slowly grown in size and attention over more than two weeks, with the president's acknowledgment at a news conference a sign they might be jelling into a political movement," highlights the Chicago Tribune.
But the movement's future remains unpredictable, according to all the American papers. The anti-Wall Street movement remains an obscure movement that will struggle to find its place in today's American political landscape. Especially since the mobilization is not without contradiction. In this respect, the Christian Science Monitor notes ironically that the anti-Wall Street demonstrators "boo CEOs, but mourn Steve Jobs," the founder of Apple who died last Wednesday. On social network Twitter — the movement's main tool — the protesters' official account declared "much of Occupy Wall Street and the tech community respect you & will miss you." Later, under the movement's dedicated keyword, a protester even wrote, "RIP to a creative genius who helped make ALL these movements possible."
Previous article![]( "Obama Shown the Spirit of the '60s")
