Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more ➡
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Add note
Save to My Library
Sync to mobile
Look up keyword
Like this
1Activity
×
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
OWT Volume 1 Issue 1

OWT Volume 1 Issue 1

Ratings: (0)|Views: 124|Likes:
Published by Benjamin Daniels

More info:

Published by: Benjamin Daniels on Apr 05, 2012
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See More
See less

07/29/2013

pdf

text

original

 
People at occupations allover the world are focusing their anger on the consumerbanking industry. They are out-raged at the massive bonuseshanded out after a taxpayer-funded bailout, anxious aboutthe banks’ ability to dictategovernment policy and fearfulthat not enough is being doneto keep something like 2008’scollapse from happening again. And after the public outcry that caused banks, most nota-bly Bank of America, to retreatfrom putting new fees on debitcard use, consumers are look-ing for new ways to store theirmoney. At a big bank, large share-holders and the board of di-rectors make the decisions. The bank invests depositors’money and charges them fees
to make as much prot for its
shareholders as it can. Whensomeone puts money in acredit union, however, she isa member and an owner. Theboard of directors controlling investments is made up of elected, unpaid members. The structure of creditunions tends to make themtreat depositors well, said creditunion historian and proponent
Waking up from the American dream
Over the past thirty years,the United States as a wholehas prospered greatly. A closerexamination, however, revealsthat only a small sliver of 
 Americans is proting from
this boost in productivity. The vast majority of Americanshave seen their incomes stag-nate while their opportunitiesdwindle and their costs rise.US productivity has in-creased by 72 percent over thelast thirty years, but the wealthi-est one percent of Americanshave increased their real after-tax income by 275 percent, ac-cording to a recent study by the
Congressional Budget Ofce
(CBO)., According to a new study by the Economic Policy Institute, the top 1 percent of  Americans claimed 60 percentof all income growth in thelast 30 years, with the top .1percent taking 36 percent of allincome growth. The bottom90 percent claimed just 8.6 per-cent of all new income in thelast thirty years.“The people who havepower have adopted poli-cies that skew the rewards of the economy to people withpower, and have blocked poli-cies that would lead to sharedprosperity,” said Larry Mishel,president of the EconomicPolicy Institute. “That peoplearen’t doing well has not beendetermined by the economy;it’s been determined by politicsand policies.” The tax cuts started by Bush and extended by Obamareturn over $100,000 per yearto those making a milliondollars per year – a tax break greater than three times theaverage annual American in-come, according to the Centeron Budget and Policy Priorities. The CBO shows that even astheir share of American in-comes more than doubled overthe last thirty years, the richest1 percent of families’ effectivefederal tax rate dropped from37 percent to 29.5 percent.“People making ten,twenty million dollars per yearare all government welfare re-cipients,” said Dean Baker, co-director of the Center for Eco-nomic and Policy Research.“Without the governmentrunning to their assistance, Ci-tibank would be bankrupt to-day, Goldman Sachs would bebankrupt today – most of WallStreet would not exist today. And that’s true of many, mansectors of the economy.” Bak-er cited pharmaceuticals as anexample, saying drugs wouldbe one-tenth of their current
Occupiers camp out in McPherson Square in Washington, D.C. In the month since the occupaon began, tents have lled the square,including those oering food, power, informaon and medical service. (Craig Hudson)
Bank transfer:Customersswitch tocredit unions
Inside
 Jack Evans of Ward 2
brings corporate inuence
to City Council
By Sam Jewler 
 After the mayor and D.C.council chair, Ward 2 Coun-cilmember Jack Evans may bethe city’s third most powerful
elected ofcial. As the longest-
serving member of the D.C.Council and chair of the all-im-portant Finance and Revenue
Committee, he has signicant
sway over how the city spendsits money.
Not only is Evans inu
-ential, he’s also wealthy. In ad-dition to his $125,000 councilsalary, Evans earns $190,000a year from Patton Boggs, thepowerhouse K Street lobby 
rm. But it’s unclear what the
councilmember does to earn
his second six-gure salary. His
Patton Boggs bio used to say,“Mr. Evans advises clients on
real estate matters.” However,
that sentence was removedshortly after this reporter’s Jan-uary 2010 column in the Wash-ington Post.In his decade as FinanceCommittee chair, Evans hasplayed a leading role in “real es-tate matters” that involve largeamounts of public land andtaxpayer subsidies, and haveoften resulted in major rev-enue losses. Examples includethe baseball stadium (cost totaxpayers: $600-plus million),the convention center ($850million – D.C.’s largest publicly 
nanced project ever), and the
convention center hotel ($272million), among others.Evans’ Ward 2 includesDupont Circle, Georgetownand the downtown area, whereD.C. has ongoing occupationsat Freedom Plaza and McPher-son Square on K Street.Over the years, Evans’dual employment has led toquestions regarding potential
conicts of interest. Former
 Washington Post reporter John
Hanrahan recently raised con
-cerns over Evans’ role in theconvention center hotel deal. After spending years pushing for massive public subsidiesto assist Marriott in building a1,175-room luxury hotel, Ev-
By Pete Tucker 
  W  e   t  h  e   9  9  %
McPherson SQ. • Washington, D.C. • Free Vol 1 • Issue 1 • November 8, 2011
 
THE OCCUPIED
Washington Times
3
 
How We Occupy
Radical horizontalism,consensus, and funny handsignals.
3
 
Faces of theMovement
McPherson Squareoccupiers share theirstories.
The Occupied
Washington Times
is funded enrelythrough individualdonaons. We receiveno money from theOccupy DC generalassembly. Please visitwww.occupydc.org/newspaper and sustainour publishing.
2
 
All for One
With two occupaonsin Washington, D.C., we
share one message.
3
 
Leer to
America
Ditch the old divisions.We can all agree on a few
things.
1
 
Occupy Union
Staon
Why we protested aconservaon group.
4
 
Occupy goesGlobal
Millions around the globerise against injusce.
3
 
Lazy!
 
Comebacks to acommon complaint.
By Andrew Breiner & Karina StenquistContinues on 4Continues on 2continues on 2
Members and supporters of the OccupyDC movement parcipate in a ash-mob style protest inUnion Staon on Oct. 20. The acon was in response to the Conservaon Internaonal’s corporategreenwashing of Northrop Grumman and other corporaons. (Craig Hudson)
Out of nowhere, ap-proximately 100 Occupy DCdemonstrators appeared atUnion Station, protesting a$1,000-per-plate fundraiser
hosted by the nonprot Con
-servation International (CI) with chants and music anddancing. On its website heenvironmental organizationclaims to work toward “ahealthy and productive planetfor us all.” But protestors say that given CI’s close corporatepartnerships with companieslike BP, Monsanto, Walmart, Toyata, McDonald’s and Co-ca-Cola, all that it cleans up issoiled reputations.Former Conservation In-ternational employee ChristineMacDonald, spoke out againstCI’s relationship with corporatedonors in her book Green Inc.In an interview, she told The
Nation’s Johann Hari, “About
a week or two after I started, I went to the big planning meet-ing of all the organization’smedia teams, and they startedtalking about this supposedly great new project they wererunning with BP. But I hadread in the newspaper the day before that the EPA [Environ-mental Protection Agency] hadcondemned BP for running 
By Jarrad Davis
ConservationInternationallinked tocorporategreenwashing
Funding
Continues on 2
 
prices in a truly free market in which executives earned lessmoney.Costs of critical servicesare now higher in real terms
than ever before. Health care
coverage costs have doubledsince 2001, to an average$15,000 per family, according to a study by the Kaiser Fam-ily Foundation.2 In turn, theproportion of personal bank-ruptcies coming from healthcare costs has gone up, from46 percent in 2001 to 62 per-cent in 2007. According to the American Journal of Medicine,some 80 percent of the bank-rupt had health insurance, but
it was insufcient to save themfrom nancial ruin.
Education costs in thiscountry are higher than everbefore. Nationwide, studentdebt is approaching $1 trillion – more than national creditcard debt. The average class of 2009 college graduate is facing $24,000 of debt, according tothe Project on Student Debt.Only about a third can pay theirloans back on time, in largepart because of the dismal jobmarket. 4 Some 22 percent of 2009 college graduates have no work; according to a study atNortheastern University, an ad-ditional 22 percent are working jobs that don’t require a collegedegree.In Washington, D.C., theaverage debt for recent collegegraduates is $30,000, greaterthan in any of the 50 states. The Project on Student Debtlists American University asone of the twenty highest debtuniversities in the country.Social mobility, the move-ment of people between in-come levels, is now little morethan an American dream. TheUS consistently ranks as one of the least socially just countriesin the Western world. Blacks
and Hispanics have seen no
rise in real income since Mar-tin Luther King had his dream,and a third of the middle classis falling into poverty. Ameri-cans live in a world more pro-ductive than ever, yet it is one with higher costs, fewer jobsand lower-paying jobs. The American dream is areality only for those at the top – the other 99 percent of ushave fallen asleep. Now begins
the great awakening. •
 American dreamfalling out of reachfor most
continued from 1
ans recused himself from vot-ing on the issue at the very lastminute. Months later, when thedeal became ensnarled in legaltroubles, Evans un-recusedhimself and reconciled the warring parties. Two weeks ago, in an in-terview with TheFightBack,
Hanrahan questioned why the
 Ward 2 councilmember hasyet to submit a written expla-nation for his 2009 recusals, asrequired by law. “If the laws areon the books, follow them, Mr.
Evans,” Hanrahan said. The
following day, Evans lashedout at the veteran reporter,calling him “a f---ing idiot”in an interview with City Pa-per’s Loose Lips. When askedby email if he apologized forthis statement, Evans replied,“No.”Evans, whose PattonBoggs salary exceeds his coun-cil income, has been excused
from following the conict-
of-interest-disclosure law by an April legal opinion fromthe council’s general counsel. V. David Zvenyach wrote that
Evans doesn’t have to le a
 written explanation becausethe “appearance of a poten-
tial conict” is not enough to
require disclosure. Evans told The Occupied Washington
 Times he does not plan to le
an explanation for his recusals.“There’s nothing here,” he toldthe Post’s Mike DeBonis.Excusing Evans fromexplaining his recusals is sig-
nicant because unlike lying 
to reporters, which may resultin bad press, lying on a legaldocument can be a criminal of-
fense. •
Pete Tucker is a local D.C. reporter at The- FightBack.org.
Evans brings K St.to City Council
Continued from 1
“If the laws
are on the
books,follow them,Mr. Evans.”
 There are two occupa-tions in Washington, D.C. We
ght for the same vision of 
a nation that promotes thegeneral welfare of its people without regard for - or un-
due inuence from - their ac
-cess to wealth. The Occupied Washington Times, created by the occupiers of McPhersonSquare, and The Occupied Washington Post, created by the Stop the Machine occupi-ers of Freedom Plaza, buildour solidarity on the knowl-edge that we share the supportof the majority of Americanpeople. An ABC News/Washing-ton Post poll found that 80 per-cent of Americans oppose theCitizens United v. Federal Elec-tion Commission SupremeCourt Decision, including 65percent who strongly oppose.Citizens United allowed cor-porations to spend unlimitedamounts of money to advertisein elections, greatly expanding their power to choose politi-cians and create the policiesthey want. A 60 Minutes/Vanity Fairpoll showed that a large major-ity of Americans choose taxing the rich as their preferred way 
to address the decit. Yet most
politicians have neglected to se-riously consider this approach.Eighty percent of Ameri-cans don’t want the govern-
ment to cut Social Security. Yet
Congress is considering cutting Social Security to lower the def-icit, which many economistsconsider far less urgent thanthe unemployment crisis.Eighty-eight percent of  Americans supported banning bank bonuses or taxing themat 50 percent, according to aBloomberg poll taken afterthe taxpayer-funded bailout.
 Yet these proposals were never
discussed by our elected repre-sentatives. And once again thiselection season, the two majorparty presidential candidates,
as well as the most inuential
legislators, will be courting the
nancial sector for tens of mil
-lions of dollars in donations. We the 99 percent declarea democracy that listens moreto wealth than to public opin-ion unethical, illegitimate andself-destructive. We demandthat we the American people
be heard - for the benet of the 100 percent. •
Occupy DC and Stop the Machine share common ground
The OWT and OWPEditorial Boards2
Occupiers collaborate to spread the word about the growingmovement. (Craig Hudson)
November 8, 2011
OPINION
the most polluting plant in the whole country.... But nobody in that meeting, or anywhereelse in the organization, wantedto talk about it. It was a taboo.
 You weren’t supposed to ask if 
BP was really green. They were‘helping’ us, and that was it.”Northrop Grumman isanother corporate donor back-ing Conservation Internation-al. Their President and CEO, Wes Bush, sits on Cl’s Boardof Directors and was attend-ing the October 20 fundraiser when Occupy D.C. arrived.According to a 2008 re-port by the Political Econo-my Research Institute at theUniversity of Massachusetts,Northrop Grumman released460,000 pounds of toxic air inone year. The EnvironmentalProtection Agency has alsolinked the company to 52 toxic wastes sites within the UnitedStates.
Yet despite the seemingly 
obvious environmental dam-age being caused by compa-nies like Northrop Grumman,Conservation Internationalmaintains that they and the restof their Business and Sustain-ability Council are, “a commu-nity of companies committedto leveraging their businessexperience and resources to
protect nature for the benet
of humanity.”New Zealand-basedresearcher and writer, AzizChoudry, denounced Conser- vation International, stating,“CI’s track record suggests amotivation to conserve biodi- versity as a resource for bio-prospecting for its private sec-tor partners rather than any concern for the rights of thepeoples who have lived withand protected these ecosystemsfor so long.” Bio-prospecting isthe discovery of new and use-ful biological samples, typically in less-developed countries,either with or without the helpof indigenous knowledge, and with or without compensation. The Amerindian Peoples Association expressed “deepconcern” when ConservationInternational did not consult with the indigenous residentsof southern Guyana beforeentering into a memorandumof understanding with the gov-ernment of Guyana, which al-
lows the nonprot to turn their
traditional lands into “protect-ed” lands.The Mexican Centerfor Political Analysis and So-cial and Economic Research(CAPISE) announced muchstronger worries, calling Con-servation International “the Trojan horse of major trans-national corporations andthe U.S. government.” CAP-ISE continued on to say that,“Conservation International’sstrategy is to gather informa-tion and buy large tracts of land with high bio-prospecting potential, which allows it toadminister natural and/or stra-tegic resources and place themat the disposal of major trans-nationals.”In order to investigate theaccusations of greenwashinand bio-prospecting againstConservation International,the British magazine Don’tPanic had two of their report-ers go undercover, pretending to be representatives of Lock-heed Martin—the world’s larg-est multinational arms com-pany—to see how CI interacts with its corporate partners. The undercover report-
ers met with a senior ofcial
at Conservation International who offered “Lockheed Mar-tin” a chance to join CI’s Busi-ness Sustainability Council for$37,500 per year. That offercame after the reporters hadstated in an email that theirmain interests were not to pro-tect the environment, but rath-
er to raise their “green prole.” The ofcial from CI assured
them that companies are notbound by Conservation Inter-national to participate in any kind of sustainability practices.Conservation Interna-tional’s alliance with corpora-tions appears to be its only concern. CI accepts money from large-scale polluters whilepraising those same compa-nies’ small-scale green effortsand harmful actions like bio-prospecting.
Heydon Prowse, one of 
the reporters who went un-dercover, said, “ConservationInternational’s dependence oncorporate funding makes themunwilling to exert any pressureon polluters to change their ways,The Occupied Washing-ton Times contacted Conser- vation International for com-ment, but they did not return
a reply. •
Conservation International trades green cover for prot
Sophie Vick lis a hand-made OccupyDC ag over the crowd at theOct. 20 Union Staon protest against corporate greenwashing, oneof many acons carried out by occupiers. (Craig Hudson)
 The graph at left depicts the steady gains made in American productivity over the last thirty years compared tothe massive gains in income for thetop one percent and the essentially stagnant development of averageoverall wages. The graph was puttogether by Mother Jones, whichreported that if median householdincome had kept pace with theeconomy since 1970, it would now be over $90,000, instead of the cur-rent $50,000.
No shared sacrifice
Source: Mother Jones
Continued from 1
 
I’m an Iraqi war veteran. I was aninterrogator and I saw this gov-ernment’s policy when it cameto occupying other countries.…I would interrogate individu-als and the same story kept oncoming up over and over again:“I have to feed my kids”… “It iswrong you guys are here.” Thisgovernment condions its sol-diers to dehumanize people.You’re not ghng people orIraqis or Afghans, you’re ghng
terrorists or insurgents.
Meet Your Neighbors
 Americans are increas-
ingly dissatised with the in
-stitutions of our national life. A recent Gallup poll revealed
diminished public condence
in areas as diverse as business,labor, banks, medicine, mediaand the criminal justice system.Congress’ approval rating hov-ers around 9 percent.
 Yet nothing elicits as
much disappointment and an-ger as the state of our repre-sentative democracy. Citizensdecry the gridlock of the polit-ical system and loathe the po-larized nature of our discourse. There is collective frustration with our 220-year-old govern-ment’s inability to bring us to-gether to solve the importantissues of the day. The Occupy movementspreading across the UnitedStates expresses this frustra-tion with mainstream politicsby conceiving and practicing democracy in a wholly differ-ent way. Namely, the occupa-tions are exercises in direct, orconsensus-based, democracy. Truly democratic decision-making, occupiers assert, is aleaderless, active and collab-orative effort that hears andrecognizes all voices. It is not apassive, competitive affair thatreduces social problem-solving to replacing one set of politi-cians with another.By choosing to relate toeach other in a radically egali-tarian, horizontal, and non-coercive fashion, and by mak-ing decisions by consensus asopposed to voting, occupi-ers assert that individuals canmanage their affairs withoutrepresentatives. All are capableof direct participation in theprocess. The general assembly is the Occupy movement’sdecision-making body. Every occupier is encouraged to at-tend. Individuals and commit-tees submit proposals that thegroup discusses at length andamends to address all con-cerns. Instead of voting pro-posals up or down, the generalassembly attempts to reachconsensus, meaning that every person in attendance agrees tolet the proposal go forward.In this way, diverse par-ticipants come to workable,collective solutions that all canaccept. Even if an individualdoes not entirely agree with theassembly’s decision, she comesaway with a stake in it since her voice has been heard and herconcerns have been addressed.Importantly, these meth-ods are working effectively. The movement is growing,managing itself and incorpo-rating new participants with various views and interests.Faced with an unrespon-sive government, occupierscreated their own responsiveone. The movement providesa model for the better soci-ety it hopes to bring about by showing that it is possible. Theoccupation points to the pos-sibility of an engaged world, where general assemblies arepresent in every neighborhood
and people condently andably manage their own affairs. •
How we occupy
Finding my second occupation
I’m occupying because I’msick of the hypocrisy and I’msick of all the lies. I’m sick of what it’s done to humanity...My aunt was diagnosed withleukemia, and because of ourmessed up health care systemshe was unable to get medi-cal assistance. No insurancewould take her, and that to me
is the most inhumane thing
ever... I’ve been out here sinceday 2 of Occupy DC. I didn’tknow what to expect at rst;I had no expectaons. I was just like, “Oh my god, the mehas nally come. People havereally awoken, and we’re not just talking now - it’s acon.I believe that things dras-cally need to change. I’m preyfreaked out by what looks likelyto happen within my lifemewhen it comes to global warm-ing and climate change. As wellas just the destrucon of earth,especially the lengths we’re go-ing to to get more fossil fuels:fracking, mountain top removaland deep-water drilling. It is justgeng more and more destruc-ve.I was at Columbia University in1968, where we had a majorstudent strike sit-in, whichinvolved a thousand studentsgeng arrested as part of a ghtagainst racism and as part of aght against the Vietnam War.Aer that, I connued beingacve against the Vietnam Warmovement unl 1975 whenthe war ended. At that point Igot a job as a transit worker inWashington and I started ghngfor improved wages, benetsand job security for the workersthere. All those experiencesshowed me that people will ghtwhen condions are right andthat you can actually make some
progress.
By Brian Knudsen
“Get a job!” someoneshouted from their car at agroup of occupiers sitting inMcPherson Square. Beforeanyone could respond, thecar was gone. The refrain isa common one.It comes not just fromhecklers on the streets butalso blasted from mediaoutlets and proliferated in waves on the Internet. Themost immediate thought – other than “I have one!” – is“Where?”Unemployment cur-rently lingers around ninepercent, meaning close to 14million Americans are with-out a job. Nearly 40 percentof the unemployed havebeen out of work for oversix months. Chronic unem-ployment often degrades aperson’s attractiveness to po-tential employers. The aver-age length of unemploymenthas shot from 13.5 weeks be-tween 1948 and 2007 to 40.5 weeks today.
 These gures do not
include the people that havesimply stopped looking be-cause jobs are nowhere to befound. Job participation, theamount of people of work-ing age who are employedor actively seeking work, hasfallen to 64 percent. Fiveand half million Americansare unemployed and not re-
ceiving benets, up from 1.4
million last year. With thelowered job participationrate and underemploymentfactored in, unemploymentrises to 17.5 percent. Of the Americans that have man-
aged to nd and hold onto
jobs, 40 percent have mini-mum or low-wage servicejobs. These statistics, whileshocking, are not news. Things have been bad for along time now, something the people yelling “get a job”are most likely aware of. Theprevailing individualist spiritof our times lays the blamefor the depressed job marketsquarely on the unemployed. The facts, though, place theblame elsewhere. The 2008 bailouts weresupposed to allow for greater
nancial liquidity. But lend
-ing by commercial banksdropped nearly one trilliondollars as of mid-2010 andstill has not recovered. In-stead of lending to business-es and promoting growth,and, in turn, jobs, the bankshave been buying up trea-sury bonds. Bank invest-ment in treasury bonds leaptnearly $500 billion in 2011.In effect, the banks took themoney that the federal gov-ernment’s interest-free loan,and loaned it back to thegovernment with interest. This essentially free money 
contributed to bank protsof $58 billion in the rst six
months of the year.Rather than stimulatethe economy, the bailoutshelped pad Wall Street pock-ets, and now, nearly three
years after the nancial col
-
On the same page, for once
Dear conservative friendand co-worker, We don’t agree on much,do we? It seems like the act of opening our mouths instantly leads to stubborn disagree-ment. Despite being a govern-ment employee, you believegovernment should be smaller;I think it should be bigger.
 You still have some faith in the
trickle down effect, and I think it’s a form of liquid torture. Tome, conservatives are heart-less; to you, liberals are spine-less. Although you spare methe Bill O’Reilly banter, I coulddo without the David Brookstripe, as I’m sure you couldmy Noam Chomsky quotes.Nevermind gay marriage, gunrights, search and seizure laws,and abortion.But there’s hope for usyet, my friend, because the po-litical climate is a little more ac-
By Eric Blair 
commodating for dissent thesedays. We are both shocked by events like Citizens United, when the Supreme Court al-lowed corporations to writeblank checks in support of political candidates. And it’s
because we gured out just
how much money Wall Streetfunnels into all of these candi-dates. Biased mainstream me-dia outlets across the politicalspectrum have kept us at odds. And it’s ironically because of these childish standstills inCongress, the forever-looming shutdowns, and the broken
promises of elected ofcials in
both parties that there’s hope. What seems to tie us to-gether is the sense of power-lessness we feel watching ourgovernment quibble over petty issues as the country slinks fur-ther down the road of inequal-ity and stagnation. It wouldn’tbe so bad if we could vote innew members of Congress todo our bidding, but we both
gured out that we can only 
elect new actors playing thesame characters every twoyears. My friend, we’ve evenagreed on a common reasonfor this: it’s the money of cor-porations, unions and the elite,not ours, that fuels their cam-paigns, making our represen-tatives beholden to them. Onour lowly government sala-ries, we’re far from being ableto buy airtime to run viciousattack ads during “AmericanIdol.” I believe it was you whosuggested we think about pub-
lic nancing of political cam
-paigns to get corporate money out of our ballot boxes. Couldit be we’ve found some com-mon ground?It seems like a strangetime in this country’s his-tory when the two of us can’tagree on the quality of yourgirlfriend’s baking, but we canagree that our founding fathers would be appalled at the stateof our democracy today. Weboth accept that special inter-est groups’ grip on govern-ment has grown too strong,and that the general welfare of this country depends on some-thing changing. We might notsee eye-to-eye on what all of those changes should be, but atleast we can level on the funda-mental problems. Thanks forthe civility – I’ll see you Mon-
day morning. •
3
OPINION
By Kathryn Seidewitz
lapse, millions of Americans
still can’t nd work. Many 
occupiers are in the samesituation as most Americans – a Wall Street Journal pollrecently found that 85 per-cent of Wall Street occupiershad jobs.Counter-protesters thathad planned to appear at Oc-cupy DC handing out jobapplications on October 20never materialized. Occu-piers had taken their lunchbreaks to greet the counter-protestors; others had print-ed copies of their resumes,ready to apply. Many weretoo busy at work to come
down and greet them. •
Rose Jaffe
Truly democracdecision-making is acollaborave eort that hearsand recognizes all voices.
Michael
Patterson
McPherson Sq. Occupiers at a glance
Kelsey Tribble
Mike
Golash
Rooj
 Alwazir 
In a time ofuniversaldeceit, tellingthe truth is a revolutionary  act.

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->