Lately my mind has been completely preoccupied with transitive closures and Walker's Theorem, but at the one-month anniversary of Occupy Wall Street I think it's probably time to admit this is not a passing fad, it's an important development, and I should pay more attention to it.
People I respect a lot endorse the movement, and the demands strike a chord with me in a vague sense, but I worry that in practice I'm too "neoliberal" for them. A Tea Party analogy might be OWS:Daniel::Tea Party:Senate GOP Leadership.
But they appear to have staying power - occupying a single site for a month is more along the lines of the Arab Spring than the Tea Party, and we have reports today that they've got $300,000 stashed away and have storage lockers full of supplies.
- Evan has an interesting post about the "Occupy Wall Street Library", which apparently you can donate to.
- Bob Murphy shares a discussion between Tom Woods and Stefan Molyneux on the movement. This might come as somewhat of a shock, but their primary critique is that OWS is not libertarian.
-This is an interesting graphic from the Wikipedia page:
If I were an OWS organizer, I'm not sure which trajectory I would prefer - but the contrast is interesting. I'm guessing part of the difference is due to the fact that the primary instigator of the Tea Party movement (Santelli) was a media personality, so it's no wonder they had quick coverage.
- And here's an interesting solution to a problem that Joe Stiglitz faced:
Any other thoughts/interesting points on OWS?