On Saturday, I stopped by the first public meeting of Occupy Winston-Salem, one of reportedly 200 groups across the country looking to expand the Occupy Wall Street protest that’s been taking place in New York City’s financial district since mid-September.
I was equal parts curious and dubious. Occupy Wall Street prides itself on being a leaderless grassroots movement that isn’t affiliated with any political party or group, and they’ve been criticized by some in the media as not having clear demands other than “greed is bad.” That isn’t entirely fair… but I’ll say more about that in a moment. I wasn’t sure what to expect from the meeting – I had a vague expectation that it would be a handful of college students who just wanted to be able to tell people they were involved, and I was pleasantly surprised to see that this was far from true.
For starters, in the crowd of 150+, there appeared to be as many people over 60 as under 30. I counted exactly two other people that I know from volunteering with the local Democratic Party. In its coverage, the Winston-Salem Journal even quotes one attendee saying he hopes Occupy W-S doesn’t get wrapped up with local Dems or labor unions. Second, the people facilitating the discussion were clear that Occupy W-S is a non-violent movement, but in terms of other specific actions, the group would be what the members of the group wanted it to be. Everyone is heard. It’s not enough to say “OMG, we have to DO SOMETHING!!!” – you need to think about exactly what you want to do and why.
While I still think that the Occupy movement needs to define its aims a little better – because if you don’t define yourself others will be happy to do it for you – I think there’s tremendous value in building a coalition where people don’t have to agree 100 percent with one another to participate.
So let me tell you what I think:
For some time, I’ve been thinking about R.J. Reynolds. Apologies to my Moravian ancestors who literally built this city, but Reynolds is arguably the person who made Winston-Salem what it is today. It wasn’t just his business (and note: this is not the place to make judgments about that business’s products), it was the way he ran that business.
Reynolds chose Winston-Salem for his tobacco company’s HQ because of its railroad hub (HELLO, infrastructure!), and employed a hell of a lot of locals in his factories and, later, at his private home, Reynolda. Reynolda Village was originally meant to house the estate’s workers, and the family provided basic services, a school and a church for that staff (and today the Village is a high-end shopping center/ office space, still generating revenue). Reynolds offered his employees short working hours and relatively high pay, and housing for some. Moreover, his wife Katherine started a literacy tutoring program for employees and their families. And here’s the best part – in the late 19th century, Reynolds was a city commissioner in Winston (this was before the merger with Salem), and he pushed for creation of property taxes and income taxes.
In other words, one of the wealthiest men in North Carolina, who after his marriage would build his own fiefdom, and who could’ve at any time pulled up stakes for anywhere else in the country, essentially volunteered to fork over part of his personal wealth to the public. At one point, Reynolds was the single-largest taxpayer in North Carolina. And this isn’t even taking into account the millions that Reynolds and his family donated to area schools, social service groups, museums, arts organizations and more – philanthropy that his descendants continue even today.
Why do all that? It’s possible that Reynolds was moved out of pure altruism. But I have to believe that the businessman who was savvy enough to add sugar to chewing tobacco and invent pre-rolled cigarettes understood – like Henry Ford would later – that taking care of the other 99 percent is ultimately good for business.
And that’s why I’m attracted to Occupy Wall Street. I’m not remotely anti-business or socialist; I like getting paid, and owning my own home for the past six years has made me understand even more than I already did the importance of having an incentive to keep improving what you have. The problem is that too many corporations don’t have that incentive, because their models are driven by the quarter, as opposed to the quarter-century. Plenty of businesses contribute to building their communities, and they’re wonderful neighbors. I don’t have any interest in tearing them down; the opposite, in fact.
It just seems to me that, for the last half-century or so, a handful of corporations have been working hand-in-glove with a permanent federal government establishment to rig public incentives in their favor. In doing so, they’re making it harder and harder for smaller businesses to operate. They’re the ones who are anti-business, not me.
Meanwhile, this establishment has been successful in keeping us, that other 99 percent, divided against one another by exploiting differences on social issues or just outright creating fictions like the Welfare Queen or the Evil Big Brother Regulator That’s Cramping My Invisible Hand. I’ve got news for you: in terms of regulations, it isn’t the ones about how much lead you can leave in your tuna fish that are driving companies out of business. (If so, I’m kind of glad you’re out of business, because… um, LEAD IN MY FOOD.) Dealing with building codes in both of the counties that your distribution hub straddles is a far bigger headache for a business.
There was a time in this country when businesses and the public (either through a government or just as individuals) were willing to cooperate with one another for their mutual benefit. It wasn’t the public that changed. For me, Occupy Wall Street isn’t about bringing down “the man.” It’s about stripping away this plutocracy that simultaneously strangles small businesses, frees governments from real accountability and locks the very largest corporations together in an ever-downward-spiraling suicide pact.
I don’t want to eliminate capitalism; I want to return to it in its most functional form. There is no better system for stabilizing a society and incentivizing growth. But capitalism can’t work in a country where a small business can’t get a loan or a customer can’t finance a major purchase, or where entire industries exist only because you and I subsidize them, or where our elected officials happily cut public services so we can keep those subsidies coming to companies that couldn’t hack it on a truly free market.
It’s time to hit the “reboot” button.
No comments:
Post a Comment