The Occupy [Wall Street] movement: theological impulses and liberation praxis.

Nessan, Craig L.

In the plot of the film, "Network" (1976), a TV news anchorman abandons his script and generates a populist movement, tapping into popular rage against the "way things are." At the apex of his denunciation of the injustices of the system," Howard Beale urgently appeals to the masses: "I want you to get mad! Get up right now, open your windows, stick out your heads and yell: 'I'm as mad as hell and I'm not going to take it anymore!" in the end, however, even this modern day Jeremiah becomes co-opted by the power of "the system," meaning the capitalist system, that transforms every phenomenon into a commodity from which to exploit a profit.

"We're mad as hell and we're not going to take it anymore!" The deep sense of injustice of the "common people" which emerged not only in the United States but in numerous countries across the globe, ignited in September 2011 as the fire known as "Occupy Wall Street," or more simply, "Occupy." My analysis, theological reflections, and ethical proposals originate from the context of the United States. Some of my interpretation therefore is quite particular to the political, social, and especially economic situation of my country. At the same time, certain aspects of this interpretation may parallel more closely developments in other parts of the world. Especially, in relation to the theological impulses and implications for liberation praxis, I advocate that these themes need to unite progressive Christians across the globe.

The Face of the Occupy Movement in the U.S.: The Middle Class as Endangered Species

Why this movement and why at this particular moment in time? The stories of Occupy activists vary greatly, but share a common theme: deep discontent with and dislocation in relation to the established global economic order. While some of the Occupy movement founders include longtime leftist activists, many have joined forces due to emerging circumstances that have created the conditions for unprecedented activism in the public square. Sara is a recent graduate from a state university with a degree in the liberal arts. She finds herself encumbered with nearly $100,000 in student loans, while the only job opportunities appear to be ill the service sector of the economy at no more than $10 per hour and with little or no prospect for adequate health or retirement benefits. Robert lost his job in the banking industry in 2008 and as a consequence was forced to default on his mortgage, losing his $350,000 house to foreclosure and compelling him, his wife, and two young children to live with his in-laws. Jasmine has lived on the streets of a major city For the last three years. She has been given companionship and hope in community with the tent village among Occupy activists. Butch served in the first Persian Gulf War, suffering severe medical problems and mental health issues ever since the time of his military service. He has found the veteran services dramatically inadequate to provide him the medical care and financial support needed in light of his chronic post-traumatic stress disorder. Natasha participates in Occupy as an off-duty police officer. Although her police work has obligated her involvement in the arrests of Occupy protestors breaking the law in acts of civil disobedience, her own political convictions and economic situation have led her to off-duty support of the movement. John used to work in the auto industry. As a young man he took for granted the labor contracts and benefits negotiated by his labor union, which allowed him to provide a decent life for his family. In the 1980s, however, first the labor union was dismantled through the demand for concessions by the corporation; eventually, the assembly plant itself was moved to Mexico. Ever since his unemployment benefits ran out, John has had a low-paying job at Walmart. These are but a few sketches of the characters who populate the Occupy movement in the U.S.

The "Declaration of the Occupation of New York City" pointedly names many of the grievances that unite the advocates of Occupy (1):

* They have taken our houses through an illegal foreclosure process, despite not having the original mortgage.

* They have taken bailouts from taxpayers with impunity and continue to give executives exorbitant bonuses.

* They have poisoned the food supply through negligence and undermined the farming system through monopolization.

* They have continuously sought to strip employees of the right to negotiate for better pay and safer working conditions.

* They have held students hostage with tens of thousands of dollars of debt on education, which is itself a human right.

* They have consistently outsourced labor and used that outsourcing as leverage to cur workers' health care and pay.

* They have influenced the courts to achieve the same rights as people, with none of the culpability or responsibility.

* They determine economic policy, despite the catastrophic failures their policies have produced and continue to produce.

* They have donated large sums of money to politicians, who are responsible for regulating them.

* They purposely keep people misinformed and fearful through their control of the media.

Who are "they"? "They" are the 1%, the economic elite class, a plutocracy, whose excessive control of both the domestic and global economy mobilizes the forces of Occupy.

According to the statistics of the Congressional Budget Office, between 1979 and 2007 income growth among the various segments of the U.S. population, measured in terms of "real (inflation-adjusted) income growth after federal taxes, are staggering: cop 1% = +275%; next 19% = +65%; middle 60% = +40%; and bottom 20% = +18%.2 As a consequence of such dramatically unequal income growth, the proportion of "after-tax income" based on proportion of population reveals stunning disparity:

* The top 1% = 8% in 1979, compared to 17 Percent in 2007 (more than doubling);

* the next 19% = 35% in 1979, compared to 36% in 2007 (virtually unchanged);

* the middle 60% = 50% in 1979, compared to 43% in 2007 (reduced by 7%);

* the poorest 20% = 7% in 1979, compared to 5% in 2007 (reduced by 2 Percent).

In 2005 the portion belonging to the top 20% came to exceed the portion belonging to the remaining 80% most of this increase going to the economic elites at the top of the pyramid. In 1979, the top 1 Percent held approximately the same amount as the lowest 20% in 2007, the top 1 Percent has progressed to possess as much as the lowest 40%. According to a study of income growth by the University of California in 2010, 93% of the total growth went to the wealthiest 1 Percent of American households, while the remaining 99 Percent divided the left-over 7%.(3) The spotlight shining on the 1% by the Occupy movement is grounded not only in rhetoric but reality!

One of the key factors in the emergence of the Occupy movement at this moment in time involves the precarious position of the middle class in the U.S. Within my own lifetime, I have witnessed the erosion of the middle class.(4) Speaking autobiographically, I grew up in a lower-middle class family, whose economic livelihood could be sustained by my father's work in the automobile industry, with salary and benefits protected by his labor union, as supplemented by an additional part-time job as a house painter. Our family could thereby enjoy the benefits of a stay-at-home mother. Today in the U.S. very few jobs are protected by the collective bargaining rights oflabor unions. For the majority of American families, it requires the income from two adults to sustain a middle class lifestyle, including the possibility of home ownership. For those with minimum wage jobs (currently ranging from $7.25 to $9.04 per hour, depending on state, and with most states on the lower end of this spectrum) or other low-paying jobs, even families with two incomes struggle to sustain what once was taken for granted as the prerequisites of a middle class lifestyle. At the same time, work benefits, such as health insurance or old age pension, have severely declined with more and more of the financial burden shifted from employer to employees. High unemployment figures ensure stiff competition in the job market, even in the lowest paying service sector, suppressing wages all the more.

Middle class America is at a tipping point, if it has not already irreversibly tripped over the threshold into downward mobility. Given the increasing costs that will need to be paid for energy (especially oil), other depleted natural resources, and the eventual repair of the environment, the prospects for the revival of the middle class are dim. Moreover, the economic outlook for the younger generations is even bleaker; high indebtedness from student loans coupled with low paying jobs equals loss of hope in the "American Dream." It is no coincidence that the Occupy movement has emerged in tandem with placing the American middle class on the endangered species list.

American Populism and Social Media

The United States has a history of significant, though imperfect, social action by populist movements in protest and advocacy against the influence of excessive wealth. Populism can be defined as a movement by common citizens to mobilize people for economic, social, and/or political change. Populist movements normally appeal to the interests of the common people in juxtaposition to the interests of an elite class that maintains inordinate influence and control over economic and political systems.

Two instances of American populism are especially instructive. First, in the 1880s-1890s the increasing concentration of power and wealth in rural communities--undergirded by the ever-increasing mechanization of agriculture, combined with the monopolization of agricultural supplies and markets--gave rise to the "farmers alliance" movement.5 its the ownership of land transferred from family-owned Farms to large land owners (who employed "tenant farmers" as dependent laborers), efforts were made--typically by farmer alliances organized in particular states--to build cooperatives for the purchase of agricultural supplies and for organized sale of agricultural products to the markets. In the first document of the populist movement from 1886, the "Cleburne Demands," called for "such legislation as shall secure to our people freedom from onerous and shameful abuses that the industrial classes are now suffering at the hands of arrogant capitalists and powerful corporations." (6) Calling for a national conference between farmer alliances and labor organizations, they "proposed regulation of railroad rates, heavy taxation of land held only for speculative purposes, and an increase in the money supply." (7)

By the end of the 1880s the National Farmers Alliance numbered 400,000. Effective organization was evidenced from the creation of cooperatives in Texas to the development of an insurance plan in the Dakotas. As the movement evolved into the Populist Parry, Mary Ellen Lease spoke at its convention in 1890:

  Wall Street owns the country. it is no longer a government
  of the people, by the people, and for the people, but a
  government of Wall Street, by Wall Street and for Wall
  Street. ... There are thirty men in the United States
  whose aggregate wealth is over one and one-half
  billion dollars. 'There are half a million looking
  for work.. .We want money, land and transportation.
  We want the abolition of the National Banks, and
  we want the power to make loans direct from the
  government. We want the accursed foreclosure
  system wiped our.(8)

The preamble of the People's Parry national convention stated:

  We meet in the midst of a nation brought to the verge
  of moral, political and material ruin. Corruption
  dominates the ballot box, the legislatures, the
  Congress, and touches even the ermine of the
  bench. The people are demoralized. ...
  The newspapers are subsidized or muzzled;
  public opinion silenced; business prostrate,
  our homes covered with mortgages, labor
  impoverished, and the land concentrating
  in the hands of capital.(9)

The parallels with contemporary critiques of the political and economic crisis are haunting.

The central challenge faced by American populism at the end of the nineteenth century involved forging a united effort from diverse interest groups. Building an alliance across the hideous racial divide between blacks and whites, when combined with the challenge of aligning rural farmer alliances with the mostly urban labor movement, was virtually impossible to achieve. The death knell for the 1890s populist movement sounded in the attempt to build an alliance of forces in the electoral politics of the presidential election in 1896. (10) Instead of remaining an independent movement, popul ists chose to side with the Democratic candidate, William Jennings Bryant. Through the support of the financial empires of Marcus Daly and William Randolph Hearst, Bryant was defeated by William McKinley, for whom the corporations and press mobilized, in the first massive use of money in an election campaign. Even the hint of Populism in the Democratic Parry, it seemed, could not be tolerated. ... (11)

The achievements of this late nineteenth century populist movement are instructive in at least three ways. First, it demonstrates the possibility of mobilizing widespread participation by the American people in protest and activism against excessive economic disparity. Second, it suggests the potential for new forms of communication technology (in this case newspapers, journals, and books) to spread information in raising expectations of reform. The populist magazine, National Economist, had 100,000 readers in the 1890s, while books by populist leaders, such as Wealth Against Commonwealth by Henry Demarist Lloyd or Financial School by William Harvey Coin, were quite influential. (12)Third, one should note the danger involved in seeking to link the populist movement of the 1890s with conventional electoral politics and parties.

A second instance of populism arose in the 1930s when the United States was plunged into the throes of the Great Depression. During the 1920s prosperity again had become increasingly concentrated among an elite at the top of the wealth pyramid. However, the stock market crash of 1929 plunged the entire nation into deep economic recession. The "New Deal" reforms introduced during the presidency of Franklin Delano Roosevelt (such as the National Recovery Act or Agricultural Adjustment Administration), while reputed as favorable to the working class, were factually very limited in their effectiveness and far more effective in protecting the interests of the wealthy [class..sub.13] More successful were the varied populist movements, such as the "Unemployed Councils" and other labor organizing efforts, carried out by the common people, which led to better living conditions for the working class. Charles R. Walker wrote about the Unemployed Councils:

  The Council's weapon is democratic force of numbers,
  and their function is to prevent evictions of the
  destitute, or if evicted to bring pressure to bear
  on the Relief Commission to find a new home; if an
  unemployed worker has his gas or his water turned
  off because he can't pay for it, to see the proper
  authorities; to see that the unemployed who are
  shoeless and clothesless get both; to eliminate
  through publicity and pressure discrimination
  between Negroes and white persons, or against
  the foreign born, in matters of relief ... to
  march people down to relief headquarters and
  demand they be fed and clothed. Finally to
  provide legal defense for all unemployed
  arrested for joining parades, hunger marches,
  or attending union meetings. (14)

Instances of constructive action through such self-help initiatives were widespread.

Through collective bargaining the labor movement also gave expression to 1930s-brand populism. The American Federation of Labor (AFL) and Committee for Industrial Organization (CIO) began as grassroots movements, whose effectiveness depended largely on rank and file laborers occupying" workplaces through sit-down and wildcat strikes.(15) Labor unions gained power only as owners legitimized them in preference to the unpredictability of grassroots labor organizing. Through the implementation of structures, such as the National Labor Relations Board, the momentum of populist labor organizing lost much of its impetus:

  Factory workers had their greatest influence, and
  were able to exact their most substantial concessions
  from government, during the Great Depression, in
  the years before they were organized into unions.
  Their power during the Depression was not rooted in
  organization, but disruption. (16)

Although government measures (such as the minimum wage and child labor law adopted in 1938) institutionalized gains for some people, many others were left out of their provisions.

One particular populist initiative, the "Share Our Wealth" movement led by Huey Long, deserves special mention. Long, former governor of Louisiana (1928-1932) and U.S. Senator (1932-1935), organized the "Share Our Wealth" program in 1934, advocating for wealth redistribution through a net assets tax on corporations and wealthy individuals as one controversial proposal. Some speculated that Long was planning to run as a third party candidate against Roosevelt in 1936, a possibility that came to an abrupt end when he was assassinated by the relative of a political opponent in September 1935. Major planks of the "Share Our Wealth" platform included:

1. No person would be allowed to accumulate a personal net worth of more than 300 times the average family fortune, which would limit personal assets to between $5 million and $8 million. A graduated capital levy tax would be assessed on all persons with a net worth exceeding $1 million.

2. Annual incomes would be limited to $1 million and inheritances would be capped at $5 million.

3. Every family was to be furnished with a homestead allowance of not less than one-third the average family wealth of the country. Every family was to be guaranteed an annual family income of at least $2000 to $2500, or not less than one-third of the average annual family income in the United States. Yearly income, however, cannot exceed more than 300 times the size of the average family income.

4. An old-age pension would be made available for all persons over 60.

5. To balance agricultural production, the government would preserve/store surplus goods, abolishing the practice of destroying surplus food and other necessities due to lack of purchasing power.

6. Veterans would be paid what they were owed (a pension and healthcare benefits).

7. Free education and training for all students to have equal opportunities in all schools, colleges, universities, and other institutions for training in the professions and vocations of life.

8. The raising of revenue and taxes for the support of this program was to come from the reduction of swollen fortunes from the top, as well as for the support of public works to give employment whenever there may be any slackening necessary in private enterprise.17

After the death of Huey Long this movement soon disintegrated due to mismanagement, factionalism, and the loss of its charismatic founder.

Howard Zinn summarizes the ultimate end of the 1930s American populist movements:

  When the New Deal was over, capitalism remained intact.
  The rich still controlled the nation's wealth, as well
  as its laws, courts, police, newspapers, churches,
  colleges. Enough help had been given to enough people
  to make Roosevelt a hero to millions, but the same
  system that had brought depression and crisis--the
  system of waste, of inequality, of concern for profit
  over human need--remained. (18)

The occasional successes in addressing wealth disparity were fostered by the organizing efforts of courageous citizens in the Unemployed Councils, labor movement, and other organizing efforts, such as "Share Our Wealth." In addition to the use of flyers, newspapers, books, and other print media, 1930s populism made significant use of radio as an emerging medium of communication. (19) Each successive wave of populist movements is fostered by the emergent forms of communications technology. As was the case in the 1880s-1890s populism, black Americans were virtually omitted from the limited gains of others. (20)

Occupy's Radical Critique of the Human and Environmental Costs of Global Capitalism

The Occupy Wall Street Movement traces its beginnings to the call "for protestors to fill the streets of lower Manhattan" issued by Kalle Lasn, editor of the anti-consumerism magazine Adbusters. (21) Strategizing about the movement began in August 2011 as about 100 activists gathered in Manhattan at the same time that the Federal Government deliberated a shutdown due to gridlock over the federal budget deficit. Activist leader, David Graeber, formed a circle to organize a demonstration on Wall Street for September 17. The slogan, "We Are the 99%," is also attributed to Graeber. Momentum was added to the organizing efforts from Lasn's Internet communications from Canada. One fascinating dimension of the Occupy movement has been the constructive use of new social media both to provide educational information about the movement and nearly instantaneous communication to foster organizing efforts and activities. In many ways, the global, or even national, reach of Occupy would he hardly imaginable without the emergent forms of instantaneous electronic communications.

Time Magazine reporter Nate Rawlings describes how the initial march ignited a global movement:

  On Saturday, September 17, 2011, about 2000
  people assembled near the Charging Bull sculpture
  at the southern tip of Manhattan and marched north
  with the intention of camping out on Wall Street.
  They were an eclectic group, mostly young, typically
  dressed in shorts and sneakers; a few even wore suits
  for the occasion. Nearly everyone was fired up with
  indignation about what they saw as a culture of
  out-of-control greed. At first they didn't succeed,
  at least geographically. Police steered them away
  From Wall Street, so they made their way instead to
  Zuccotti Park, just around the corner from Ground
  Zero. (22)

A camp was set up in Zuccotti Park and one week later a march was organized to Union Park, against which the police used pepper spray to detain the protestors. Caught on video, the incident was broadcast on YouTube and within a few hours became a catalyst for growing interest in the movement and its cause. On Saturday, October 2 another march past City Hall and across the Brooklyn Bridge led to mass arrests of protestors to further galvanize and publicize the Occupy movement.

On October 5 the movement expanded through the participation of "several thousand members of more than a dozen labor unions. (23) On October 15 the call for a global "Day of Action" motivated protests from east to west, beginning in New Zealand, across Asia to Europe and North America. The Zuccotti Park encampment was dispersed by police on November 15. From September to November, the Occupy movement spread to places as diverse as Madrid, New York, Cairo, Melbourne, Rome, Santiago, Tokyo, Frankfurt, Tel Aviv, London, and Hong Kong. The sense of righteous indignation at the excessive profits of a few at the expense of the many through the globalized economy drew significant resonance around the world.

At the heart of the principles, methods, and practices of the Occupy movement is the attempt to reclaim participatory democracy--not only grassroots political democracy but the invention of economic democracy. The method for sharing ideas is the "General Assembly," gatherings of people in public spaces to participate in an innovative form of democratic deliberation. The mode of communication is the "human microphone," a practice by which the words of a speaker are echoed in waves, phrase by phrase, through repetition by those assembled. The human microphone was developed in the U.S., because protesters were not allowed to use electronic sound amplification. Among the core principles of the Occupy Wall Street General Assembly are the following:

* engaging in direct and transparent participatory democracy;

* exercising personal and collective responsibility;

* recognizing individuals' inherent privilege and the influence it has on all interactions;

* empowering one another against all forms of oppression;

* redefining how labor is valued;

* the sanctity of individual privacy;

* the belief that education is a human right; and

* endeavoring to practice and support wide application of open source.

"We are daring to imagine a new sociopolitical and economic alternative that offers greater possibility of equality. We are consolidating the other proposed proposals of solidarity, after which demands will follow." (24)

Resentment over the political status quo has been magnified by the excessive profits of global corporations and the banking industry as supported by the laws and policies of the federal government. Tax codes that treat corporations as "individuals," granting them preferential status (25), the $700 billion "bailout" of Wall Street that was chiefly administered by those very institutions that had put the economy at risk in the first place, and the shift in profit-making from the "real" economy (the actual production of goods and services) to the "virtual" economy of maximizing profit (through the management of financial instruments and the largely unregulated "derivatives" market) are urgent problems needing redress. John B. Cobb writes:

... the great corporations are no longer particular
  industries but rather holding companies that own
  multiple industrial and commercial firms and view
  each of their possessions in almost purely financial
  terms. These corporations are hybrids between the
  industrial society of the past and the financial
  society of the present. They often own financial
  companies, and they have no long-term interest in
  any one of the companies they own, other than their
  contribution to the profits of the holding
  company ... The destruction of national economies
  through economic globalization was far more for the
  benefit of finance than of industry. Indeed, U.S.
  industry has suffered massively from economic
  globalization. (26)

As the consequences of economic globalization and the focus on the "virtual economy" take their toll on the lives of real people, not only in distant lands but in the U.S. itself, the majority of people know something is desperately wrong with the direction of the country, but not many can pinpoint the most salient reasons. The Occupy movement has begun to articulate the deep disease and discontent affecting a large segment of the U.S. population, especially in relation to "the subservience of the government to the financial sector." (27)

One of the persistent and chief criticisms leveled against the Occupy movement is that it lacks a clearly articulated set of legislative and policy proposals. Such accusations from countless editorials and political pundits, however, fail to comprehend the radical character of Occupy's challenge to political and economic business as usual. The Occupy movement sees the conventional agenda of partisan politics in the U.S., whether of the Democratic or Republican Parry, as itself fundamental to preserving the status quo, in which an elite--the 1%--profit at the expense of the vast majority of the world's people. Because running For national office in the U.S. requires that candidates (whether for President, Senate, or House of Representatives) accumulate massive sums of money in order to conduct a successful campaign (spending millions of dollars on advertising and publicity), elected officials From both parties are beholden to those wealthy enough who make exceedingly large financial campaign contributions and to lobbying organizations that represent the interests of the economic and corporate elites.

In a real sense, the logic of Occupy deconstructs conventional party politics as ultimately the choice between Tweedledee and Tweedledum. (28)

  [The] two fat little men named Tweedledum and Tweedledee,
  quotes the nursery rhyme ... agree to have a battle, but
   never have one. When they see a monstrous black crow
  swooping down, they take to their heels. The Tweedle
  brothers never contradict each other, even when one
  of them, according to the rhyme, "agrees to have
  a battle." Rather, they complement each other's
  words. (29)

While the election of a Democrat or a Republican to national office does make some incremental difference in the shape of public policy, over the last thirty years the economic advantages accruing to the wealthy elite--regardless of the party in power--have become so one-sided that the real purpose of party politics in Washington appears to be gridlock: ensuring that there be no significant legislative changes to benefit the poor, college students, unemployed, elderly, handicapped, those without health insurance, etc., thereby preserving the economic status quo for the privileged class. Occupy Wall Street unmasks the fusion between global capitalism and neo-liberal democracies and conjures a radical reimagining of political and economic democracy in the U.S. and across the world. (30) In opposition to the excesses of economic globalization as it has come to be supported by national governments on every continent, Occupy seeks to rebuild from the grassroots not only political but especially economic democracy, in order to reform and reconstruct a sustainable society for the majority of the world's people and the earth itself

Theological Impulses

Although many religious people, including Christian leaders, have been actively involved in the Occupy movement, theological discussion has been largely journalistic and mostly located in web-based resources. (31) Two significant treatments by U.S. theologians have been authored by Gary Dorrien and Karen Bloomquist. (32) The theological impulses grounding concern for economic justice are ancient, however, permeating the biblical traditions; raised to prominence by prophetic figures in the history of the church (for example, Martin Luther at the time of the Reformation); and a central argument by liberation theologians of our times, including voices from diverse global contexts from Latin America to Asia. In this section, we trace some central theological claims that line up with the commitments of the Occupy movement, although until now such claims have remained mostly implicit.

The biblical narrative witnesses to the liberating character of God in Jesus Christ. God was first revealed to Israel as the one who hears the cry of the poor and sets free the captive slaves from Egyptian bondage (Exod 6:5-7). The people of God are called to serve as the protectors and deliverers of the vulnerable (Jer 2:3-9). The law code of Israel was characterized by the expectation to safeguard not only the weak among the Jews--widows, orphans, and the poor--but also the needs of the strangers and aliens: "You shall not wrong or oppress a resident alien for you were aliens in the land of Egypt. You shall not abuse any widow or orphan. If you do abuse them, when they cry out to me, I will surely heed their cry..." (Exod 22:21-23). The provisions of the sabbatical year demonstrate the extent of neighbor love and divine restorative justice to renew the land and laborers every seventh year (Lev 25:1-7) and a jubilee year every fiftieth year (Lev 25:9-1 0, 39-42). God's concern for holy justice is concisely summarized in Deur 10:17-18: "For the Lord your God is God of gods and Lord of lords, the great God, mighty and awesome, who is not partial and takes no bribe, who executes justice for the orphan and widow, and who loves the strangers, providing them with food and clothing."

The prophetic office emerged in Israel to hold the kings accountable for their failure to execute God's justice. For example, Isaiah pronounced God's judgment against those who unjustly accumulated the property of others: "Ah, you who join house to house, who add field to field, until there is room for no one but you, and you are left to live alone in the midst of the land! The Lord of hosts has sworn in my hearing: Surely many houses shall be desolate, large and beautiful houses, without inhabitant" (Isa 5:8-9). Such offenses are a violation of God's justice: "... for they have rejected the instruction of the Lord of hosts, and have despised the word of the Holy One of Israel" (Isa 5:24b). Amos raised a prophetic warning against the privileged class of Israel prior to the destruction of the Northern Kingdom: "Hear this word, you cows of Bashan who are on Mount Samaria, who oppress the poor, who crush the needy, who say to their husbands, 'Bring something to drink!' The Lord God has sworn by his holiness: The time is surely coming upon you, when they shall take you away with hooks, even the last of you with fishhooks" (Amos 4:1-2).

Likewise the words of the prophet Hosea: "There is no faithfulness or loyalty, and no knowledge of God in the land. Swearing, lying, and murder, and stealing and adultery break out; bloodshed follows bloodshed" (Hos 4: lb-2). Moreover, Micah declared: "Hear this, you rulers of the house of Jacob and chiefs of the house of Israel, who abhor justice and pervert all equity, who build Zion with blood and Jerusalem with wrong! Its rulers give judgment for a bribe, its priests teach for a price, its prophets give oracles for money; yet they lean upon the Lord and say, 'Surely the Lord is with us! No harm shall come upon us.' Therefore because of you Zion shall be plowed as a field; Jerusalem shall become a heap of ruins..." (3:9-12).

The prophets announced that the Messiah would be the just king, representative of God's righteousness (lsa 11:1-4). When Messiah Jesus arrived, he inaugurated the fulfillment of this prophetic hope: "'The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free, to prodaim the year of the Lord's favor" (Luke 4:18-19). At the center of Jesus' activity was the in-breaking of God's righteous and merciful kingdom. iris no accident that "kingdom" is a political term. Jesus summoned his followers to a new Form of community life--one in which they were sisters and brothers under the rule of God as king. Jesus taught that in God's kingdom the poor, sick, hungry, and oppressed have privileged place: "Blessed are you who are poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. Blessed are you who are hungry, now you will be filled... But woe to you who are rich, for you have received your consolation. Woe to you who are full now, for you will be hungry" (Luke 6:20-21, 24-25). Jesus healed the sick, cast out demons from the possessed, and fed the hungry--signs of divine justice. The Great Commandment summarizes Jesus' commitment to justice: "'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, and with all your soul, and with all your mind.' This is the greatest and first commandment. And a second is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself' On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets" (Matt 22:37-40).

The biblical witness contains a justice trajectory that runs through church history--from concern for the poor in the early church, through the work of renewal figures like Francis of Assisi, and extending into the Reformation era. Martin Luther, although located in the era when capitalism only was emerging, made clear his prophetic denunciation of the abuses of usury and the excesses of a property-money economy:

  There are some who think that they have God
  and everything they need when they have money
  and property: they trust in them and boast in
  them so stubbornly and securely that they care
  for no one else. They, too, have a god--mammon
  by name, that is, money and property--on which
  they set their whole heart. This is the most
  common idol on earth. Those who have money and
  property feel secure, happy, and fearless, as if
  they were sitting in the midst of paradise. On
  the other hand, those who have nothing doubt and
  despair as if they knew of no god at all. We will
  find very few who are cheerful, who do not fret
  and complain, if they do not have mammon. This
  desire for wealth clings and sticks to our nature
  all the way to the grave. (33)

Beginning with this understanding of greed as human idolatry, Luther explicitly attacked the practice of usury:

..people have wanted to lord it over others since
  the apple in paradise, where Adam and Eve wanted to
  be gods in the devil's name. All of us have the same
  apple in our bellies - a usurer and miser desires
  nothing else with all his might than that the whole
  world should die of hunger and thirst, tears and
  distress, so that he can have everything for himself
  alone and everyone else can receive things from him
  as from a god and become his bondservants for
  ever. ... So sweet is the poison of the paradise
  apple that they want to make Mammon their god and
  raise themselves through his power to become gods
  over poor, lost, and miserable people ...(34)

"In Luther's time, capitalist lust and passion for earning profits could be seen in the manipulation of the market through withholding or dumping goods and developing cartels or monopolies, among other deceptive practices." (35)

Economic justice has been advocated by strong Christian voices, like Luther's, throughout church history. The Social Gospel movement at the end of the nineteenth and beginning of the twentieth centuries denounced the radical economic disparity between rich and poor in the wake of the industrial revolution. Walter Rauschenbusch, a chief spokesman for the Social Gospel movement, wrote:

  The individualistic gospel has taught us to
  see the sinfulness of every human heart and
  has inspired us with faith in. the willingness
  and power of God to save every soul that
  comes to him. But it has not given us an
  adequate understanding of the sinfulness
  of the social order and its share in the
  sins of all individuals within Both our
  sense of sin and our faith in salvation
  have fallen short of the realities under
  its teaching. The social gospel seeks to
  bring [human beings] under repentance for
  their collective sins and to create a more
  sensitive and more modern conscience. (36)

In recent decades this call to accountability not merely for individual sin but "structural sin" has become the point of departure for diverse expressions of liberation theology: anti-apartheid theology in South Africa and Namibia, Minjung theology in Korea, Dalit theology in India, Palestinian liberation theology, and, prototypically, Latin American liberation theology. (37)

Liberation theology is grounded in a reading of Scripture and appropriation of the theological tradition that claims the biblical God as a God of justice who hears the cries of the poor; sends prophets to demand righteousness from the powerful, wealthy elites; and empowers common people to act. The method of liberation theology is contained in the word "praxis." Praxis entails critical reflection--biblical, theological, and socio-economical analysis--on the radical disparity between rich and poor. Embedded in the social realities of poor people, liberation theologians shout a dramatic "No!" against the status quo. Drawing upon the social sciences, liberation theologians analyze the factors leading to poverty, drawing upon elements of Marxist analysis, and appealing to the economic theory of dependency. 'This economic analysis has been one of the most provocative aspects of liberation theology.

Liberation theology appeals to the justice trajectory in the Bible and usable traditions from church history to construct a movement for social transformation and justice. Liberation theology insists on practical engagement in changing the structures that hold the poor in bondage. Local initiatives for change by members of basic Christian communities represent the primary form of activism issuing from liberation theology. Because some liberation theologians have advocated the use of counter-violence against structural violence as a legitimate means for social change, liberation theology has sometimes come under severe criticism. North American and European reactions to liberation theology have been extremely polarized, ranging from staunch support to absolute rejection. The social location of liberation theology rooted in the existential experiences of the poor, coupled with its appeal to the justice trajectory oldie Bible, does not allow for simple dismissal of liberation theology's core assertions.

One particular expression of liberation theology with special resonance to the commitments of the Occupy movement is Minjung theology from Korea. Ahn Byung Mu, the imaginative articulator of Minjung theology, focused on the particular concern of Jesus for the ochlos, translated in English as "crowds" and in Korean as mm Jung. Throughout the Gospels (particularly in Mark) the crowds Follow and are drawn toward Jesus as he ministers to their needs, not only their spiritual but especially physical needs. Jesus heals the sick, drives out demons, associates with women, and welcomes the poor: "Go and tell John what you hear and see: the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news preached to them" (Matt 11:4-5). The disciples themselves were called not from the elite class but from the common people, the ochlosl minjune. Ahn writes:

..Jesus of the Gospels was not alone; he was a 'being
  together' with the minjung. We cannot say that there
  were two separate stories: Jesus and then the minjung;
  rather there is only one story of [us]. There are the
  stories of Jesus living among and together with the
  minjung. Therefore, we must admit the gospels are not
  the personal or individual biography of Jesus but the
  history of Jesus' minjung movement. (38)

The minjung is the whole suffering underside of the dominant society. For centuries it has developed traditions of resistance. It has again and again been the source of rebellion when the pain and anger (Han) became unendurable - (39) The ochlosl crowdsl/minjung are the 99! Jesus demonstrated solidarity and deliverance for such as these. How should the followers of Jesus in the twenty - first century connect the justice trajectory of the Bible and the identification of Jesus with the goals and praxis of the Occupy movement?

Liberation Praxis

The term "praxis" refers to a method, deriving from liberation theologies, based on the action/reflection model. Five basic elements constitute what liberation theologians mean by praxis (40):

1. An encounter with the socio-political, economic realities of injustice.

2. An ethical moment of prophetic indignation at the realities of economic injustice.

3. The use of social analysis to understand the causes of economic injustice.

4. Biblical and theological reflection on a Christian response to economic disparity.

5. Engagement for the change of unjust socio-political and economic structures.

The primary forms of praxis in liberation theology have involved church-based community organization, although some liberation theologians have advocated for the legitimacy of violence as a means of social change. (41)

This concluding section reflects on Christian implications for the liberation praxis of the Occupy movement, advocating commitment to and arguing for the effectiveness of principled, strategic nonviolence. The actual accomplishment of Occupy's complex goal--transforming injustice as embedded in globalized economic institutions and structures--would require the mobilization of large numbers of people, long-term commitment, and dedication to the practices of nonviolent civil resistance by employing a range of strategic methods. So far the Occupy movement has employed a range of tactics to gain public attention, practice grassroots democracy, educate about economic injustice, and engage in acts of civil disobedience. The tactics organized and employed by Occupy have included the establishment of encampments on public property; issuing public pronouncements; distributing literature through placards, artwork, flyers, and through social media; organizing marches; holding demonstrations at strategic locations; and "occupying" the property of businesses or public officials. It has been the occasional turn to violence that has done the most to discredit the legitimacy of the Occupy movement, such as occurred in Oakland or Rome: "once violence enters the picture, it monopolizes the landscape of the conflict, co-opting other tactics and alienating potential participants." (42)

Recent empirical research establishes the superior effectiveness of nonviolent civil resistance for accomplishing social change. (43) Chenoweth and Stephan have conducted extensive factor analysis, comparing the effectiveness of violent and nonviolent movements for change.

  We have found strong empirical support for
  the notion that successful nonviolent
  resistance is much likelier to lead to
  democracy and civil peace, whereas violent
  insurgent success prohibits or reverses
  democracy while increasing the likelihood
  for recurrent civil war.(44)

Regardless of the goal, nonviolent resistance consistently proves more effective than violent resistance movements in accomplishing desired change in the short term and with higher probability for establishing democratic institutions for the long term. This study examined 323 campaigns from 1900-2006, including four in-depth case studies of both successful and failed campaigns (Iran 1977-1979, Palestinian Intifada 1987-1992, Philippines 1983-1986, and Burma 1988-1990). The evidence even contradicts the assertion that violence should be employed as a means of social change as a "last resort." (45)

Primary factors contributing to the effectiveness of nonviolent change movements include: generating and sustaining mass mobilization of participants, building a coalition of diverse participants in the movement, winning empathy/allegiance among the main pillars of the opposition (for example, police, security forces, and the military), use of diverse methods (both methods of concentration and methods of dispersion), and loyalty shifts by international actors. (46) The most important factor in achieving successful nonviolent change is "achieving large numbers of diverse participants that allow for multiple points of leverage against which opponents have little defense and establishing an effective cooperative coalition among the interests of those diverse participants. In the case of the Occupy movement, this would mean sustained efforts internationally to build shared commitments and steady growth in number of participants. Regarding the use of diverse methods, methods of concentration include, for example, protests, sit-ins, and marches and methods of dispersion including, for example, stay-aways, boycotts, strikes, leaflets, and use of social media for education.

The case studies of particular movements for change disclose three Factors that contribute to the failure of nonviolent resistance: over-reliance on particular individuals for leadership, persistent support for the ruling regime by key patron states, and poorly administered campaigns. (47) Another very significant issue is "backfiring." Whether violence is employed by the regime in power or by the resistance, the use of violence to accomplish movement goals regularly "backfires," shifting greater support for those suffering violence than for those imposing the violence. The role of the media in exposing the use of violence is of major significance, the possibility of which has multiplied exponentially through the use of Internet communication, such as You Tube. Much of the discrediting of the Occupy movement in its Fall 2011 campaign resulted from media reports of violence by activists. Such incidents have an overall negative impact on the effective mobilization of participants for the movement, which is the most important factor in accomplishing nonviolent social change.

Chenoweth and Stephan conclude:

  ...we do want to convey that nonviolent resistance
  has the potential to succeed in nearly all situations
  in which violent resistance is typically used, and
  to more favorable ends in the longer term. Civil
  resistance enhances citizenship skills and societal
  resilience in ways that elude armed campaigns....
  It behooves scholars, policy makers, resistance
  leaders, and the media to increase their
  understanding of how, when, and why nonviolent
  campaigns achieve goals that have eluded armed
  fighters for decades. (48)

These findings have major significance for change movements, such as Occupy. This research indicates that over the course of the twentieth century a new and effective approach for attaining social change has been introduced and practiced, whose great theoreticians include Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr., Dorothy Day, and Desmond Tute (49) The further implementation of nonviolent praxis should shape and condition movements for change in the twenty-first century, including Occupy.

One major challenge facing the Occupy movement is the complexity of its goal. Occupy aims not only to alter the structures and policies of individual nation states but also to transform the character of the in global economic order. (50) In many respects the wealth, power, and influence of international corporations transcend the capacity of any particular nation or alliance of nations to regulate them. The strategies of the Occupy movement therefore must address: (1) the character of public opinion; (2) laws governing radical economic disparity within individual countries, especially tax laws; and (3) the capacity of the world community to regulate international banking, financial transactions, commerce, and the accumulation of excessive wealth. In order to remain effective in accomplishing these ambitious goals, it is imperative that the Occupy movement (or subsequent populist movements) build strong coalitions between themselves, the international movement for enforceable human rights, and those concerned for protection of the environment. (51) The overarching goal is nothing less than "sufficient, sustainable livelihood for all." (52)

In the movie, "V for Vendetta" (2006), the film adaptation of a graphic novel set in the dystopian future, a vigilante named "V" catalyzes a populist movement against the tyrannical government through daring acts of violence, culminating in the bombing of the Parliament in London. Due to the scarring of his own face through his earlier mistreatment by the government, V wears the mask of Guy Fawkes, a late sixteenth- early seventeenth-century revolutionary folk hero. Through his courageous acts of derring-do, V ignites the passive population into active armed resistance against the oppressive regime. In the popular uprising, crowds of people don Guy Fawkes masks in solidarity with their leader, until in the final victorious scene one by one the people dare to take off their masks and claim their own identities.

The Anonymous mask, depicting the face of Guy Fawkes, is one of the symbols chosen to represent the Occupy movement. Given the script of "V for Vendetta and the violent character of the "Gunpowder Plot" in which the historical Falkes was involved, the use of the mask to symbolize the Occupy movement clearly insinuates a threat of violence. While righteous indignation at the economic injustice suffered by the 99% may warrant feelings of rage and thereby suggest the legitimacy of revolutionary violence, the liberation praxis necessary for long-term success in achieving the goals of the Occupy movement, or its successors, depends entirely on persistence in mobilizing large numbers of participants for strategic civil disobedience through acts of nonviolent resistance. All violent alternatives lead only to the discrediting of populist movements, such as Occupy Wall Street, and the eventual preservation of the status quo.

The achievement of the Occupy movement involves the unmasking of the fusion between global capitalism and neo-liberal democracies, which have protected and enhanced the status of the world's economic elite class at the expense of the 99%. The endangerment of the middle class in the United States is one of the precipitating factors, catalyzing the activism of Occupy. Within the political and economic dynamics of the U.S., this is a novelty, insofar as the middle class has historically aspired to identify with the 1%, rather than claiming solidarity with the poor. By questioning the inevitability of a future that promises only increasing economic disparity and imagining the possibility of alternative futures, the Occupy movement has tapped into a reservoir of hope, which has begun to mobilize people for democratic practices that reclaim a politics of the common good. (53) Such hope is necessary to fuel the democratic activism, as embodied in the Occupy movement, which is imperative for building a more just future.

(1.) Me following is an abbreviated list taken from Sarah van Gelder, ed. This Changes Everything: Occupy Wall Street and the 99% Movement (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2011), 36-38.

(2.) For this and the following statistics, Astra Taylor, Keith Gcssen, et al., eds. Occupy: Scenes from Occupied America (New York: Verso, 2011), 16-17.

(3.) Harold Meyerson, "Me Rich are Different; They Get Richer," The Washington Post (March 27, 2012): < http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/concentrated-wealth-is-a-long-term-threat-to-america/2012/03/27/gIQAMJtleS_story.html> [March 29, 2012].

(4.) Thomas Schulz, "On the Way Down: The Erosion of America's Middle Class," Spiegel Online International (August 19, 2010): <http://www.spicgeLdc/international/world/0,1518,712496,00.html> [April 5., 2012].

(5.) For the following, sec Howard Zinn, A People's History of the United States (New York: HarperCollins, 2003), 283-295.

(6.) Ibid., 286.

(7.) Ibid.

(8.) Ibid., 288.

(9.) Ibid., 288-289.

(10.) Ibid., 294-295.

(11.) Ibid., 295.

(12.)Ibid.. 292-293.

(13.)Ibid., 392-393.

(14.) Charles R. Walker, writing in The Forum, in 1931, as quoted in Ibid., 394.

(15.) Ibid., 399-401.

(16.) Richard Cloward and Frances Piven, Poor People's. Movements, as quoted in Ibid., 402.

(17.) "Share Our Wealth," Wikipedia: The Free Encyclopedia: <http://en.wilcipedia.org/wilci/Share_Our_Wealrh> [April 9, 2012].

(18.) Zinn, 403-404.

(19.) Maryland State Archives, "Americans Listening: Huey Long and Father Coughlin," <http://reachingamericanhistorymd.net/000001/000000/000140/1=1/r140.html> [May 1, 2012].

(20.) A third and distinctive expression of American populism is the Civil Rights movement, whose central focus was gaining equal rights for African-descent Americans. For an extended treatment of the Civil Rights movement, its use of nonviolent resistance, and its implications for economic justice, see the trilogy by Taylor Branch, Parting the Waters: America in the King Years 1954-63 (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1988); Pillar of Fire: America in the King Years 1963-65 (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1999); and At Canaan's Edge: America in the King Years 1965-68 (New York: Simon and Schuster, 2007). In particular, At Canaan:c Edge, 652-656, discusses the move by Dr. King, highly controversial even among his own supporters, to organize the "poor people's campaign" and a march on Washington, based on the principles of nonviolent resistance. An adequate discussion of the Civil Rights movement and the poor people's campaign transcends the limits of this study.

(21.) For this quote and the following, see Stephen Gandel, "The Leaders of a Leaderless Movement," in What Is Occupy? Inside the Global Movement (New York: Time Books. 2011). 35.

(22.) Nate Rawlings, "First Days of a Revolution," in What Is Occupy? 13-14.

(23.) Ibid., 18.

(24.) For the preceding list and direct quote, see "Principles of Solidarity: The Occupy Wall Street General Assembly," in This changes Everything, 25-26.

(25.) Jeffrey D. Clements, Corporations Are Not People: Why They Have More Rights than You Do and What You Can Do about It (San Francisso: Berretr-Koebler, 2012).

(26.) John B. Cobb, "Landing the Plane in the World of Finance," Process Studies 38.1(2009): 129.

(27.) Ibid., 125.

(28.) CF. Lewis Carroll, Through the Looking Glass and What Alice Found There.

(29.) "Tweedledum and Tweedledee," <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tweedledee_and_Tweedledee> [May 4,2012].

(30.) Henry A. Giroux, "The Occupy Movement and the Politics of Educated Hope," <http://truth-out.org/news/item/9237-the-occupy-movement-and-the-politics-of-educated-hope > [May 28. 2012].

(31.) For example, Brian McLaren, "Why I'm Joining the Occupation," <http://www.patheos.com/Rcsources/Addidonal-Resources/Joining-the-Occupation-Brian-McLaren-10-20-2011?offset=0&max=1> [May 14, 2012] and Shefa Siegel, "Down and Outraged," Sojourners (March 2012), <http://sojo.net/magazine/2012/03/down-and-outraged> [May 14, 20121].

(32.) Gary Dorrien, "The Case against Wall Street: Why the Protestors are Angry," The Christian Century 128 (Nov 15, 2011): 22-29 and Karen L. Bloomquist, "Ekklesia in the Midst of Public Outrage Today," Dialog: A Journal of "theology 51 (Spring 2012): 62-70.

(33.) Martin Luther, "The Large Catechism," in Robert Kolb and Timothy J. Wengert, eds. The Book of Concord: The Confessions of the Evangelical Lutheran Church (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2000), 387 ("The First Commandment").

(34.) Cf. Martin Luther, "Admonition to the Pastors to Preach against Usury," WA 51:394-398 (translation by Ulrich Duchrow).

(35.) Paul S. Chung, The Spirit of God Transforming Life: The Reformation and Theology of the Holy Spirit (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009). 129.

(36.) Walter Rauschenbusch, A Theology for the Social Gospel (New York: Macmillan, 1917), 5.

(37.) John W DeGruchy and Charles Villa-Vicencio, eds. Apartheid Is a Heresy (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1983); Commission on Theological Concerns of the Christian Conference of Asia, ed. Minjung Theology: People as the Subjects of Histoty (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1983); Sathianathan Clarke, Dalits and Christianity: Subaltern Religion and Liberation Theology (Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1998); Naim Stifan Ateek, Justice and Only Justice: A Palestinian Theology of Liberation (Maryknoll: Orbis, 1989), and Craig L. Nessan, The Vitality of Liberation Theology (Eugene, Ore.: Pickwick, 2012).

(38.) Ahn Byung-Mu, "Jesus and Ochlos in the Context of' His Galilean Ministry," trans. Paul S. Chung, in Paul S. Chung, Veli-Matti Karkacainen, and Kim Kyoung-Jae, eds., Asian Contextual Theology for the Third Millennium: Theology of Minjung in Fourth-Eye Formation (Eugene, Ore.: Pickwick, 2007), 44.

(39.) Jurgen Moltmann, "Minjung Theology for the Ruling Classes," in Ibid., 71.

(40.) Cf. Leonardo Boil', "Die Anliegen der Befreiungs-theologie," Theologische Berichte 8 (1979): 71-103 and Clodovis Boff, Theology and Praxis: Epistemological Foundations, trans. Robert R. Barr (Eugene, Ore.: Wipf & Stock, 2005), for firsthand elaborations of the idea of praxis by Latin American liberation theologians.

(41.) Cf. Nessan, The Vitality of Liberation Theology, Chapter 7.

(42.) Nathan Schneider, "No Leaders, No Violence: What Diversity of Tactics Means for Occupy Wall Street," in This Changes Everything, 43-44.

(43.) The following discussion is informed by the research and conclusions in Erica Chenoweth and Maria J. Stephan, Why Civil Resistance Works: The Strategic Logic of Nonviolent Conflict (New York: Columbia University Press, 2011).

(44.) Ibid., 218.

(45.) Ibid., 226-227.

(46.) Cf. Ibid., 192-193.

(47.) Ibid., 197.

(48.) Ibid., 227.

(49.) Cf. Craig L. Nessan, Shalom Church: The Body of Christ as Ministering Community (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2010), 59-82.

(50.) Cf. David C. Korten, Agenda for a New Economy: From Phantom Wealth to Real Wealth (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 20 1 0).

(51.) Cf J. Kirk Boyd, 2048--Humanity's Agreement to Live Together: The International Movement for Enforceable Human Rights (San Francisco: Berrett-Koehler, 2010), 70-83, and Bill McKibben, Eaarth: Making a Life on a Tough New Planet (New York: Henry Holt, 2010).

(52.) This is the ride of the social statement on the economy adopted in 1999 by the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America, "Economic Life: Sufficient, Sustainable Livelihood for All."<http://www.elca.org/What-We-Believe/Social-Issues/Social-Statements/Economic-Life.aspx#read> [May 22, 2012]. CE the declaration adopted by The Lutheran World Federation in 2010, "Daily Bread instead of Greed: An LWF Call for Economic and Climate Justice." [May 22, 2012].

(53.) Henry A. Giroux, "The Occupy Movement and the Politics of Educated Hope."

Craig L. Nessan,

Academic Dean and Professor of Contextual Theology, Wartburg Theological Seminary