|
Christian Science Monitor —
November 29, 2011
Occupy Movement Must Get
Support from Millennial
Generation to Survive
By
Michael D. Hais and
Morley Winograd
With municipal
authorities disrupting
and dismantling the
Occupy movement’s
encampments in cities
across the country, many
are questioning if the
movement can survive
without its most visible
symbol of
sustainability.
Now that its physical
presence is under siege,
the need for the
movement to attract more
members of the
Millennial
generation
– and align itself with
its beliefs and
behaviors – becomes even
more critical.
Demographic figures show
that
any social movement or
trend endorsed by
America’s youngest and
most populous generation
–
the Millennial
generation (born
1982-2003) – is
likely to
shape or even dominate
American life in the
decades ahead, while
any rejected by it is
likely to fall by the
wayside.
While the Occupy
movement has had some
success in appealing to
Millennials, it still
has more to do before it
is fully embraced by the
generation, as suggested
by the results of a
national survey
conducted this month by
the consulting firm
Frank N. Magid
Associates.
Gaining widespread
Millennial endorsement
wouldn’t just represent
a PR victory by the
Occupy movement. By
2012, when more than 60
percent of this
95-million-strong
generation will be 18 or
older, almost 1 in 4
American adults will be
a Millennial. By the end
of this decade, when
virtually all
Millennials will have
come of age, the
generation will comprise
more than one-third (36
percent) of US adults.
Millennial approval and
participation is vital
to the Occupy movement’s
survival going forward.
Demographically, the
movement has significant
Millennial
representation, but it
does not appear to be
predominantly comprised
of Millennials. A survey
conducted by
Fordham University
professor
Costas Panagopoulos
indicated that the mean
age of adult protesters
in
New York’s
Zuccotti Park was
33. Since the oldest
Millennial is just 29,
it is obvious that a
fair number of those in
the park were members of
older generations.
Demonstrations on or
near college campuses
almost certainly contain
larger contingents of
Millennials than those
elsewhere. Still it is
evident that older
generations are playing
a key role in the Occupy
movement,
particularly the
anarchists and
professional left wing
agitators who initially
energized the protests.
Attitudinally, large
majorities of
Millennials do concur
with the Occupy
movement’s view of
present day America.
Eight in ten adult
Millennials agree that
the gap between the rich
and the middle class is
larger than ever. About
three-quarters of
Millennials say that big
business and
Wall Street have too
much power, that taxes
should be increased on
the wealthiest 1 percent
of Americans (75
percent), and that Wall
Street and the financial
industry should be
punished for their role
in the economic
recession (71 percent).
Two-thirds of the
generation favor
increased regulation of
banks and the financial
industry.
Millennials also have a
somewhat better
assessment of the Occupy
movement itself than do
older generations. The
strongest Millennial
perception of the
movement is that it is
“liberal” (38 percent),
not a negative term
within the only
generation in which
liberals and
progressives outnumber
conservatives and
moderates.
By contrast, the
strongest perceptions
held of the Occupy
movement by Baby Boomers
and senior citizen
Silents is that the
movement is
“anti-establishment” (39
percent), “radical” (30
percent), and even
“revolutionary” (25
percent).
Overall, the Millennial
generation is evenly
divided about the
movement, with a quarter
still uncertain. Even
so, Millennials are more
positive about Occupy
than older generations,
among whom 34 percent
hold favorable opinions
and 44 percent negative.
But despite their
sympathy with the
movement, Millennials
are not yet ready to
fully endorse the Occupy
movement. This gap
between the support
Millennials have for the
beliefs of the protest
movement and their less
than enthusiastic
backing of it, suggests
both the opportunity for
success Occupy still has
and the danger to the
movement if it fails to
focus its strategy on
attracting Millennials
to its cause.
One problem, according
to observers ranging
from newspapers to high
school and college
students and even to the
“belly of the beast,”
Wall Street itself, is
that the Occupy
movement lacks strong
leaders who can guide
and personalize it.
A large majority of the
public at large and
Millennials in
particular (67 percent
each) agrees with this
assessment.
Most of the major
social movements of the
20th century had
charismatic leaders,
such as
Martin Luther King, Jr.
(civil rights) and
Gloria Steinem
(women’s liberation),
who played this key
role. But in the social
network-driven 21st
century, movements
appear, by design, to be
“leaderless,” and
lacking in clear
structure. They are
horizontal rather than
vertical.
Millennials are, in
fact, a bit less
concerned than other
generations that
the Occupy movement is
“leaderless”; a
slight majority of them
(54 percent) either say
this is a good thing or
at least provides a
mixture of both
advantages and
disadvantages. Moreover,
a scattered and loose
structure and lack of
obvious and well-known
national leaders did not
prevent the tea party
movement from being a
major force in the 2010
midterm elections or the
contest for the 2012
GOP presidential
nomination.
A far more important
concern is that about 7
in 10 Millennials cannot
figure out just what the
Occupy movement is and
what its goals really
are. In only a few
scattered locations,
such as college campuses
in
California where
there was a call for
tuition relief, did
Occupy protestors cite
definite actionable
objectives or make
specific demands. In
contrast to the tea
party's clear and
consistent opposition to
tax increases or “big
government” programs
like “Obamacare,”
the goals of the Occupy
movement often seem
unvoiced and inchoate.
Unlike the ideologically
driven Boomer
Generation, which was
content to use teach-ins
and other talk-a-thon
strategies to endlessly
discuss, if not actually
advance, its causes,
Millennials bring a
strong dose of
pragmatism to their
desire to change the
world and would be
more likely to
participate in Occupy
activities if they were
more action-oriented.
In the end, if the
Occupy movement is to
become Millennial and
really effect change, it
must do more than simply
inspire sympathy and
sentiment. It must move
beyond being a protest
movement and become a
political movement, one
with specific goals that
engages and alters the
political process. Only
by using these and other
tactics to attract the
Millennial Generation
will the Occupy movement
break out of its
original, limited
conception as simply
being a way to
express unhappiness with
current economic
conditions.
To fully achieve its
potential, even without
a permanent, physical
presence in urban
America, it must take
the steps necessary to
become a decisive,
action-oriented voice
within an emerging and
powerful generation.
|