The most ridiculous comparison is the one Nocera draws with the Tea Party. On the one hand, you have a bunch of rightwing nihilists bankrolled by the billionaire Koch brothers and with their own TV channel, Fox; on the other, you have a rag-tag group of students, the unemployed and a few others with their own Tumblr accounts. Given their different boxing weights, it is remarkable that Occupy has managed to get as far as it has, turning "we are the 99%" into one of the most resonant slogans in campaigning history.

Its also a comparison drawn by David Miliband and Douglas Alexander in this piece.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/sep/08/us-democratic-convention-david-miliband-douglas-alexander

it is striking that the anti-government Tea Party has so much more staying power than the anti-market Occupy movement

...mused the Blairite brains trust.

One year on and they still don't speak for me.

If you want to know everything that’s wrong with Occupy take a look at this video . Occupy consists of allot of people who all agree that something that wrong, but don't seem to be sure what it is or what should be done about it.

That is why it has died.

Dunno what happened there. Here is the correct link:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaHCVZQsbME

Agreed - Occupy is a diverse protest movement, the Tea Party are corporate stooges conned into working against their own best interests.

Bloody hell Grun. I though this glitch was fixed!

Sorry all, just copy and paste.

www.youtube.com/watch?v=DaHCVZQsbME

Occupy is a positive force on the political tired monotonous landscape without a doubt...

...but they will never be as successful at concentrating peoples hearts and minds toward change as the greedy and idiotic elite will be...

With elites forcing a dangerous race to the bottom and Occupy entreating a struggle for some fairness it seems obvious that in real terms elites will have more impact...and push people toward then kind of revolutionary ideas that Occupy are talking about...

Dude, "political movements" are just ironic constructs anyway. Money isn't real. Just go to the top of the Chrysler Building and release a bag of poems on to the sky waves. There never was a "New York" anyway, it was a place in our minds.

Poor Occupy, unlike most modern 'movements' it was all grass-roots and no grass; a snake without a head. While the whole loose, leaderless melange of humanity thing was sort of inspiring it ultimately never cohered into something something solid.

I'm sure that, say a century from now, they'll look back on it as a prelude to something a lot less fun and free-spirited, though. If things don't improve for the majority of people the next wave won't be educated far-sighted idealists, it'll be the people who only see far enough in the future to guarantee their next meal.

One year on and I still have no idea what Occupy want, apart from free camping in central London.

The campaign that has done more than any other to thrust inequality on to the political agenda of one of the world's most unequal countries turned one only yesterday

I assume you refer to the US with this comment - the US being 42nd on the list which I'm not sure qualifies as being "one of the world's most unequal countries".

Then when you consider economic paradises such as Uganda, Malawi, Uzbekistan, Yemen and India are all rate as being more equal than the US then maybe an equality measure is not the best measure of the success of a society

It's about as relevant as another of the G's causes celebre - 1010; how did that work out for you guys?

In a July poll by Ipsos/Reuters, nearly 45 percent of respondents said that they did not identify with the Occupy movement “at all,” while only 9 percent said that they “strongly” identified with the ideals. Earlier polls from other organizations had shown far more support.

'nuff said.

it is remarkable that Occupy has managed to get as far as it has, turning "we are the 99%" into one of the most resonant slogans in campaigning history.

That's what was "remarkable" about it?

It came up with a slogan that definitely resonated with the 99% alright.
Many of the 99% found common ground: that these protesters did not represent them, nor anything that they wanted.

Rather than premature obituaries of these people being wrong, it's those obsessed with keeping flimsy ideas on life-support far too long who are wrong.

Bet the US taxpayer just loves paying to police them

Media coverage was essential to the Occupy movement. The media, however, bores easily. They've found newer, shinier baubles to play with, leaving the Occupy movement jilted and ineffectual.

Occupy will go down in history as America's (and the West's) last chance to wake up and save itself from within. Finally beaten down by the might of Wall St with their elite political allies and police enforcers the people were pepper sprayed into submission. Even evicted from St Paul's for scaring off the tourists, the corruption and hypocrisy at the heart of the system stinks.

Western society is over, killed by capitalism.

"But what Occupy has got right is its targets."

Sigh. This morning I left my apartment and had to dodge around metal barriers and police horses, tonight I might not get back in.

Go occupy Central Park West where the average home is in the 10's of millions. There are almost no banks left on Wall Street, the only one I can think of is actually German, and the Stock Exchange is mostly electronic and symbolic of what exactly (you don't want to buy and sell shares?), people live downtown because it is actually one of the cheapest parts of Manhattan.

By all means protest, protest about the inequalities in society, but get a real manifesto, propose real solutions that resonate, and find the right place in which to do it, the only people who can see it in Wall Street are the residents and the media, the politicians and the bankers (the real targets surely) do not live or work there.

Occupy? Aren't they that illegal hacking group that made the news a couple of times last year?

It was very interesting to Comment is Free, which was one of its main mouthpieces.

To me, and to most of the rest of us - let's call us 'the 99%" - it was silly, pointless and pretty funny.

The Occupy movement was largely irrelevant, largely because it was

a rag-tag group of students, the unemployed and a few others with their own Tumblr accounts

No matter how many left wing journalists and sympathisers with proper jobs cheered them on, until such time as they were willing to join them in significant numbers, the movement was always going to be largely a waste of time

I can understand people's criticisms of Occupy, I really can, but in an alleged democracy what I cannot understand is people's intolerance and outright abuse of a movement that was peaceful and did not set out to impose an ideology on anyone, so if anyone parrots the selfsame 'they don't speak for me' I will throw something pointy at the computer for Occupy didn't force anyone to align themselves with it, indeed I have known visiting Jehovah's Witnesses who are more aggressive. And okay so they put up tents in a public place and stayed there for a while in order to make a stand against what they believe is wrong with society, big deal, and who cares if they were mainly students with dreadlocks and jugglers, are these people not to be awarded the same democratic rights to protest?
Also, from reading comments on this forum it strikes me that many are against the toxic alliance between politicians in the western hemisphere and banks/large corporations who are known to dictate policy to protect their own interests at the expense of the people, and against the trickle up of money to the top.
Hence the many comments praising the inimitable George Monbiot.
So aren't most of us sick and tired of the same old same old, just approaching the problem from differing points on the compass.
Perhaps if we collectively used all the venom and energy involved in having a go at the Occupy movement, which has - as many are at pains to keep saying - no political clout, and aimed it at those in power and opposition we might actually get somewhere.
Nothing ventured, nothing gained, and right now only the Occupy movement and a handful of organised protests have ventured anything, so kudos to them for getting off their arses.

it is remarkable that Occupy has managed to get as far as it has

Which is where, exactly? Even this article has to begin by reminding us that the movement isn't actually stone dead. Maybe an obituary is a bit undeserved, but probably no less deserved than an anniversary celebration! What has it achieved?

"The Zuccotti Park camp allowed hundreds of complete strangers to develop serious political arguments."

Why did they decide to stay completely quiet about them, then?

I try not to give into the cynicism surrounding Occupy, because I think we really did/do need something like it - albeit far better organised.

Occupy never had any relevance at all, let alone a continuing relevance.

Their failure appears to be the result of a (real or percieved) lack of coherency in what they wanted. We all know what they didn't like (bankers, capitalism, soap etc) but didn't hear any credible solutions to the economic woes of the time.

if anyone parrots the selfsame 'they don't speak for me' I will throw something pointy at the computer for Occupy

I know exactly how you feel, its how I felt every time I saw a placard proclaiming "we are the 99%"........

What is important is how far these movements have come towards effecting real political change. The Tea Party is a major force in the American Republican party both at federal and state level. fully paid up members are either in power or plausibly electable.

The Occupy movement, mainly because it had no coherent agenda other than being for Good things and against Bad things has no leverage within the Democrats (or in the UK Labour party). It is dead because it was idea free.

A bit like some Guardian columnists.

softMick,

I was in Zuccotti Park (there's no grass but quite a few trees btw) last Sunday. It is one of the few open spaces in what is a very urban environment. I've played chess there in the past, read and book and just hung out.

I don't really see what right anyone be they anti-war, pro Tea Party, left or right wing has to take that park away from me. And that is before the drumming, the shouting and the violent confrontations.

You of course have the right to protest, but I don't think you have the right to occupy where I live. And that is what Wall Street is now, a residential area.

It's a gimmick based on a 20th Century concept of where Capitalism and banking hang out, sounded good at the time, but a few square metres of downtown Manhattan is not where the protest needs to be made, it needs to be made in Washington and the opinion columns of newspapers that are not The Guardian.

what I cannot understand is people's intolerance and outright abuse of a movement that was peaceful and did not set out to impose an ideology on anyone

Oh? It was their hubris in claiming they spoke for me as one of "the 99%" that fucked me off.

Occupy and groups like UK Uncut have made a massive difference, on a number of levels, and they were successful in what they did, such as creating a space others could use to try to discuss issues, whilst breaking away from the usual trotsky newspaper selling fools.

That they still have have as many critics from the left as from the right, means that they must have got something right.

Whatever people may think about Occupy , and for all its faults the fact is they went out and did something and highlighted an issue. They tried to get out of the rad-activist ghetto that far too many posters on CIf happily wallow in.

When the proverbial hit the fan, what were the so -called radical left, many of whom post on here doing?
Selling newspapers, and waiting for orders from there respective stalinists superstar messiahs like the usual suspects who often get articles published here, such as Nina Power or Tony Benn.

All the unions did was send people down to Occupy at St Pauls, and use each and every opportunity to tell people to join unions.

The Traditional and supposedly left wing - groups such as SWP, AWL etc , there are so many of these empty peanut packet communists, i could list them forever - are part of the problem.

Occupy got off their behinds, and that they were able to do what they did, just exposes the moral, intellectual and political decline, not just of the 1% but also 99% of the broader supposed 'Left', in the UK.

The comparison with the Tea Party is instructive, but not because of the disparity in their funding. The Tea Party has defined objectives (even if they're completely batty), and they have mounted a guerilla war, using the existing Republican political party and the existing political system to try and get their policies put into force. Conversely, the Occupy movement can't even agree on what to do with the various crazies and winos who infest its camps.

The comparison with the Tea Party is instructive, but not because of the disparity in their funding. The Tea Party has defined objectives (even if they're completely batty), and they have mounted a guerilla war, using the existing Republican political party and the existing political system to try and get their policies put into force.

It works both ways though - some would say the Tea party brand has turned many moderates off Republicans altogether which means four more years of neither being in the White House. Perhaps the Democrats dodged a bullet as far as Occupy were concerned.

The Zuccotti Park camp allowed hundreds of complete strangers to develop serious political arguments

I must have missed those. Care to outline some for us?

Occupy might not have the high-profile presence it did a year ago, but it would be wrong to dismiss its continuing relevance

No it wouldn't.

You are history sunshine - yesterdays news.

Koch Suckers, all of them. OCCUPY the world , peacefully. If only it could be...

I remember all this Occupy lark. What was it, occupy bells street? Something like that anyway.

Either the Bilderberg group is signed into CiF or people just don't get what the 99% is!
It is a description of the economic and power imbalance of our society... not...
"I am not part of the 99% because these people don't represent me"
Factory workers who don't strike or don't agree with strike action are not any less working class with those who do.

.... unless of course you are that all powerful FT100 CEO... then you are not the 99%

"Occupy might not have the high-profile presence it did a year ago, but it would be wrong to dismiss its continuing relevance"

I'm beginning to think the author resides in a parallel universe. It might be relevant to him and a handful of others but is has no relevance to the vast majority of the rest of us. It was just one long, frequently misinformed collective whinge by a group who between them, are almost certainly big net takers from, not net contributors to, the system they supposedly would dismantle

' it would be wrong to dismiss its continuing relevance'

perhaps true but as it has no 'relevance' in practice this is a none problem.

Winters coming up , so I can't see them returning to the 'street' any-time soon and did they ever producing any evidenced that they really represented the 99% of indeed anywhere their that percentage of the population as they show very grandly claimed .

So, unless everyone having a 'let's bash the Occupiers' fest is presently in favour of the present corporate dystopia most of us in the western hemisphere have to suffer, what's to be done??
I suggest protesting against opposition parties to up their game and at least have a nodding aquaintance with the people they supposedly represent, certainly to end the present toxic alliance with banks/large corporations.
But would be nice to hear other ideas rather than just outrage against a bunch of people who aren't even the one's responsible for the sorry state we are presently in.
Everyone keeps saying 'the Occupiers don't represent me', or that they are pissed off with Occupiers using slogans that are untrue, so what about the fucking politicians do they represent you?? Do they speak the truth?? And they - meaning politicians not the Occupiers - are taking us all to hell on a handcart, so why use your bile against those who - however ineffectually - speak out against said politicians??
It is just a nonsense.

@greensox

I don't really see what right anyone be they anti-war, pro Tea Party, left or right wing has to take that park away from me

They did the same to Finsbury Square here too.
Eventually (sadly, long after the grass had been replaced by mud, litter and wooden boards) the local businesses and residents pressured the council into serving an injunction. They left, taking their tents (but not their litter) with them.
The council has subsequently re-turfed the square.
However, for 6 months, 99% of people couldn't use the park.

...and I still don't know what they wanted, apart from free camping in the City.

St Pauls is nice to walk around now though. No stench of urine, boozed up nutters and badly spelt graffiti.

To give them their dues, Occupy did drive home the point that a diverse cross section of middle england were a bit cross about the fallout from the biggest credit crunch in 80 years and by getting City types to acknowledge their annoyance, they would the City folk who do these things to do them differently in the future please.

I suspect they have gone on to organise charity bike rides and dinners, or sponsored trips up Kilimanjaro.

All the unions did was send people down to Occupy at St Pauls, and use each and every opportunity to tell people to join unions.

The bastards! How dare they suggest that people join workers organisations which actually stand a chance of achieving something for their members? Sure, the unions have many faults, but at least they sometimes protect and support workers against the bosses. Standing up for the 99% against the 1%, if you will.

That they still have have as many critics from the left as from the right, means that they must have got something right.

This is as ludicrous an argument here as it is when people deploy it to 'prove' that the BBC are impartial.

How dare they suggest that people join workers organisations which actually stand a chance of achieving something for their members?

Kind of ironic though given that the bulk of the dropouts at St Pauls didn't look like they'd worked a day in their lives.

I really got fed up with Occupy. It was a source of so much dodginess clogging up my news feed; anti-Semitism (in its 1930s anti-"international bankers" disguise and the more up-to-date "We are all Hezbollah" variant), 9/11 troofism (and other stupid conspiracy theories), support for Ron Paul and Austrian economics, mindless Obama-bashing, puerile if-voting-changed-anything-they'd-make-it-illegal anarchism, the creepy "people's microphone" and jazz hands, those ghastly plastic Guy Fawkes masks, totalitarian cults like the SWP muscling in and the general impression that these are all people who will grow up and put it all behind them in a couple of years or less.

Worst of all, this self-righteous muddle was dressed up as though it was the only opposition to the scorched earth operation the Tories are running against the poor and vulnerable. If that is true, we really are doomed.

There is a simple truth in what the Occupy movement stands for and it is expressed in the statement that they are the 99%. 99% against the 1% is a very powerful symbol which will stay in the minds of people much more than any political philosophy.

If Young People are the Key to a Successful Movement We Are in Trouble ...