Class

In 1984, my favorite love story, George Orwell's hyper-secure state of permanent warfare and delineated economic class is bottomed out by the "proles" (short for proletariat), an underclass deemed too stupid to worry about the evil machinations of "the Party." In this dystopia, the slogan "proles and animals are free"  dictates the government's attitude towards the poor; they, like animals, lack the decision-making skills to abuse their freedom in any meaningful way and therefore are not a worry of the Party. The novel's hero, Winston Smith, calls the proles the best hope for freedom. "Until they become conscious they will never rebel, and until after they have rebelled they cannot become conscious."

The idea of a clueless but easily influenced working class is not a new one. Like most of 1984, it is based on the ideology of 19th-century conflict theorists like Karl Marx and Max Weber. Decrying the liberalism of the bourgeoisie (middle-class), Marx stated " the proletariat alone is a really revolutionary class." Fear of the working class can also be seen even earlier, amongst American intellectuals in the wake of the 1776 revolution. John Adams and other founders were concerned about "mob rule" in a democracy (hence why Senators were chosen by state legislatures, not elected, until the passing of 17th Amendment), leading to a property requirement for voting. The reason for this is largely the view of the poor as uneducated and easily influenced. If the poor can be guided towards a worldview that congratulates their hard work and romanticizes their poverty, they can lead movements of massive social change, for better or for worse.

The last 40 years have done quite a bit to change this factor in the Western world. College, after the 1950's, was no longer the elite club of intellectuals and rich offspring. In a post-Belushi era, college is a right of passage in the United States. And as long as jobs and credit were flowing freely, this system could sustain itself.

However, as banks deny more and more loans and jobs remain stagnant, the "Lost Generation" of today is far from undereducated. They are, in fact, anchored by the debt they were told to garner in turn for an education. However, the tools to win in this system have failed to prove effective, but they also allow us to understand why we're poor, why our choices are so limited. The proles are no longer rural simpletons; they are a people raised on middle-class dreams, educated by the best universities they were willing to go into debt for, and thrown into a reality which has no need or room for the education they were given.

The phrase "we are the 99%" reveals two things about Occupy Wall Street as a class movement. First is its effort to identify not just as a majority a la Nixon's "Silent Majority", but as a movement which means to represent nearly everyone. It is an "us-versus-them" game, and unless you own a bank (or two), they are on your side. Second, OWS is chiefly a movement about class consciousness. The power corporations have over the middle and lower classes is astonishingly staunch and far older than Citizens United or the 2008 collapse. By breaking away from these outdated models of upper, middle, and lower class (to say nothing of lower-middle and upper-middle class), OWS is seeking to change the way we view class structures. It says to the middle class, "you are merely luckier than I am. We face the same forces in a world designed to benefit the ultra-rich."

In the context of how we define class and the American Dream, this is an astonishing message to build a movement around. Protest movements tend to need individual targets, like Mubarak or Obama or Lyndon Johnson. But to focus less on individuals and more on the very method we diagnose our economy, the very looking glass we peer into, makes the popularity of OWS very unique. OWS is expressing the worldview of most Americans, that our society is heavily bent towards old-money and the well-connected. It is a populist message, and public perception does not equal reality, but a new generation of economists and historians is being raised and educated in this social climate.

It is possible, perhaps even likely, that social commentators are slapping a sticker on OWS too soon. But even if Zucotti Park is emptied tomorrow, the measure of OWS' success will be the public debate. Sadly, the public debate is largely controlled by the attention-deficit media. Admittedly, it's hard to focus on the drum circles and smell of hemp when dictators are being thrown into the frozen food section. But the effect OWS has had, putting income inequality and financial justice on front pages around the world, was precisely its aim. They do not have specific legislative hopes or demand the resignation of any official (at least not collectively). This was a movement by the proles to educate the proles. OWS recognizes the limited effect they will have in the halls of Congress or on the trading floor. The real victory is educating the rest of us, the 99%, about our place.