On CNN, Douglas Rushkoff who believes corporations run the world–tries to make sense of OCW for the media (clueless) and the rest of us (perplexed):
Anyone who says he has no idea what these folks are protesting is not being truthful. Whether we agree with them or not, we all know what they are upset about, and we all know that there are investment bankers working on Wall Street getting richer while things for most of the rest of us are getting tougher. What upsets banking’s defenders and politicians alike is the refusal of this movement to state its terms or set its goals in the traditional language of campaigns.
That’s because, unlike a political campaign designed to get some person in office and then close up shop (as in the election of Obama), this is not a movement with a traditional narrative arc. As the product of the decentralized networked-era culture, it is less about victory than sustainability. It is not about one-pointedness, but inclusion and groping toward consensus. It is not like a book; it is like the Internet.
The Colbert Report
- A left-leaning FAQ and a Fox News opinion piece may help, as well.
- The Nobel Laureate economist, Joseph Stieglitz, makes the case for OCW as a global movement.