• IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    8
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    I think the occupy movement fell apart partly due to the fact that it never really coalesced around any sort of leadership group or figurehead. The list issues kept getting longer, the list of desired changes kept getting ever more diverse and contradictory, and there was very rarely anyone who could articulately explain to the general public what the movement was about.

      • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        Not having any sort of centralized leadership is a double edged sword. Your movement gains resistance to authorities being able to knock out the movement with a couple arrests, but your movement becomes much more prone to fizzling out of you can’t somehow maintain focus, which is what happened to the Occupy movement.

          • IrateAnteater@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            7
            ·
            8 months ago

            Open a history book. The examples will usually be referred to as “revolutions”. The French Revolution, American Revolution, Russian Revolution. For something more modern, look at the anti-apartheid movement in South Africa.

    • ObjectivityIncarnate@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 months ago

      Yeah, occam’s razor, it wasn’t a sinister conspiracy to ‘bust the movement’, what you describe is something that can and has happened, many times, to causes, diluting them into a nebulous, impotent murk.

      It’s not that deep.