And just exactly how many of these protests have you been a part of?

Yeah, that's what I thought.

If it had remained peaceful, I would agree with you. That it became violent, to my mind, made it worthless. And what, exactly, did it accomplish, now that we have the hindsight of many years? It didn't save a single American job or stop the disappearing of the middle class. And it made claims it was a temper tantrum seem valid. No, sorry, the truly meaningful movements are non-violent. They're the ones people can look to for change.

THE PRICE OF EXPERIENCE - Wm. Blake

What is the price of experience? Do men buy it for a song?
Or wisdom for a dance in the street? No, it is bought with the price
Of all a man hath, his house, his wife, his children.
Wisdom is sold in the desolate market where none come to buy,
And in the wither’d field where the farmer plows for bread in vain.It is an easy thing to triumph in the summer’s sun
And in the vintage and to sing on the waggon loaded with corn.
It is an easy thing to talk of prudence to the afflicted,
To speak the laws of prudence to the houseless wanderer,
To listen to the hungry raven’s cry in wintry season
When the red blood is fill’d with wine and with the marrow of lambs.

It is an easy thing to laugh at wrathful elements,
To hear the dog howl at the wintry door, the ox in the slaughterhouse moan;
To see a god on every wind and a blessing on every blast;
To hear sounds of love in the thunder-storm and destroys our enemies’ house;
To rejoice in the blight that covers his field, and the sickness that cuts off his children,
While our olive and vine sing and laugh round our door, and our children bring fruits and flowers.

Then the groan and the dolour are quite forgotten, and the slave grinding at the mill,
And the captive in chains, and the poor in the prison, and the soldier in the field
When the shatter’d bone hath laid him groaning among the happier dead.
It is an easy thing to rejoice in the tents of prosperity:
Thus could I sing and thus rejoice: but it is not so with me.

WTO erupted during a period of American prosperity and economic expansion, and so it doesn't fit at all in Arthur Schlesinger's theory of American history—the crisis generated cycles between conservatism and liberalism.

That only illustrates the WTO protest's marginal nature. There are always people who are dissatisfied with the status quo, no matter how good it is. Outside of Seattle, people barely remember it even happened.

First, separate the WTO protests from the riot in Seattle. The groups that were protesting are same groups that have been at the Bilderberg & subsequent WTO meetings all along. You will undoubtedly find them involved with OWS at some level. In that sense, the only difference is the calendar.
This really screams out for a sgt_doom response. It's in his wheelhouse.

Good Morning Charles,
I took part in neither the WTO Demonstration or the Occupy Seattle Movement. But, I did observe both. I have photos of the latter. Seems to me that the WTO Demonstration was more "successful" largely because it was more violent and destructive. That is most unfortunate of course. But, that remains the legacy. I seriously believe the masses don't recall the real reason(s) for the WTO protests and whether any demands were met or fulfilled. The OS and elsewhere may have no legacy largely because:

A) They had no major target on their placards/signs etc. The word "Occupy" a verb was used in place of a proper noun/acronym/name (ie. Iraq War/WTO/Obama). Yes, locations names were used (NYC, Seattle etc.) but the common denominator was "Occupy".

B) As you mentioned yesterday and I agreed, the elements (Sgt. Winter). Encampments outdoors even in urban areas reaches a point of diminishing returns quickly. Add to that a criminal element (the shooting in Oakland) and santitary conditions (lack thereof over time), the demonstrators themselves get tired.

C) Finally, a greatly organized authority (Mayors McGinn, Adams of Portland and Bloomberg of NYC et al) and their law enforcement (police etc.) agencies that actually learned their lessons from events like WTO. The uprooting of the OS was filmed/captured live. The police knew that.

So, no I wouldn't choose either. I did have some empathy for OS. But, that ended with the graffiti, the violence (at other sites) and the encampments. They became a blight even at progressive SCCC.

Charles, I believe many are hurting in this long term weak economy. I have great empathy for the unemployed. But the OS Movement really did nothing for them. I don't believe protesting against the excesses of Wall Street will necessarily change Wall Street (BTW, I agree there are excesses and WS needs to be changed). However, at the end of the day a dialogue rather than confrontation may work to reform WS.

Ken, I disagree. The WTO is still one of the problems. Like Our government, the WTO exists in part to benefit the 1%, only it does so on an international scale with no accountability to the voters of democratic nations, while having the ability to overrule the laws of democratic nations.
Another key difference between WTO and Occupy protests is that there were no protests in other cities to support the protests here, which were made up of people who came here frp, around the world.

"But the biggest difference a decade makes is that in 1999, we were taking on capitalism at the peak of a frenzied economic boom. Unemployment was low, stock portfolios were bulging. The media was drunk on easy money. Back then it was all about start-ups, not shutdowns.

We pointed out that the deregulation behind the frenzy came at a price. It was damaging to labor standards. It was damaging to environmental standards. Corporations were becoming more powerful than governments and that was damaging to our democracies. But to be honest with you, while the good times rolled, taking on an economic system based on greed was a tough sell, at least in rich countries.

Ten years later, it seems as if there aren’t any more rich countries. Just a whole lot of rich people.
People who got rich looting the public wealth and exhausting natural resources around the world."

---Naomi Klein
The Most Important Thing in the World No…

The WTO had tens of thousands of people in the street that were most certainly not violent. I think some of you are confused.

The WTO is why we continue to let China sell us fake goods without proper inspection.

Sooner it dies, and takes "Free Trade" (aka "Pollution Is Free") with it, the better for world markets.

@10 - No suppoet in other cities for the WTO protests? ...except for the fact that the Longshoremen shut down the the ports on the entire west coast for that WTO week.

I was at the WTO, and it is a fact that the police started the violence. They began pepper-spraying & shooting people w rubber bullets a little after 9am. The black bloc didn't start attacking symbols of exploitation (eg. Niketown) until well after 11am. Not that there is some tit for tat legitimacy there, but it was a police riot, not the other way round.

SPD turned WTO violent.

The trade agreements of the 90's set the stage for the economic collapse of the 00's.

That's some deep 8:00 AM coffee babble.

@14, I forgot about the longshoremen shutting down ports in other cities. But I do remember that the police were the ones who turned that protest violent.

Even Norm Stamper, the Seattle Police Chief at the time, acknowledges that the WTO protests were peaceful until his department began dousing the crowds with chemical irritants. If you think the crowds were violent first, write a letter to the producer of whatever TV news show you watched the WTO protests on because you were mislead. Any violence or property damage that happened after that is on the SPD.

YOU try not smashing in a window or newspaper box with rage after being covered in burning chemicals and/or shot with a rubber bullet.