Occupy Wall Street Movement: Moral and Economic Implications

The Occupy Wall Street Movement: Moral and Economic Implications
Name
Institution
Instructor
Course
Date
The Occupy Wall Street Movement: Moral and Economic Implications
The Occupy Wall Street Movement (OWM) was an anti-capitalistic exploitation uprising that began in the U.S. in 2011. The movement’s objective was to change America’s political and economic systems, which encouraged continued enrichment of the moneyed one percent of the population (made up of corporations, the media, and financial institutions), at the expense of the remaining ninety nine percent.
The movement’s moral contention is that there is an unacceptable level of social and economic inequalities between the poor and the rich. The movement describes America’s capitalist economy as one that is skewed in favor of the rich (Francis, 2011). In its extreme, capitalism turns majority of citizens (the working class) into slaves of the minority (the owners of the means of production). In addition, the one percent are making their profits at the expense of the ninety nine percent. For instance, mining corporations destroy and pollute the environment to extract and process minerals. They take all the profits, and yet as a natural resource, the environment belongs to all people. The moral implication of this situation as presented by the movement is that corporations may need to redefine their approach to social responsibility. One of the negative impacts of uncontrolled exploitation of the environment is climate change, which affect everyone. Therefore, it is wrong for a few people to wreck the world, the livelihoods and future of others for their selfish ends (Francis, 2012). A system that thrives through greed and exploitation is immoral and unfair. Are the few dollars given to charity and community development projects a token meant to blind society from seeing the exploitation and greed of corporations? Whatever answer one gives, it is clear that the OWM has put corporations to task regarding the level of their commitment to social responsibility, and recast extreme economic inequalities as a moral problem that needs to be addressed.
On the economic front, the movement’s opposition to economic inequalities questions the relevance of capitalism in the world today. It questions the extent to which individuals are free to make profits through hard work in an environment that supports free enterprise. Is communism the way to go? Should corporations share their profits with the poor? Should they be taxed more to support welfare programmes? These questions suggest that there is a defect with modern capitalism, raising further questions whether governments should regulate the economy to protect the poor from the claws of corporate greed.
The utilitarian approach would suggest that governments should intervene to protect the interests of the majority. The theory argues in favor of an action that results in the greatest good (Tittle, 2000). ...