Occupy Wall Street Movement

Occupy Wall Street Movement Student’s name Professor’s name Institution affiliation Date of Submission Occupy Wall Street Movement Occupy wall street movement OWS, was instigated by activists to protest against the greed corporate elite, the social inequality and the sarcastic control of major banks and multinational corporations over democratic process. The protest touched the social and political structure by referring 99% of have not and 1% of haves who controlled the social and political makeup. The movement impacted the political stand with democrats supporting the movement while the republicans were critical but had a common understanding that the movement was changing the public debate. The OWS aimed to implant that they are the 99% in the cultural and political setting (Writers for the 99%, 2011). The protest enhanced the passing of jobs Act which pursued the interest of the working class. The OWS movement though started on a low note gained momentum and changed the social and political situations to accommodate the majority people in the US. OWS movement represents somewhat of an ideological Test with accusation of bias in the right wing. The objectives of the OWS movement included the minimizing of corporate influence on politics calling for a more balanced distribution of income. The protesters advocated for good jobs and reforms on the banking and mortgage firms which were perceived to have control over the political matters. Many critics of the movement saw it a way of overthrowing capitalism, but this was contrary because the protesters highlighted the need to restore the basics of capitalist principles such as accountability. The protesters were not aggrieved about money or banking, but the protest was about the corruption which thrived on Wall Street. The movement fought against the corrosive power of major banks and corporations regarding a democratic process and the economic collapse caused by Wall Street that causes great depression in the US (Writers for the 99%, 2011). The flaming of 99% vs. 1% depicted two groups in opposition. Business leaders who represented the 1% had to understand the nature of the protest regarding decisions made on Wall Street causing financial disruption around the globe. The capital markets were structured around lies making the role of corporations to return value to shareholders. The shareholders return had become the governing principle making it impossible to regulate change as business leaders acted with respect to their incentives to maximize returns. The desperation by the liberal left which represented the minority Americans by way of ideology, had failed to shape the political debate driven by the capitalist agenda, which did not match to the expectation of the majority (Writers for the 99%, 2011). This had led the Americans to little confidence in the government providing solutions to domestic problems. The OWS signified that majority of the US people lives were worsening amid promises made in the past. All the wealth promised to improve the lives had not fulfilled as the wealthier elites accrued the largest share benefiting from politicians who viewed them as creator of the country’s prosperity. The OWS enable the political structure to change by providing equality to all its citizens (Van Gelder & Staff of Yes! Magazine, 2011). The OWS movement objective was to seek for equality to all citizens with respect to both cultural and political structures. They were against the control of politics by the wealthy elites who were not concerned on the well being of the working class. With regard to the utilitarian ethical perspective, which proves that an organization or a system have to act in manner that promotes the maximum utility that is expected for the whole community that is affected by its actions in seeking the greatest good (Schechter, 2012). The American 1% had broken the moral rule such as breaking promises, stealing and laying the majority 99% to better their lives. The Wall Street had a tendency to value stock of the expectable markets there by increasing value to shareholders return instead of valuing stock with respect to the actual market. This was one way which the Wall Street had led the country to financial crisis because it does not regard the well fare of its customers. Therefore, the greatest good for the majority is seen to be dictated by the minority wealthy elites’ unjust treatment. The OWS was taking an ethical framework that considered benevolence seriously, as it seek the operations of corporate and political scenes to incorporate utilitarianism. The Kantian ethical perspective lies on the framework of the concept of free will by the decision makers and the universalizing that will. This perspective is formulated on claims which are equivalent to acting according...