As the Occupy movement continues to battle corporate (and what I like to call in a broader sense, "institutional") influence and corruption in our country, I have seen throughout the various Occupations, many varying divergences from one another, regarding the causes they take on.
From women's rights, to gay rights, civil rights and privacy rights. Environmental protection and corruption regulation and accountability...the list goes on. And while I myself am a great supporter of most of these causes and more, I have noticed a largely underdiscussed topic in regards to the movement, its aims and actions.
I'm a former political professional myself, so organization as a trade is something I know to be both art and science. In regards to its science, ideological mapping and tracking has been something of a hobby for a rather long time. With the conventional concepts of left and right rather evident on issue and fringe levels, the more one looks at the breakdown of individual positions and overriding philosophies (their topical contradictions included,) the more one comes to see how complicated and intercorrelated the varying positions and overall political spectrum become.
As such, as I look at Occupy, I see very strong leftist and centrist-pragmatist presence, but generally speaking, the factions which comprise the OWS movement range from the red-anarchists and marxist communists, to free market Ron Paul libertarian conservatives. Mainstream Democrats (who these days are Republican lite in many ways, IMO) make their presence felt, both in camps/GAs, as well as through the party's institutional allies such as major unions and PACs like Moveon. About the only groups or interests not represented in some way in some form are the corporate free-market conservatives and wealthy elites themselves, short of the cameo appearances by outspoken moguls and celebrities.
But the real current I've always found that bound these group together, beyond the general frustration and populist rage that inspired the original protests, is the specific and cross-ideological matter of influence peddling in general.
Each group and individual have, within some respect, their own comprehensive view on how the country should be governed and run. These ideas are varying mixes of philosophical/ideological positions and issue interest based considerations. But either way, the core of their rage, aside from the fallout from the past and present malfeasance by power actors, is that their will isn't even given the chance to be properly argued in power.
With industrial and special interest powers dominating the narratives and debates, politicians roundly ignoring the mass calls for action on the whole range of issues at hand, and corporate media interests spoon feeding crafted messages, its not hard to see why they feel this way. But the important part is not why, but how. How does this come to happen?
Money's influence in politics for a time, became the central narrative to OWS and in many ways still is. It is therefore my opinon that within such an ideologically diverse movement, wherein diametric opposites lived, worked, protested and supported eachother in the name of something greater than their differences, that election and lobbying reform are the only true core issue to OWS.