How Pope Francis Can Finish What Occupy Wall Street Started

The pope’s astronomical popularity means his income-inequality message can go further than Occupy’s ever could.

Pope Francis prays in front of the statue of the Immaculate Conceptionon at Spanish Steps December 8, 2013 in Rome, Italy. 
National Journal
Matt Berman
Dec. 12, 2013, 5:36 a.m.

Every­body likes the pope.

Or at least nearly every­body. Time‘s newly min­ted Per­son of the Year is viewed fa­vor­ably by 92 per­cent of Amer­ic­an Cath­ol­ics, ac­cord­ing to a new ABC/Wash­ing­ton Post poll. The same poll found that 69 per­cent of all Amer­ic­ans view Fran­cis fa­vor­ably. And these num­bers have been rising since Fran­cis’s elec­tion in March. A new Wall Street Journ­al poll says that the pope’s pop­ular­ity has nearly doubled since Ju­ly. Fran­cis is already at least as pop­u­lar as Pope John Paul II was at his peak.

So when Pope Fran­cis is­sued his World Day of Peace mes­sage on Thursday at­tack­ing the “widen­ing gap between those who have more and those who must be con­tent with the crumbs,” Amer­ic­ans listened. This is the same pope who in Septem­ber cri­ti­cized the glob­al eco­nom­ic sys­tem for wor­ship­ping “a god called money” and said that “we want a just sys­tem that helps every­one.” It’s the same pope who de­nounced “trickle-down” eco­nom­ics and warned that the “id­ol­atry of money” would lead to a “new tyranny.”

While the Oc­cupy Wall Street move­ment that began in 2011 de­serves cred­it for bring­ing in­come in­equal­ity to the polit­ic­al front-and-cen­ter, it’s Pope Fran­cis who can ac­tu­ally keep it there.

A big part of the reas­on for that is his pop­ular­ity. Oc­cupy Wall Street nev­er had any­thing like the pope’s ap­prov­al num­bers. A month after the move­ment began in fall 2011, more Amer­ic­ans ap­proved of Oc­cupy than dis­ap­proved by a slim mar­gin, 39 per­cent to 35 per­cent.

But a vastly lar­ger num­ber of Amer­ic­ans sup­por­ted the ideas be­hind the Oc­cupy move­ment. A Decem­ber 2011 Pew Re­search poll found that while Oc­cupy at that point had just a 44 per­cent ap­prov­al rat­ing, 77 per­cent of Amer­ic­ans be­lieved that “too much power in the hands of a few rich people and cor­por­a­tions,” and 61 per­cent be­lieved that the U.S. eco­nom­ic sys­tem was un­fair and favored the wealthy.

The ideas about in­equal­ity ex­pressed by Oc­cupy in 2011 and by Fran­cis today are not un­com­mon among Amer­ic­ans. But the pope is an in­fin­itely more power­ful con­duit to carry and cham­pi­on them. And he can be that cham­pi­on without sud­denly ditch­ing the papacy and ac­cept­ing a policy gig at the White House. The pope, with his in­fal­lib­il­ity and his U.S. base of over 75 mil­lion Amer­ic­an Cath­ol­ics, is already stand­ing atop one of his­tory’s largest soap­boxes.

It makes sense that, in a re­cent speech on eco­nom­ic fair­ness, Pres­id­ent Obama quoted Fran­cis, ask­ing “How can it be that it is not a news item when an eld­erly home­less per­son dies of ex­pos­ure, but it is news when the stock mar­ket loses two points?” It’s much more dif­fi­cult to ima­gine the pres­id­ent quot­ing Oc­cupy in that ma­jor speech on eco­nom­ic mo­bil­ity — in no small part be­cause it’d be kind of weird for Obama to just start wag­gling his fin­gers.

But as Obama tries to base the re­mainder of his pres­id­ency on mo­bil­ity and in­equal­ity, he has few al­lies more power­ful than the Vat­ic­an.

What We're Following See More »
STAFF PICKS
These (Supposed) Iowa and NH Escorts Tell All
8 hours ago
NATIONAL JOURNAL AFTER DARK

Before we get to the specifics of this exposé about escorts working the Iowa and New Hampshire primary crowds, let’s get three things out of the way: 1.) It’s from Cosmopolitan; 2.) most of the women quoted use fake (if colorful) names; and 3.) again, it’s from Cosmopolitan. That said, here’s what we learned:

  • Business was booming: one escort who says she typically gets two inquiries a weekend got 15 requests in the pre-primary weekend.
  • Their primary season clientele is a bit older than normal—”40s through mid-60s, compared with mostly twentysomething regulars” and “they’ve clearly done this before.”
  • They seemed more nervous than other clients, because “the stakes are higher when you’re working for a possible future president” but “all practiced impeccable manners.”
  • One escort “typically enjoy[s] the company of Democrats more, just because I feel like our views line up a lot more.”
Source:
STATE VS. FEDERAL
Restoring Some Sanity to Encryption
8 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

No matter where you stand on mandating companies to include a backdoor in encryption technologies, it doesn’t make sense to allow that decision to be made on a state level. “The problem with state-level legislation of this nature is that it manages to be both wildly impractical and entirely unenforceable,” writes Brian Barrett at Wired. There is a solution to this problem. “California Congressman Ted Lieu has introduced the ‘Ensuring National Constitutional Rights for Your Private Telecommunications Act of 2016,’ which we’ll call ENCRYPT. It’s a short, straightforward bill with a simple aim: to preempt states from attempting to implement their own anti-encryption policies at a state level.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
What the Current Crop of Candidates Could Learn from JFK
8 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

Much has been made of David Brooks’s recent New York Times column, in which confesses to missing already the civility and humanity of Barack Obama, compared to who might take his place. In NewYorker.com, Jeffrey Frank reminds us how critical such attributes are to foreign policy. “It’s hard to imagine Kennedy so casually referring to the leader of Russia as a gangster or a thug. For that matter, it’s hard to imagine any president comparing the Russian leader to Hitler [as] Hillary Clinton did at a private fund-raiser. … Kennedy, who always worried that miscalculation could lead to war, paid close attention to the language of diplomacy.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Hillary Is Running Against the Bill of 1992
8 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

The New Covenant. The Third Way. The Democratic Leadership Council style. Call it what you will, but whatever centrist triangulation Bill Clinton embraced in 1992, Hillary Clinton wants no part of it in 2016. Writing for Bloomberg, Sasha Issenberg and Margaret Talev explore how Hillary’s campaign has “diverged pointedly” from what made Bill so successful: “For Hillary to survive, Clintonism had to die.” Bill’s positions in 1992—from capital punishment to free trade—“represented a carefully calibrated diversion from the liberal orthodoxy of the previous decade.” But in New Hampshire, Hillary “worked to juggle nostalgia for past Clinton primary campaigns in the state with the fact that the Bill of 1992 or the Hillary of 2008 would likely be a marginal figure within today’s Democratic politics.”

Source:
STAFF PICKS
Trevor Noah Needs to Find His Voice. And Fast.
9 hours ago
WHY WE CARE

At first, “it was pleasant” to see Trevor Noah “smiling away and deeply dimpling in the Stewart seat, the seat that had lately grown gray hairs,” writes The Atlantic‘s James Parker in assessing the new host of the once-indispensable Daily Show. But where Jon Stewart was a heavyweight, Noah is “a very able lightweight, [who] needs time too. But he won’t get any. As a culture, we’re not about to nurture this talent, to give it room to grow. Our patience was exhausted long ago, by some other guy. We’re going to pass judgment and move on. There’s a reason Simon Cowell is so rich. Impress us today or get thee hence. So it comes to this: It’s now or never, Trevor.”

Source:
×