Even though I don’t agree with Clarissa about some aspects of the “Occupy” movement and other worldwide protests, I think this analysis is spot-on, particularly this part.

Protesters release the tension through the carnavalesque but ultimately meaningless activities and are then ready to hand themselves over to the system they ranted against with an even greater abandon.

The Occupy protests or their successors will only achieve anything when they attempt to actually occupy or to take something – protests especially as they are conduced in the US, like comedy and satire*, more blow off steam than threaten existing power structures.

Protests might be necessary but they aren’t sufficient. The Occupy protesters should’ve, for instance, actually and physically occupied Wall Street and the large banks and then sent a list of cogent demands to Congress of how to reduce the power of the kleptocracy.

Yes, many would’ve died as there is nothing so staunchly and sedulously defended as wealth. But there is a cost to every action in this world.

*In authoritarian regimes, satire of leaders on state-sanctioned TV programs is often encouraged or at the least ignored as it is well-known to be a stress reliever among the hoi pollo subservient to that regime. Jon Stewart, anyone?