Even if the funeral procession hasnt officially begun, and the inheritance has yet to be divided, there appears to be enough solid evidence to formally announce that capitalism is, at this very moment, preparing to return to its maker. Much like other concepts that seemed eternal, but whose downfall gave way to new perspectives and spirits, our current enemy is undergoing the same process: The free market is under attack. The death of this economic tyrant has been taking place for some time now. The most significant deterioration began in 2008, with the outbreak of the global economic crisis led by falling stock markets and the collapse of such major investment banks as Lehman Brothers and the nationalization of American International Group, Inc. (AIG). Suddenly Americans understood that it might be best for everyone, the rich, the poor and everyone in between, that the state oversee, control and even nationalize assets that really belong to the public. During an earthquake, it is recommended to stick close to the ground in order to survive. We should act in the same way when facing an economic quake: lie low and wait it out. However, the recovery effort has silenced a new proposal for a safer, more equitable economic system. Citizens clearly no longer want the tyranny of market forces, the arbitrariness of the market's will and the capriciousness of its rises and falls. Lehman Brothers executives may have little in common with the protesters camping out in tents throughout Israel. But the two groups do share a common denominator: even if they won't admit it, both have demanded that the state take the reins and shape an upgraded and renewed model of welfare policy. Civil social protests are among the best things to have happened to us recently. Yet, still, it is a mixed blessing. The specificity of the protests, be it cottage cheese prices, housing costs or employment opportunities, allow them to achieve important targeted goals. These protests, however, deal with only one issue at a time and don't allow for broader social change. The problem is that these devoted and creative protesters have not, and will not, heaven forbid, call themselves socialists. They do not view themselves as part of the larger worldwide movement envisioning a different economic order and world view. It worries me that an economics student who is sleeping in a tent today might be a corporate board member tomorrow, and will fondly recall the sweaty days of the July 2011 tent protest as he or she might recall the army and the trip to India after. Will a law student still feel obliged to uphold these social values even after he or she has found a cheap place to lay his or her head? I am worried, frustrated and even a bit hopeless when I try to envision how these authentic, lively protests might potentially foment long-term change. It's good that people protest against what ails them. But what happens when the pain heals? Does the protest also pass? What's even better is when people protest against not just what ails them, but protest for what is important to them, for something larger than themselves, for something that not only directly affects them, but is painful for someone else. There is a chance to find comprehensive, not just sustainable, solutions among those who make the connection between what disturbs them and what is fitting and true; between the private struggles into broad political efforts; between the specific problems and the overall policy. Perhaps we can find inspiration in the somewhat outdated yet classic socialist anthem written in 1871 by Eugène Pottier, which implores: We will destroy this world of violence
Down to the foundations, and then
We will build our new world.
He who was nothing will become everything!
