The internet, it’s very basic level is about information and I think that although it has become an extremely important tool for accountability, it is also somewhat of a double edged sword. What I mean by this is that the sharing of information certainly helps to raise awareness about issues, but it can also lead to severe apathy and information overload. As a result, it has created a new movement of slacktivism, where people think that they can change things by clicking the “like” or “share” button on a facebook link.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slacktivism
http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2013-05/4/unicef-slacktivism
That’s not to say that all the sharing of information taking place doesn’t lead to activism against injustice, as there have been many benefits to the residual quality of the information found on the internet. Nowhere else is the metaphor of the double edged sword more apparent than during a comparison between the The Arab spring and occupy Wall St. movements. They are possibly the most dramatic events of public dissent, (and in some cases outright rebellion), in recent memory with the Arab spring actually affecting serious social change. What most people don’t realize is that the roots of these events have roots in the same issue, corporate and government collusion to create an exploitive situation that is a detriment to the general public. Noam Chomsky speaks about the Arab spring and the motivation behind it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a8GZhtwgVKk
On the other side of the coin, Occupy Wall street started in the streets of the New York Financial district on September 17th, 2011 as a non violent reaction towards the problems in the system that had created and precipitated the 2008 financial crisis.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Occupy_Wall_Street
The reason in my opinion that Occupy Wall St. failed in the Western world was because of two reasons. First they failed to participate or operate in the same arena as the corporate power they were attempting to disrupt and overthrow, (the judiciary system). The second is that their passive approach modelled on the teachings of peaceful protest (that were successfully used by Gandhi to implement change in India) combined with the lack of a rallying issue or point possibly also worked against them as well as it allowed them to be labelled as over-entitled and lazy, thus reducing support in the general public.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mahatma_Gandhi
Most recently the Idle No More movement, which began in December 2012 as a reaction against the omnibus bill c-45, and more specifically the overhaul of the Navigable Waters Protection Act (NWPA) of 1882. It’s possible that the Idle No More movement will suffer from the same lack of a rallying cry as Occupy Wall Street as although the movement started as a reaction to the bill, it’s mantra has since evolved into a concern for ” Indigenous Sovereignty to protect water, air, land and all creation for future generations”.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idle_No_More
I think if the three movements has taught us anything, it’s that if you are going to refuse to operate within the judiciary system as all three have, than the movement has to be kinetic, passionate with people actively working in the street and have clear direction and a rallying point for those not involved to empathize with.