This article is ridiculous.

Editor,

This article ("Opposite Sides of the Protest Come Together, Briefly") is ridiculous.

"Wall Street" in common parlance and in the lexicon of the Occupy movement does not mean "underlings who work for financial institutions."

It means corrupt financial institutions, decision makers in corrupt financial institutions, and the antidemocratic concentration of political power in those corrupt institutions via corrupt financial relationships and a corrupt revolving door between those institutions and all branches of government.

Is the NYT really so clueless about what is going on in the streets of the entire world and so naive with regard to the concentration of wealth and power over the last 30 years that you think a conversation between Joe Stockbroker and a kid with his hat on sideways is what this movement is trying to achieve?

And the kid. Couldn't you have chosen a protester who is more politically sophisticated than a kid who is obviously suffering under the neoliberal regime but has only a vague, kid's understanding of how that regime is sucking the life-blood out of our society?

Set up an interview between me and a Wall Street CEO, don't edit what is said, and post it on your website. I would be willing to give that debate a crack, speaking only for myself, not representing anybody else.

Re: "Opposite Sides of the Protest Come Together, Briefly" (10/14/2011)