I hesitate to put it this way, but as a first reaction, did anyone else see that first reading as a kind of cruel joke? A sad depiction of the Occupy movement drowned in satirically punk-ish language that no one can take seriously unless they never grew out of their Crass patches? But at the same time, this article is a kind of window to the past—probably not as good of an aesthetic as windows like Mad Men or something, but true to form. There’s so much hope in that article, and there’s an intelligence there that almost can’t be taken seriously because of the rhetoric. And though now Occupy has fizzled out from a collective shrugging of what they were trying to accomplish—among other reasons, I’m sure—the problems it outlined are still prevalent and, well, terrible. If a giant movement like Occupy couldn’t address those issues, what hope is left? And is my framing of this an example of a post-Occupy world jaded about meaningful political change?