Occupy Wall Street was initially dismissed by conservative pundits as nothing more than a fringe extremist movement composed of a cocktail of the most liberal people imaginable. However, Democrats have been reluctant to claim ownership of this movement either, for fear of being compared to the right-wing Tea Party movement and of moving the party away from the center.
This raises a question: With no discernible ownership, no leadership and criticism coming from all directions, how has this movement persisted?
David Brooks, the conservative New York Times columnist who visited campus last spring, wrote that the supporters of Occupy Wall Street are nothing more than the "flamboyant fringes" of our society, attracting media attention, but failing to capture the attention of the general public.
The truth is that Occupy Wall Street is the public manifestation of years of dissatisfaction with our government's continued determination to cater to the political interests of the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans (who also finance the majority of political campaigns).
While most people won't be going down to Zuccotti Park to show their solidarity with the protesters, Occupy Wall Street's criticisms of economic inequality and corporate greed have been echoed by many voters as a primary concern in virtually every election in recent memory.
In 2008, Barack Obama promised he would bring change to a Washington corrupted by the power of lobbyists and afraid to do what's right for the majority of Americans.
Three years later, lobbyists are as powerful as ever and President Obama is walking a thin line, trying to appeal to the masses while appeasing the economic powers on Wall Street to ensure that his re-election campaign is well funded.
Our president, it seems, has forgotten that winning a general election means getting people to believe in his message again. He won't do that simply by outspending his opponents on the campaign trail.
In spite of callous criticisms of the Occupy Wall Street movement from people like GOP chairman Pat Mullins, who called the protesters "disgusting" and "despicable," a Time Magazine poll shows the majority of Americans support the protesters, while just 13 percent of Americans hold a "very unfavorable" opinion of them.
This suggests that the arguments of the protesters might not be as out of touch with mainstream America as some conservative pundits would have us believe. In fact, 70 percent of Americans hold a negative opinion of Wall Street, according to the same poll.
Republicans have resorted to personal attacks on Occupy Wall Street participants in an attempt to discredit the opinions of the protesters as irrelevant and unrepresentative of what "real" Americans want. Defending Wall Street or even appearing to favor it in this economic climate would be tantamount to political suicide.
The fact that the GOP has resorted to personal attacks shows that Occupy Wall Street threatens Republican efforts to prevent tax increases on the wealthiest Americans.
The hope of the conservative elite seems to be simple: that the movement known as Occupy Wall Street will disappear. The weather will get colder, people will probably become less passionate and less vociferous in expressing their dissatisfaction with the status quo, but their message will remain relevant.
It's time our politicians try to listen to the people they represent instead of favoring lobbyists who represent only a small percentage of corporations.
Politicians should work to ensure that when Wall Street prospers, Main Street does too.
Having an economic system that generates wealth is important, but when that system fails to fairly distribute wealth or produce jobs, the government should make efforts to adjust it.
America is and always has been a land of opportunity, but recently, those opportunities have become harder to find.
Maybe if we tried listening to each other instead of dismissing movements such as Occupy Wall Street as extremist, we might move a little closer to acheiving the American dream.