If this isn't actually a coordinated effort among cities to simultaneously clear their downtowns of Occupy encampments in time for the Christmas shopping season, the various raids sure do seem to be inspired by each other. But if authorities think they can break this movement by destroying tents and supplies, bashing in a few heads, and catch-and-releasing dozens or hundreds of protesters here and there, they've got another think coming.

While the semi-permanence of the tents and kitchens and libraries hold a symbolic value closely linked to the word "occupy," that symbolism is at its heart ironic. It is in fact the Wall Street bankers and the riot police enforcing their dictates who are the true occupiers, while the protesters would be more accurately understood as an indigenous resistance movement. The police can destroy the people's camps, but they can't actually destroy the people, who through force of numbers can always pick up and move and reoccupy at will. Besides, it's not the overnight camps that create the most disruption; it's the day time rallies and demonstrations that are interfering with the normal workings of the city (i.e., commerce). If the protesters continue to fight this as the nonviolent guerilla war that it is, camp busting will prove futile.

Or to put this in economic terms that the One Percenters might understand: Human capital is mobile. I mean, if you can't control the flow of human capital across our borders, how are you going to control the flow of human capital within them, while still attempting to keep your cities friendly to commerce? Of course, you can't. And if there's one thing the 99 Percent have in abundance, it's untapped human capital.