Conservatives Misunderstand Occupy Wall Street

Many conservative writers and speakers are categorizing the Occupy Wall Street movement into a right vs. left, liberal vs. conservative issue. For example, Aaron Biebert at the writes in an open letter to the #ows protestors:

You speak of greedy big companies not sharing their profits, but you forget that these companies were only created for profit. It’s the reason people start companies. Without a profit motive, there would be few big companies to employ people or create wealth for investors on Wall Street.

He goes on to tell OccupyWallStreet protestors that it's their fault, they shouldn't protest, and they should just go out and get jobs. I've heard this many times.

There is truth there. People shouldn't expect to protest their way to success in business or in life. If there really are people protesting who don't want to work and instead want a handout, who are against profit and markets as concepts, then yes, they misunderstand.

But conservatives who think that Wall Street is a free market are confused as well.

How un-free would Wall Street have to get for people to think it needs reform? Would it populate highest positions in government with those who would influence laws and money flows in their favor? Would it use that influence to get trillions in bailout money? Or, might it even control central banks to such a degree that they keep interest rates artificially low so they can continue to borrow cheap money to speculate and control the rest of the market?

Would it use its influence in the media to divide people into right and left so that they couldn't get together, unify, and see what was really going on?

You know Wall Street's biggest fear? The Tea Party and Occupy Wall Street unifying into a single movement that would expose their hijacking of America's markets.