As the “Occupy Wall Street and Philly” movement enters its third month, protesters and people throughout the country are wrestling with an issue — what are they asking for and should they actually be there at all?

This week the debate took on a new meaning with the removal of the protest camp at Zuccotti Park in New York City. And in Philadelphia, the Occupy movement took a serious blow as well, with an alleged rape over last weekend and increasingly unsanitary conditions.

There have been reports of fighting among the homeless, causing many to believe that it has become a breeding ground for unnecessary protest, versus a movement for change.

“Occupy Wall Street has not necessarily lost its steam, but the lack of actions beyond showing up to a protest leave those who agree with the concept, but don’t have the time or desire to join the protest … on the sidelines less enthusiastic,” said Michal Ann Strahilevitz, professor of business and marketing at Golden Gate University in San Francisco. “The basic ideas behind the movement are still felt by the public majority, we are pissed and we want reform.”

But the question is — what kinds of reform?

 “Many Americans are dissatisfied by our current financial system structure and the lack of regulation,” said Strahilevitz. “However, the movement needs to move from proving that many people are angry to having a concrete set of actionable goals and different ways people can participate other than camping out at the protest site.”

Bill Dobbs, a member of the public relations working group that has helped spawn the nationwide movement, said in early November that “The push for demands has generated a lot of controversy; there are ardent supporters and there are ardent opponents. In all; these discussions about demands, is ‘Where … should this movement go?’”

A “Principles of Solidarity” statement accepted by the protest’s general assembly on Sept. 23 — six days after protesters set up camp near Wall Street — promised that “demands will follow.”

Just over a week later, the demands working group — one of more than 80 groups formed to tackle topics like alternative currencies, political and electoral reform, trade justice and tactics — began trying to come up with some specific aims.

From the beginning, coming up with demands capable of winning the support of a vast majority of the protesters was problematic. Minutes of the group’s meetings over the past month and a half chronicle the discord that the effort has generated.

Opponents have accused the group, which has some 250 members online and a few dozen who meet in person, of going against the principles of the “Occupy” movement. Some issued their own demand, calling on the group to merge with another one better aligned with their vision — or even disband.

“Inherently, in asking for demands, you are accepting that there is a power greater than yourself, which is something that this movement is categorically against,” Patrick Bruner, a 23-year-old protester, told MSNBC.com. “This movement is founded on autonomous action and collective wisdom.”

Some members of the demands group said they welcomed the dissent and asked questions. But others saw it as a calculated effort to disrupt the process.

“The Occupy Movement has never eloquently stated its goal or goals,” said Gary Frisch, a Philadelphia based public relations specialist, in an email to The Tribune. “The movement clinged to abstract notions such as ‘corporate greed’ and ‘income inequality’ and offered little more than sound bites like ‘the other 99 percent’ in lieu of an actual agenda.”

Early on, the group’s message and agenda seemed to be a “Jobs for All” demand, which was presented to the general assembly for discussion more than a week ago in New York.

Members of the demands group distributed copies of the draft and read it out loud. Breakout discussion groups were held, with a member from the group sitting in on each one. At the end, each demands’ member reported back to the general assembly what their breakout circle had talked about.

Some of the dozens of other protesters in attendance backed the jobs demand, while others suggested revisions or their own alternatives. There was even an idea for a constitutional amendment, to specify that corporations aren’t people and money is not speech. But the eviction of the protesters Monday night in New York slowed the process.

Gary Gerstle, a professor of American history at Vanderbilt University and an expert in social movements, said that while it was important for the protesters to “let things emerge,” they’ll need to issue a common set of demands “that different groups are going to be able to unite around and also at the same time allows them to pursue their local interests.”

“There has to be a big demand that addresses the central issue of inequality, of suffering and opportunity, the 99 percent versus the 1 percent,” he said. “How does that get concretized in a real issue that really has legs and can really change the face of politics?”

He said the authorities may have done the protesters a favor with the eviction, because the latter didn’t appear to have a “clear strategy” for moving to the second stage of their protest.

A number of the protesters who don’t support demands see the movement’s physical encampments as success in itself, noting that they have created a space for open dialogue across a broad swath of social and economic classes and age groups.

Jennifer Klein, a professor of 20th century U.S. history at Yale University, said that the occupation strategy had served the protest well in the movement’s early days.

“There has been so much obfuscation of elite class power in the U.S. for the last three decades that taking over those spaces … and challenging the class and spatial boundaries of the city, is really a good starting point,” she said.

But she, too, said that the time has come for the protesters to explain what they want.

“I think it’s time to think big,” she said. “What is the point of thinking in terms of, ‘If we could just come up with this one little bill’? I just think lobbyists will so easily outmaneuver them.”

Despite the loss of the tent camp in New York and the challenges in Philadelphia, many believe that the movement should continue to carve out spaces where individual voices can be heard, rather than trying to meld them into a chorus.

“I definitely think the movement has lost steam,” said Frisch. “Without a specific end game, it’s inevitable that an organization or protest lose the support of both the public and its own members.  For example, how do you gauge success?  How do you determine that your ‘occupation’ is having an impact?  Is the mayor of the city coming to meet with your leaders a tangible success, or just a way to get on the news?  It’s like the ‘war on terrorism’ or the ‘war on drugs’ — these are concepts, not wars, and you can’t achieve victory in a concept.”

MSNBC.com contributed to this report.

Zack Burgess is the enterprise writer for The Tribune. He is a freelance writer and editor who covers culture, politics and sports. He can be contacted at zackburgess.com.