Topical thread: Tea Party politics
Via National memo comes a review of a book on the ‘Tea Party’.
One might imagine the changes that worry Tea Partiers to be primarily economic. But Tea Party members rarely emphasize economic concerns. The nightmare of societal decline is usually painted in cultural hues, and the villains in the picture are freeloading social groups, liberal politicians, bossy professionals, big government and the news media. Forces conspire, Arizona retiree Stella Fisher says, “to the breaking down of conservative society.” Kids today, she says, think “it’s not so important that you get married, even if you have a baby with somebody.” Members of the Tea Party peer out at a fast-changing society and worry. The public image of the Tea Party is one of anger. But in our experience, the more typical emotion is fear. (Theda Skocpol is a professor of government and sociology at Harvard University. Vanessa Williamson is a doctoral candidate in government and social policy at Harvard. This is an excerpt from their forthcoming book, The Tea Party and the Remaking of Republican Conservatism to be published Jan. 2 by Oxford University Press.)
Sounds a bit odd. True, I only know one Tea Party member (he’s trying to beat Olympia Snowe to the Republican Maine Senate nomination and very good luck to him too) but I wouldn’t describe him as conservative at all.
A liberal (in the English sense, of classical liberal like me, think libertarian without being crazy about it) is how I would describe him. He’s certainly a social and cultural liberal. So I’m not really sure where all that conservative stuff is coming from. Maybe my sample if just too small?
An individual with electoral political aspirations may identify with one ideological group or another not because they share the ideology, but because they see greater opportunity of success within that group relative to another. Gaining recognition in the two established parties is much more difficult for the very reason that they have a far larger number of aspirants vying for positions of recognition, influence and power. The Tea Party gave opportunity to a new and little recognized group of politicians who held no significant positions in the established parties. That group is still benefiting from the media’s absurd focus on this small band of fearful people who allow themselves to be manipulated by a yet smaller group of fear mongering political manipulators. Note that the Tea Party’s time may have run out due to the media’s interest in what’s new and different at the moment. Not the Tea Party and its fearful adherents.
I re-read the quote Tim and couldn’t figure out what question you were answering Tim.
I re read the quote Tim, and you seem to be answering a question that wasn’t asked.
Around here in SWGA, there is a good deal of anger directed at people who threaten the social order. During 2008 and the summer of 2009, the Tea Party was quite evident in the summer of 2009 made a strong effort to unseat the local Congressman, an Afro-American Blue Dog Dem. He’s still there and they are no longer in evidence.
That group was greatly influenced by Armey’s Freedom Works. The were white middle-aged people who were worried about Medicare, Guns-Gays-Godlessness, Commies in the WH, and so on. A lot of what they had to say came straight from Fox News.There was a lot of unstated racism but no violence. And, everybody left hr/his guns at home. You don’t fool around with guns around here. Lots of people have weapons they’d just as soon not parade around in public.
In comparison to the 60’s, these people were better organized and educated than the citizens of Selma. They were angry in a different way. Ordinary people in the South are just plain screwed now and always have been–no difference whether you’re white or black. It gets old being poor. Even in good times unemployment and underemployment are common not just for African-Americans but for all non-college educated people. There was not a lot a lot of factory work before and less now.
In addition, other than the military, there’s not a lot in the way of effective job creation going on. This town and the surrounding county got their start because of the plantation culture. Now, plantations are tourist destinations or hunting reserves. Lumps of labor don’t exist in the economy elsewhere, but they sure do here. Things are bad enough without change. When the Democrats start talking about that hopey-changey thing, they just rile people up.
There is some similarity between the Tea Party the Occupy movement in that people in both groups are unhappy with the status quo. The TP’ers seem to want to go back to the future to the some imaginary period when the Walton family was the one on TV every week–not the one that has more assets than the lower 1/3 of all earners in the US. The Occupiers want to do the same thing but stop travelling in time before corporations ruled the country somewhere in the pre-Goldman Sachs era when people had Unions and good wages.
The Tea Party was an exercise in power for the Billionaire Boys Club. They were able to change the composition of Congress in a mid-term election. Now, it’s round two. There are some signs that the newbies in Congress need to regroup. Revolutions are hard work. Both the President’s Deficit Commission and the Super Committee failed to provide the massive Grand Bargain that Peterson and the BBC have so earnest sought. SS is still there, more or less intact. And, people haven’t
quite figured out what’s going on. Well, I live in a plutocracy down here. And, although the pine trees are wonderful neighbors, most people elsewhere need jobs unrelated to the timber business. This will be an interesting election. We’ll just have to wait to see who is left in Congress when the dust settles. NancyO
Tim
libertarian is by definition crazy. something you should be able to figure out by the time you have been older than seventeen for a few years. as for being a classical liberal… i think, not sure, that means someone who accepts the lies written by the “economist” apologists for the robber barons of the last … oops, the other last… century.
based on what you have written here in the past i would guess that you the classical rich man’s inability to see the poor man waiting your table. that can work for awhile until the poor man gets too poor, which seems to happen shortly after the rich man gets too rich.
i don’t have anything against the rich, except for certain criminals and congressmen, but if you can’t keep reasonably good track of reality you are in for some bad surprises.
Tim
libertarian is by definition crazy. something you should be able to figure out by the time you have been older than seventeen for a few years. as for being a classical liberal… i think, not sure, that means someone who accepts the lies written by the “economist” apologists for the robber barons of the last … oops, the other last… century.
based on what you have written here in the past i would guess that you have the classical rich man’s inability to see the poor man waiting your table. that can work for awhile until the poor man gets too poor, which seems to happen shortly after the rich man gets too rich.
i don’t have anything against the rich, except for certain criminals and congressmen, but if you can’t keep reasonably good track of reality you are in for some bad surprises.
Nancy
SS is not still there more or less intact. It has in fact been destroyed. What was insurance for workers paid for by the workers themselves, is now welfare paid for by deficit spending… exactly what Peterson always said it was, only it has been destroyed by the Democrats. Who would have predicted that?
I don’t know the Tea Partiers from the other “angry conservatives,” but to the extent that they are frightened by fear mongering politicians who point at the “cultural liberals” the cultural liberals have only themselves to blame. There is a way to do economic liberalism (FDR sense) without frightening the horses.
I can tell you from my experience in the great northwest that when they shut the mills because the demand for logs was off, and then downsized their workforce because they automated the mills, everyone was sad, but then the owners blamed it all on the spotted owl, and that gave the workers someone to hate besides their bosses… who, after all, gave them money… and presto, the natural allies of the New Deal became Republicans.
Now I don’t know what the moral to that story is because I went to Republican meetings back than and tried to point this out to them, and try to explain the concept of “indicator species” and they nearly lynched me.
Coberly,
I don’t want to stir up too much mud, but: You’re referring to the payroll tax cut, right? But unless I’m mistaken (and I might be) there have been payroll tax cuts before. In fact, again IIRC, when the GW Bush tax cuts were first introduced, the Dems espoused targeted payroll tax cuts, claiming that those would do more for employment than cutting taxes for people who don’t need it.
Don’t get me wrong. I’m pro-SS. And I think one of the ironies of the last decade is the hue and cry over one of the few portions (arguably) of the federal government that has been running an enormous surplus. But be that as it may, the payroll tax cut is at least sold as something temporary to boost the employment situation, much like deficit spending to boost the economy. Right? Let’s not chicken-little too much.
felipe
don’t worry about too much mud. there is plenty to go around. i was referring to the tax “holiday” and it was a bad idea when first mentioned. there was some hope it would only be a rhetorical disaster, until Obama decided that letting it expire would be a “huge tax increase” thus effectively declaring it permanent.
there was an earlier tax holiday for employers to “incentivize” new hires.. still a bad bad idea.
if you can see a way to restore SS as an insurance plan for workers paid for by workers.. and prevent it from sliding into welfare as we knew it and then welfare as the Peterson would like it… I will be on your side. But chicken little? at this point,my friend,the sky has already fallen.
Tyranny of the minority
Recently, some thirty-eight members of the US Congress representing a minority political group calling themselves the ‘Tea Party’ tyrannized the nation by threatening to bring about default on the nation’s debt unless our government bowed to their will. How could such a small group wreak such havoc? They had enough votes to determine whether John Boehner was to remain Speaker. The NRA is another example. With a membership of less than 4.5 million they have been able to control congressional elections across the nation and sway presidential elections. No candidate for office dares challenge them.
This same tyranny by a minority is going on in many of our states, and in a lot of city and county, governments. When a minority, be they ever so small, controls enough votes to determine the outcome of an election; they have political control. In these situations, elections may not be about the most relevant issues facing the voters; politicians may dare not even address these issues for fear of alienating one or another of the minority groups. As a consequence, an election may be decided on the basis not offending a religious group, a group of civil or gay rights activists, one or another ethnic group, … In a way, this is another form of the horse trading that goes in the US Congress, or in coalition governments around the world. The big problem is that our politicians, seemingly willing to do anything in order to get elected, fail to address those issues most in need of being addressed (see above in re illegal immigration).
Tyranny of the minority
Recently, some thirty-eight members of the US Congress representing a minority political group calling themselves the ‘Tea Party’ tyrannized the nation by threatening to bring about default on the nation’s debt unless our government bowed to their will. How could such a small group wreak such havoc? They had enough votes to determine whether John Boehner was to remain Speaker. The NRA is another example. With a membership of less than 4.5 million they have been able to control congressional elections across the nation and sway presidential elections. No candidate for office dares challenge them.
This same tyranny by a minority is going on in many of our states, and in a lot of city and county, governments. When a minority, be they ever so small, controls enough votes to determine the outcome of an election; they have political control. In these situations, elections may not be about the most relevant issues facing the voters; politicians may dare not even address these issues for fear of alienating one or another of the minority groups. As a consequence, an election may be decided on the basis not offending a religious group, a group of civil or gay rights activists, one or another ethnic group, … In a way, this is another form of the horse trading that goes in the US Congress, or in coalition governments around the world. The big problem is that our politicians, seemingly willing to do anything in order to get elected, fail to address those issues most in need of being addressed .
ken
if your analysis is correct, maybe it’s time to start a minority political group that can sway presidential elections.