Nutz
Gold Member
- Feb 27, 2014
- 14,814
- 1,810
- 265
- Banned
- #1
I found this article, it is a pretty good summary of what I think about the Tea Party and its Teaper members. It is rather long and I don't agree with all of it, so I will only quote the parts that best describe Teapers and their hate movement.
Tea Party?s hot mess: Inside a noisy, disenchanted movement - Salon.com
There are a couple of really key differences, one of which has to do with change. An establishment conservative doesnt necessarily embrace change of any kind; in fact, theres a reason they cling to conservatism, because they prefer stability...if a change is going take place, they prefer to have organic, controlled change versus revolutionary change.
Now, a reactionary conservative, they dont want change at all...they will do anything they can to protest social change of any kind, up to and including breaking the law Thats what the Klan did; thats what the Tea Party has done on a couple of occasions with their violence. Its not as much violence as you saw with the Klan in the 1920s, but you do see some of the ways in which they break law and order. If youre a real conservative, youre supposed to be all about law and order. But these reactionary conservatives theyre not completely about law and order if it means capitulation and the loss of their social prestige.
Reagan comes to mind...his philosophies shit on by racist teapers who have reacted to losing to a black man...twice.But these reactionary conservatives [Teapers] see policy differences, or differences of policy preferences, as a contest between good and evil. They have this Manichaean way of looking at politics, this apocalyptic way of looking at politics. Therefore, compromise cannot be [allowed]. Compromise will not be tolerated whatsoever, because they see it as concession to evil, whereas an establishment conservative knows that compromise is necessary.
Could you expand a bit on the point you just made about Tea Party lawlessness...
Think about what happened in Arizona, with the attack of some of the Arizona representatives offices that voted in favor of the Affordable Care Act. Some of their offices were vandalized by Tea Partyers thats one example. A more recent example, quite honestly, is what recently happened in Nevada, those people that went on that shooting spree that killed those cops those people were linked to the Tea Party. Im not saying they were members of the Tea Party, but they were Tea Party sympathizers. As a matter of fact, [their victims] were draped in the Gadsden flag. So, Im just saying [Tea Party supporters are] not above breaking law and order. Theyre not above challenging law and order.
Its bigger than racism. People who tend to support the Tea Party, they tend to be sexist, they tend to be homophobic, they tend to be xenophobic; so its not just about race. Its about difference. Its about anything that violates their phenotypical norm of what its supposed to mean to be an American: white, mainly male, middle-class, middle-aged or older, heterosexual, and native born.
They would say people like Ben Carson and Herman Cain [are] these sort of silver-minded Negroes. Theyre the exceptions. Now if we want to talk about looking at black folks as a whole, no theyre racist. There are some exceptional people that agree with their views whom they like and whom they want to hold out there to blunt any claims that theyre racist; theyre going to pick a couple token people. But that doesnt absolve them of racism.
So theyre not dumb, and theyre not working-class or poor and this has been the case with Birchers, this was the case with the 1920s Ku Klux Klan, this was the case with the Know-Nothing Party in the 1850s. Same demographic group, every time.
Another problem is just the double-talk that they use. They claim theyre about small government; theyre really not. They claim that they dont like Barack Obama cause hes a progressive; have they really looked at his legislative record? He governs as a centrist, regardless of what they believe his beliefs to be. On that, if you look at what happened on George Bushs watch I mean, lets be for real: the deficit on George Bushs expanded 104 percent If you look at Clintons tenure, it only expanded about 14 percent. If you look at the national debt, how much that expanded on George Bushs watch; if you look at the extent to which discretionary spending in George Bushs first term expanded I think it expanded by like 48-49 percent. I mean, come on! We didnt see any Tea Partyers out there at the time. We saw nothing when George Bush was doing all this stuff. George W. Bush got TARP passed. We saw nothing. Now we get Obama in, and now the world is going to shit
Underground meaning back to the White Nationalist meetings.What happens with these reactionary, right-wing movements, historically, is that they tend to coalesce whenever [the people involved] believe social change is happening too fast So if theres no threat to the American way of life, these people will go underground, as people say. But that doesnt mean theyll necessarily go away. For a while, they will go underground and we wont have to deal with them. But as soon as they perceive another existential threat, then they will reappear again. It happens all the time, historically.
you see what the Tea Party is doing to the Republican Party right now? Its tearing it apart. So if I were a strategist, Id continue to pick candidates that make the Tea Party group want to remain politically viable because its ripping the Republican Party in half.
Tea Party?s hot mess: Inside a noisy, disenchanted movement - Salon.com