Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
December 08, 2010
Where's the war? And who are the warmongers?
A lot of people are hoping to start a war between social conservatives and libertarians in the Tea Party, and I think that represents wishful thinking on their part. That there is no denying the existence of sharp differences in philosophy within the Tea Party tent has long been obvious; I have written a number of posts about it, and I make no secret of being in the libertarian camp, nor have I ever denied my disagreements with social conservatism (especially the statist variety). But because I have also long favored a coalition between libertarians and social conservatives on issues they can both agree upon, I see no more reason for starting a "war" than the social conservatives I have encountered. Because of the horizontal, grassroots nature of the Tea Party, I think it would be very difficult to start any real war. For starters, the Tea Party is based largely on showing up at a given event. If local Tea Party organizers in, say, the RTL camp decided that a mass demonstration in front of the local Planned Parenthood headquarters was in order, they would be as free to show up as those who disagreed with the demo would be free to stay home. There is nothing new about disagreement on that issue. Ditto gay marriage, marijuana legalization, or demanding that condom lessons be stopped in schools. Individual Tea Partiers have different positions on these issues pro or con, which means that large turnouts from "THE TEA PARTY" in its entirety could hardly be expected. Few would show up. So how do you start a "war" that way?
I'm reminded of the old slogan "what if they gave a war and nobody came?"
For there to be a "war" between libertarians and social conservatives, they would have to agree to have one. I might be wrong, but don't see such an agreement as forthcoming. It certainly isn't going to come from me. I merely disagree with social conservatives on those areas where I disagree, just as they disagree with libertarians on those areas where they disagree. As these disagreements are well known, and as the coalition enters its third year, I'm not seeing anything resembling a call for war within the Tea Party movement itself.
The whole thing seems awfully contrived, and I am tempted to ask "who benefits?"
In that regard, an article in Reason (Class War:How public servants became our masters) sheds some light into what drives the Tea Party more than any other issue.
Our rulers, that's what!
They -- and I do mean they -- are the uniting force that motivates libertarians and social conservatives to show up together in strength. They make disagreements on other issues pale by comparison. They want to bury us all. And they aren't checking cards at the gates of the nation's doom to see whether we are libertarians, social conservatives, or some non-conforming mishmash of both.
...54 percent of the economy is private, 28 percent goes to the feds, and 18 percent goes to state and local governments. The trend lines are ominous.That's what I think drives the Tea Party, and that's why the latest divide-and-conquer strategy will fail. Every day I see examples, large and small, and I don't have the time or energy to blog about all of them. (Just yesterday I read about the mandate for back up cameras on cars, and about bureaucratic insistence that doctors be chaperoned when examining patients even though neither the doctors nor the patients want chaperons.) These people are running our lives, ruining the country, and they are doing it with our money, and even though it is clear that the money has run out, they demand it anyway.
Bigger government means more government employees. Those employees then become a permanent lobby for continual government growth. The nation may have reached critical mass; the number of government employees at every level may have gotten so high that it is politically impossible to roll back the bureaucracy, rein in the costs, and restore lost freedoms.
People who are supposed to serve the public have become a privileged elite that exploits political power for financial gain and special perks. Because of its political power, this interest group has rigged the game so there are few meaningful checks on its demands. Government employees now receive far higher pay, benefits, and pensions than the vast majority of Americans working in the private sector. Even when they are incompetent or abusive, they can be fired only after a long process and only for the most grievous offenses.
It's a two-tier system in which the rulers are making steady gains at the expense of the ruled. The predictable results: Higher taxes, eroded public services, unsustainable levels of debt, and massive roadblocks to reforming even the poorest performing agencies and school systems. If this system is left to grow unchecked, we will end up with a pale imitation of the free society envisioned by the Founders.
Which naturally leads me to suspect that it is they who want the Tea Party to have a war.
They can make all the noise they want, but I for one am not about to go to war on their say-so. Sure, they might be very powerful, but they don't have the power to declare war within the Tea Party, do they? Well, I guess maybe they can declare a war within their media echo chamber, but they can't draft me or make me fight, can they?
posted by Eric on 12.08.10 at 10:52 AM
What actually drives the tea party? A democrat as president and a dem controlled congress.
The will slack off a bit as repubs get more control in congress. And will not make much noise at all when repubs control both houses and the presidency once again.
What Actually 'Drives' The Tea Parties
What Actually 'Drives' The Tea Parties
Billionaires like the Koch brothers.
What actually drives the tea party? A democrat as president and a dem controlled congress.
The will slack off a bit as repubs get more control in congress. And will not make much noise at all when repubs control both houses and the presidency once again.
You're wrong. Dead wrong. I'm speaking as one who has been very active in the Tea Party movement.
We were beginning to mobilize, though not formally, shortly after the 2004 election. Up until then we had President Bush's back because there were boots on the ground in Harm's way in Afghanistan and Iraq and we were not going to put them in even more danger.
But we weren't happy. We hated the Senior Prescription bill. We hated pulling our punches in the war effort that we thought was increasing the casualties. We hated President Bush's immigration policy. We hated President Bush's environmental policies. We hated that in ten short years the Congress seemed to be less and less committed to the values of that group of reformers, both Democrat and Republican, of 1994 and were squandering that legacy with unjustiabile earmarks and spending.
But TARP was the last straw and the wakeup call. And when the new Administration seemed hell bent to continue mismanagement of the TARP monies, when they started seizing control of financial institutions instead of closing them down, when they started seizing corporations, when they passed an unconscionably irresponsible pork laden appropriations bill early in January, and the healthcare overhaul that nobody wanted. . . .
The Tea Party was mobilizing through all of that.
The Tea Party is not about contentuous social issues and most groups are resisting addressing those in any way. The Tea Party is about restoring fiscal sanity, preserving individual liberties, and protecting the intent of the Constitution before all are effectively destroyed.
So now it is okay to put boots on the ground in danger because a Democrat is president?
What actually drives the tea party? A democrat as president and a dem controlled congress.
The will slack off a bit as repubs get more control in congress. And will not make much noise at all when repubs control both houses and the presidency once again.
You're wrong. Dead wrong. I'm speaking as one who has been very active in the Tea Party movement.
We were beginning to mobilize, though not formally, shortly after the 2004 election. Up until then we had President Bush's back because there were boots on the ground in Harm's way in Afghanistan and Iraq and we were not going to put them in even more danger.
But we weren't happy. We hated the Senior Prescription bill. We hated pulling our punches in the war effort that we thought was increasing the casualties. We hated President Bush's immigration policy. We hated President Bush's environmental policies. We hated that in ten short years the Congress seemed to be less and less committed to the values of that group of reformers, both Democrat and Republican, of 1994 and were squandering that legacy with unjustiabile earmarks and spending.
But TARP was the last straw and the wakeup call. And when the new Administration seemed hell bent to continue mismanagement of the TARP monies, when they started seizing control of financial institutions instead of closing them down, when they started seizing corporations, when they passed an unconscionably irresponsible pork laden appropriations bill early in January, and the healthcare overhaul that nobody wanted. . . .
The Tea Party was mobilizing through all of that.
The Tea Party is not about contentuous social issues and most groups are resisting addressing those in any way. The Tea Party is about restoring fiscal sanity, preserving individual liberties, and protecting the intent of the Constitution before all are effectively destroyed.
What Actually 'Drives' The Tea Parties
Billionaires like the Koch brothers.
Sorry, but I had never HEARD of the Koch Brothers until just recently.
Billionaires like the Koch brothers.
Sorry, but I had never HEARD of the Koch Brothers until just recently.
And if it hadn't been for people like Rachel Maddow, you would never have heard of them.
Thanks!
What Actually 'Drives' The Tea Parties
Billionaires like the Koch brothers.
Sorry, but I had never HEARD of the Koch Brothers until just recently. I think they are bogeymen the Left dreamed up as another effort to demonize the Tea Parties.
And if they are supporting the Tea Party movement as they are accused, then surely they are offset by George Soros, the Tides Foundation, and others of that ilk who are doing their damdest to turn us all into Marxists and don't care who they destroy in the process.
Our local Tea Party groups are made up of Republicans, Democrats, Independents, and folks who don't identify with an ideology at all, but who embrace the Tea Party goals of a fiscally restrained government, respect and protection for individual liberties, and respect for the U.S. Constitution as it was originally intended to be interpreted.
The local Republican Party was thanked for announcing our rallies to their constituents, but was not otherwise involved in anything in any way. There were no famous people leading any of the events to date.
Billionaires like the Koch brothers.
Sorry, but I had never HEARD of the Koch Brothers until just recently. I think they are bogeymen the Left dreamed up as another effort to demonize the Tea Parties.
And if they are supporting the Tea Party movement as they are accused, then surely they are offset by George Soros, the Tides Foundation, and others of that ilk who are doing their damdest to turn us all into Marxists and don't care who they destroy in the process.
Our local Tea Party groups are made up of Republicans, Democrats, Independents, and folks who don't identify with an ideology at all, but who embrace the Tea Party goals of a fiscally restrained government, respect and protection for individual liberties, and respect for the U.S. Constitution as it was originally intended to be interpreted.
The local Republican Party was thanked for announcing our rallies to their constituents, but was not otherwise involved in anything in any way. There were no famous people leading any of the events to date.
They are to Cato, what Annenberg is to Annenberg. They have a point of view, and put their money into studies and journal writers.
What Actually 'Drives' The Tea Parties
Billionaires like the Koch brothers.
Sorry, but I had never HEARD of the Koch Brothers until just recently. I think they are bogeymen the Left dreamed up as another effort to demonize the Tea Parties.
And if they are supporting the Tea Party movement as they are accused, then surely they are offset by George Soros, the Tides Foundation, and others of that ilk who are doing their damdest to turn us all into Marxists and don't care who they destroy in the process.
Our local Tea Party groups are made up of Republicans, Democrats, Independents, and folks who don't identify with an ideology at all, but who embrace the Tea Party goals of a fiscally restrained government, respect and protection for individual liberties, and respect for the U.S. Constitution as it was originally intended to be interpreted.
The local Republican Party was thanked for announcing our rallies to their constituents, but was not otherwise involved in anything in any way. There were no famous people leading any of the events to date.
They are to Cato, what Annenberg is to Annenberg. They have a point of view, and put their money into studies and journal writers.
I hadn't thought of it like that but good analogy. I didn't mean to imply that they didn't exist. I just meant I suspect the Left has grabbed onto them to use as bogeymen to attack the Tea Partiers.
Its not what the left wants to project.
One take:
Classical Values :: Where's the war? And who are the warmongers?
December 08, 2010
Where's the war? And who are the warmongers?
A lot of people are hoping to start a war between social conservatives and libertarians in the Tea Party, and I think that represents wishful thinking on their part. That there is no denying the existence of sharp differences in philosophy within the Tea Party tent has long been obvious; I have written a number of posts about it, and I make no secret of being in the libertarian camp, nor have I ever denied my disagreements with social conservatism (especially the statist variety). But because I have also long favored a coalition between libertarians and social conservatives on issues they can both agree upon, I see no more reason for starting a "war" than the social conservatives I have encountered. Because of the horizontal, grassroots nature of the Tea Party, I think it would be very difficult to start any real war. For starters, the Tea Party is based largely on showing up at a given event. If local Tea Party organizers in, say, the RTL camp decided that a mass demonstration in front of the local Planned Parenthood headquarters was in order, they would be as free to show up as those who disagreed with the demo would be free to stay home. There is nothing new about disagreement on that issue. Ditto gay marriage, marijuana legalization, or demanding that condom lessons be stopped in schools. Individual Tea Partiers have different positions on these issues pro or con, which means that large turnouts from "THE TEA PARTY" in its entirety could hardly be expected. Few would show up. So how do you start a "war" that way?
I'm reminded of the old slogan "what if they gave a war and nobody came?"
For there to be a "war" between libertarians and social conservatives, they would have to agree to have one. I might be wrong, but don't see such an agreement as forthcoming. It certainly isn't going to come from me. I merely disagree with social conservatives on those areas where I disagree, just as they disagree with libertarians on those areas where they disagree. As these disagreements are well known, and as the coalition enters its third year, I'm not seeing anything resembling a call for war within the Tea Party movement itself.
The whole thing seems awfully contrived, and I am tempted to ask "who benefits?"
In that regard, an article in Reason (Class War:How public servants became our masters) sheds some light into what drives the Tea Party more than any other issue.
Our rulers, that's what!
They -- and I do mean they -- are the uniting force that motivates libertarians and social conservatives to show up together in strength. They make disagreements on other issues pale by comparison. They want to bury us all. And they aren't checking cards at the gates of the nation's doom to see whether we are libertarians, social conservatives, or some non-conforming mishmash of both.
...54 percent of the economy is private, 28 percent goes to the feds, and 18 percent goes to state and local governments. The trend lines are ominous.That's what I think drives the Tea Party, and that's why the latest divide-and-conquer strategy will fail. Every day I see examples, large and small, and I don't have the time or energy to blog about all of them. (Just yesterday I read about the mandate for back up cameras on cars, and about bureaucratic insistence that doctors be chaperoned when examining patients even though neither the doctors nor the patients want chaperons.) These people are running our lives, ruining the country, and they are doing it with our money, and even though it is clear that the money has run out, they demand it anyway.
Bigger government means more government employees. Those employees then become a permanent lobby for continual government growth. The nation may have reached critical mass; the number of government employees at every level may have gotten so high that it is politically impossible to roll back the bureaucracy, rein in the costs, and restore lost freedoms.
People who are supposed to serve the public have become a privileged elite that exploits political power for financial gain and special perks. Because of its political power, this interest group has rigged the game so there are few meaningful checks on its demands. Government employees now receive far higher pay, benefits, and pensions than the vast majority of Americans working in the private sector. Even when they are incompetent or abusive, they can be fired only after a long process and only for the most grievous offenses.
It's a two-tier system in which the rulers are making steady gains at the expense of the ruled. The predictable results: Higher taxes, eroded public services, unsustainable levels of debt, and massive roadblocks to reforming even the poorest performing agencies and school systems. If this system is left to grow unchecked, we will end up with a pale imitation of the free society envisioned by the Founders.
Which naturally leads me to suspect that it is they who want the Tea Party to have a war.
They can make all the noise they want, but I for one am not about to go to war on their say-so. Sure, they might be very powerful, but they don't have the power to declare war within the Tea Party, do they? Well, I guess maybe they can declare a war within their media echo chamber, but they can't draft me or make me fight, can they?
posted by Eric on 12.08.10 at 10:52 AM
Mega links at site
What actually drives the tea party? A democrat as president and a dem controlled congress.
The will slack off a bit as repubs get more control in congress. And will not make much noise at all when repubs control both houses and the presidency once again.
What Actually 'Drives' The Tea Parties
Billionaires like the Koch brothers.
What actually drives the tea party? A democrat as president and a dem controlled congress.
The will slack off a bit as repubs get more control in congress. And will not make much noise at all when repubs control both houses and the presidency once again.
The TEA partiers got far more Repubs removed from office than Dems so you might want to rethink the biased opinion there. The TEA party from what I have been able to find wishes to reel back government. They think the Feds are taking too much and spending it poorly. They wish to bring the waste to a halt. All in all an admirable goal.
