I’ve never been directly affiliated with the Tea Party movement but have been following the headlines concerning it for around 1.5 years. After Obama was elected president the movement according to the media has changed from being mostly libertarian/miniarchist in scope to rallies used by the neoconservatives to gain votes for the 2012 election. Upon this transition the rhetoric has changed to favor neoconservative principles blanketed by the term libertarian. The connection between libertarianism and the Tea Parties is strongly reinforced when talking heads such as Glenn Beck bring up news concerning the latest Tea Party and then immediately afterwards claim to be a libertarian. Now that the connection between libertarianism and the tea parties has been established the media is linking the tea parties thus linking libertarianism to racism, terrorism, violent acts and worst of all inconsistent neoconservative talking points.
I am begin to feel the effects of this misrepresentation in my everyday life. For example whenever making the case for liberty to my peers I am immediately linked to the Republican party and its apologist such as Bill O’Reilly, Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin. If the person I’m talking to is a supporter of one of these people they do not tend to believe that they do not truly represent the libertarian position and if the person I’m talking to isn’t a supporter of one of they people they normally do not to take my arguments seriously.
Now that I’ve got that off my chest my question is what is the best way to overcome this propaganda and continue to spread the message of liberty?
The way I see it is that the tea-party movement started out as a minarchist/libertarian movement with all the Ron Paul and Alex Jones people behind it at first. Then, now as we’ve seen it’s mostly become an opposition movmeent where everyone who is opposed to Obama- including the neocons, and all of the fascists on the right now supporting it.
That’s just how these movements go. It’s like the anti-war movement- the anti-war movement under Bush was hijacked by the Democrats, and Hollywood celebrities, and all of thoe other people that really weren’t anti-war, but now it’s more of a genuine movement. I think that when the Republicans get back in power- if the tea-party movement is a true and independent movement, we’ll see if the hard-core people freedom-lovers, and what not are still there. But right now it’s a conservative/republican movement.
What do you hope to gain from just sitting around doing nothing and acting like an arm-chair intellectual posting on message boards and not talking to people about the issues? I hate people who act completely apathetic like you do. Just how exactly do you expect to do anything if you completely ignore politics and these philosophical revolutions?
This is their precise goal. And this is why Ron is getting such “favourable” attention from Faux and other the other tards at the moment. They want to make that connection [you elaborated], stick. It’s a shame that others are blind to it.
Attack the “right” before you attack the “left”. Proclaim you actually hate George Bush and the republicans more than they (“socialist” you are talking to) does.
These movements generally start off genuine, then they are co-opted and used to filter in and control the “opposition”. The movement never accomplishes anything. Anti-war movement = done jack squat to stop the war. It was essentially, anti-bush was what it became about.
This whole tea party thing is the exact same. Nothing will change. Unless the genuine folks can push support into state secessions.
What I thought was sickly-funny was on the front page of the New York Times I saw at the store today was Sarah Palin standing next to McCain and in the caption underneath it stated that Sarah Palin said, ‘McCain is what the Tea-Party Movement is all about. Support McCain and you support the Tea-Parties’. That gave me a chuckle. Especially noting that McCain is running against another conservative in the republican primary! So now it’s all about who is more Tea-Party than the other guy! Cause it’s not that the other conservative is not for Tea-Party’s either. Nearly all politicians are trying to run to that gold mine.
Really? I thought that the establishment media failed at that early on and that they stopped playing the libertarians are racist card when they did the Ron Paul gun owner shooter guy thing at the Obama rally, and, that kind of blew up in their faces because of how ridiculous everyone thought the reporting on that was. If anything I’d say the media has been somewhat sympathetic to the libertarian cause and they’ve been actually distinguishing them from the tea-party groups.
socialdtk
Why not just attack both indiscriminately? That’s what I do. I just attack the system right now. I’m not pulling any more punches. Whenever I talk to people and they ask me my opinion about the political system I’ll just tell them how it is: it’s corrupt, and, both parties are at fault. I tell people that loonies on the left and the right have taken over Washington… and that seems to work. The only problem I may have is when people accuse me of being a conspiracy theorist or a nut… but I’m all fine with that.
I think it’s frankly disgusting and shows how we’re moving in a horrible direction. I think it’s time to focus on other countries like Singapore. I mean the world can’t be moving in the same direction! The rest of the world is definitely not as blind and as we are to economic reality!
I’m really down in the dumps about this country these days, I feel like I’m just largely surrounded by fallacy ridden half-truths or just horrible economics. There are more and more libertarians than before, but I just don’t think we are going to accomplish anything. We are set on this crash-course and all we can do is watch in sheer horror as everything unfolds here.
I don’t really understand the whole anti-politics sentiment that’s developed here. The only way that we’re going to get anything done really is if we use the machinery of the state against the state. I’m all for education of liberty here. But I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again- the reason why the statists are so effective at passing legislation and doing what they want to do is because they have all their masses mobilized and they use their representation to carry out their constituents will.
We have a representative republic- at least for now, and we should use that machinery to promote more decentralization, and really just I think while we need a philosophical movement among the general population and get them more educated in liberty- we need to also change the general philosophy of the government as well. We’ve seen too often that the government doesn’t listen to the masses even though they’re their own constituents. It’s time we infiltrate the two-party system and take on reform for ourselves. Maybe not infiltrate the political party system… but we definitely need to do something. That’s at least the way I see it.
You are mistaken. You haven’t spoken to my neighbors, my family, or my co-workers. They would tell you about how I talk to people about the issues. I probably talk too much, in fact.
I’m apathetic? Really? You don’t know me very well. And I don’t think you really hate me, do you?
You still believe in the political process, I do not. The only thing I can think of that might be effective to eventually reduce the size and scope of government is if at least 80% to 90% of voters show up on election day but cast blank ballots. Imagine the message contained in 100 million blank ballots cast. That would deny the only thing the people in power desire from us on election day; legitimacy. My strategy would be to deny them legitimacy. Then, it might be possible to elect more people like Ron Paul who would reduce the government to the Constitutional limits that you desire.
But that will never happen, people will keep voting “R” and “D”. The media is a propaganda machine. Other parties are marginalized. It’s two parties, that’s it, because that is the design. How else could they keep government growing? How else could they indebt the nation to $12 trillion, run $1.7 trillion annual deficits, take over industries, build the empire, inflate the money supply, make us dependent on them in our old age, and now force us to participate in their health care plan? “Stop voting, it only encourages them.” Do I sound apathetic to you?
You see the 5 minutes they have Ron Paul on, and not the other 23 hours and 55 minutes of the day they are whoring themselves for the state, status quo and establishment.
I think you’re more of a complainer though. I really just dislike people who just go about complaining about things all the time and act like they can’t do anything, and, because they see the government as completely evil- rather than get that changed… they would rather have it all or nothing, and refuse to take part in the process, and refuse to do anything about it. I just really hate this mindset. I’m sorry.
That might help. But I’m still a believer in political process. I, unlike you, am a believer in a representative form of government. I think that people should be allowed to have a say in what goes on. Why should we be quiet while they’re calling all the shots?
Actually, on the contrary 3rd parties have propped up from time to time in American history. My knowledge of history on the subject isn’t too great… but they have existed in the past. That’s why I don’t like that mindset. Yes. You do sound apathetic to me. I understand the negativity. But Barack Obama was able to capitalize on all the negativity towards Bush, and, he was able to catipult himself to Presidency and become the first African American President. I think if we can have an African American President nothing’s really too out of the question. I am not an Obamaniac… but his election certainly does tell you about what’s possible in our representative system of government. I do agree that the 2 party system needs to be fixed. All I’m saying- is that things can happen in the political system, change can happen… and I think you just would have to keep working on it.
Actually, yeah most of the time they are whoring the state. But they do have Ron Paul and other libertarian type people on their regular programming, I guess, just so they can say that they’re fair and balanced and so they can say they’re giving opposing views. I saw the former VP candidate of the libertarian party on regular MSNBC programming a few days ago. I would think they’re more sympathetic to the libertarian cause. Deep down they might know that all that’s going on is wrong… so they want to listen to someone who will tell them the truth for 5 minutes, while they have to continue reporting the lies and state propaganda after that.
I’m not pleading special interest. All I would be doing would be to limit the power of the state and restore its constitutional framework, and then, we could work from there to make changes.
I’m guessing that the people with guns aren’t going to give back their power. But I could be wrong, maybe if you remind them about that piece of paper they were supposed to adhere to and then get down on your knees and beg really really hard, they will dismantle the system that butters their bread.
I did not mean to imply the two party system needs to be fixed. It can’t be fixed, because for the people in power, it is not broken. It is working perfectly. The two party system ought to be abandoned, not fixed.
And how can that possibly be accomplished? I am being realistic, not negative. The very essence of government is to grow and expand, not contract and limit itself.
I dunno, I think that what’s happening is that the mainstream Republican Party sees a lot of energy in the tea party that it would like to harness and direct towards the 2010/2012 elections.
It seems many of you have little experience of the political process, probably because the US dual-party system doesn’t allow much elbow room for outsiders.
Once in a while a “populist” movement will arise in a democratic system: think of your Tea Party movements. More often than not these movements won’t gather much political support and will be confined to fringes but sometimes they will experience a tumultuous growth. This usually happens when politics become too homogeneous, with main parties bickering over very minor side issues and agreeing on everything else or when serious grievances are shrugged off by mainstream parties. Good European examples are Pim Fortuyin’s anti-immigration movement and the various secessionist leagues which sprout up between the late '70s and the early '90s in Northern Italy.
Outlawing political parties and movements is an extremely risky business: the Spanish government outlawed Herri Batasuna, the radical Basque party, thinking but by doing so they would deprive ETA of any “political support” and would be able to steer the dissent towards more moderate (and easily controlled) political movements. They failed completely and to this day the Spanish government, which often embarks on ridiculous “human rights” crusades half a world away, still carries this stigma.
What to do then when a political movement becomes too troublesome? The first step is very simple: a smear campaign. Supporters of the movements are represented as selfish, racist, greedy, ignorant, heartless… a very common tactic I’ve already related is sending cameramen and photographers around a rally and look out for the obviously bizarre, like the inebriated gentleman dressed up like a character from Asterix or people holding up “weird” signs. Now I must say this could be stopped by taking advantage of anti-libel laws: the problem is at this stage movements usually lack both funds and people with an understanding of the political-media apparatus. Second step: when movements begin to grow large and hence with an electoral potential all sorts of shady characters will appear around it. This ranges from pathetic opportunists, like your Sarah Palin, to Gramscian infiltrators with everything in between. Now, movements at this stage lack proper organization but this can be avoided by using both common sense and popular organization: just ask people who this fellow coming from the shadows is. Chances are he/she already has a record in politics and/or shady deals.
Usually by the stage the movement is already largely harmless but if it’s still threatening there are a number of things that can be done. For example Fortuyin’s movement rested largely on his energetic leadership. Once he was murdered the movement melted away. But thuggish acts, as much as they fit the State mentality, can backfire: for example a few years ago the French State was trying to link Corsican secessionists to a series of fire bombings. This melted away when following a botched bombing military issued equipment was found on site and a gendarme from the dreaded GIGN was rushed to the hospital with serious burns. Better to exploit weaknesses: for example the movement leadership may have dabbled in risky financial speculations, a renown leader may have a taste for extramarital relationships or have sons he wants placed in good positions… These persons can be easily manipulated or turned into puppets without too much effort.
I’ve seen all of this in my lifetime and that’s why I have a message to Tea Party sympathizers: be on your guard, for the enemy is much subtler than you can imagine. And next time Sarah Palin shows up, toss her in the sea like your ancestors did with King George’s soldiers.
I was one of the founding members for my local Tea Party group. Our group was/is made up of Republicans, Libertarians, Independents and I think we even had one or two Democrats. Our Tea Party group has tried to keep from becoming to close to any political party and we have kept out of social issues, which maybe dose make the organisation look more Libertarian then the members actually are. I can’t speak to every Tea Party group.
I had been a Libertarian leaning Republican, but about the same time that I got involved with the Tea Party I switched my party affiliation to Libertarian mostly because of the Republicans bailouts and spending and I’ve become more and more Libertarian as time has pasted.
I was disappoint when I saw that, I was concerned with Palin’s embrace of the Tea Party. There has been a lot of political operatives from may different political groups trying to co-opt and/or disrupt the Tea Party movement. I don’t expect every Republican politician to become a hardcore Libertarians, but if the Republicans take power back and go right back to doing the same fiscal irresponsibility as before, then I’ll be out there protesting against them and I think the core of our group will be also.
I just want to say, a lot of the bad thing being associated with the Tea Party aren’t coming from us. The “white supremacist” black guy with the rifle was an Open Carry protester, the Hitler-Obama singes are mostly coming from LaRouchePAC, and all of the acts of violence that I have heard of turn out to be far-left crazies.
