And it was Lenin who offered the classic definition of a vanguard party as involving "people who make revolutionary activity their profession" in organizations that "must perforce not be very extensive."Note: Is the Tea Party phenomenon that has captured the public's attention and unnerved many in both the national Democratic and Republican hierarchies a true movement with lasting effect or a flash in the pan that will fade from the scene because it has nothing, fundamentally, to offer the country? Is it nothing more than a loosely organized "national temper tantrum," fed and directed by right wing media zealots and wealthy business interests who are out, at all costs, first and foremost, to ensure the Obama Administration and its policies fail? We've taken two recent commentaries, below, that examine these questions from E. J. Dionne, Jr., of the Washington Post, and Steven Stark of The Boston Phoenix, (that's Boston, MA, home of the original Tea Party). So far, there's not been a highly visible or vocal Tea Party presence here in Hays County, and some politicians on the Republican side are making no claim to the movement, which is an interesting statement in itself. Your constructive comments and insights are welcome.
Send your comments and news tips to roundup.editor@gmail.com or click on the "comments" button at the bottom of the story
The Tea Party: Tempest in a very small teapot
By E.J. Dionne Jr.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Washinton Post Online Edition
Is the Tea Party one of the most successful scams in American political history?
Before you dismiss the question, note that word "successful." Judge the Tea Party purely on the grounds of effectiveness and you have to admire how a very small group has shaken American political life and seized the microphone offered by the media, including the so-called liberal media.But it's equally important to recognize that the Tea Party constitutes a sliver of opinion on the extreme end of politics receiving attention out of all proportion with its numbers.
Yes, there is a lot of discontent in America. But that discontent is better represented by the moderate voters who expressed quiet disillusionment to President Obama at the CNBC town hall meeting on Monday than by Tea Party ideologues who proclaim the unconstitutionality of the New Deal and everything since.
The Tea Party drowns out such voices because it has money – some of it from un-populist corporate sources, as Jane Mayer documented last month in the New Yorker – and has used modest numbers strategically in small states to magnify its impact.
[snip]Last April, a New York Times-CBS News poll found that 18 percent of Americans identified as supporters of the Tea Party movement, but slightly less than a fifth of these sympathizers said they had attended a Tea Party rally or meeting. That means just over 3 percent of Americans can be characterized as Tea Party activists. A more recent poll by Democracy Corps, just before Labor Day, found that 6 percent of voters said they had attended a Tea Party rally or meeting.
The Tea Party is not the only small group in history to wield more power than you'd expect from its numbers. In 2008, Barack Obama did very well in party caucuses, which draw far fewer voters than primaries. And it was Lenin who offered the classic definition of a vanguard party as involving "people who make revolutionary activity their profession" in organizations that "must perforce not be very extensive."
But something is haywire in our media and our politics. Jill Lepore, a Harvard historian whose new book is "The Whites of Their Eyes: The Tea Party's Revolution and the Battle Over American History," observed in an interview that there is a "hall of mirrors" effect created by the rise of "niche" opinion media. They magnify small movements into powerhouses, while old-fashioned journalism, which is supposed to put such movements in perspective, reacts to the same niche incentives.
There is also the decline of alternative forces in politics. The Republican establishment, such as it is, has long depended far more on big money than on troops in the field. In search of new battalions, GOP leaders stoked the Tea Party, stood largely mute in the face of its more outrageous untruths about Obama – and now has to defend candidates such as O'Donnell and Angle.
And where are the progressives? Sulking is not an alternative to organizing, and weary resignation is the first step toward capitulation. The Tea Party may be pulling a fast one on the country and the media. But if it has more audacity than everyone else, it will, I am sorry to say, deserve to get away with it.
The American Idol Party
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
The Boston Phoenix
Sarah Palin and Christine O'Donnell might not turn out to be good candidates, but they make great television
In their attempts to understand the Tea Party movement, analysts have looked to the Populists of the 1890s, the followers of Father Coughlin and Huey Long in the 1930s, and, of course, the original Boston tea partiers themselves. But in a nation whose pop culture is its politics and vice versa, the real antecedent for this political happening is a relatively recent phenomenon — reality television.
This is not to denigrate the movement. After all, popular culture is a primary outlet for political expression — a source of both candidates and mass sentiment, as Ronald Reagan well knew. And, while the roots of reality television derive from many sources, the principal one is the notion that "the people" can do a better job than the elites. Reality television is democratic to a fault, premised as it is on the idea that we no longer need "stars" because average men and women on the street are the real sources of talent and energy in the land.
[snip]
It's a very American sentiment, of course — the product of a nation that, beginning with its first tea party, defined itself as a place in which "the people" ruled. And that concept always has political resonance in eras in which elites on places such as Wall Street have appeared to prosper at the expense of Main Street.
But what has given that old idea a new cast this time around is television. Beginning, really, with America's Funniest Home Videos in the early 1990s, and continuing on through Survivor, American Idol, The Apprentice, and Dancing with the Stars, the television programming that has appealed the most in the modern era has been that which made "the folks," as Fox News host Bill O'Reilly calls them, the stars.
8 comments:
In April and May 2010 my following article on Tea Parties was printed in The Lone Star Iconoclast, Education News and on Helium.com and in several other media across the nation.
It is appropriate to reprint it here on the site of the RoundUp under this topic:
Why The Tea Party Movement Will Fail
by Peter Stern
Initially the Tea Party Movement was a good idea to get people involved with political issues within their communities. The point was to meet in small local group to discuss the important issues and to work together with legislators and others in searching for resolutions for problems and to work together to vote-in viable, ethical and responsible individuals to manage our direction at the national, state and local levels. It was a great idea. At first many people responded favorably to the Tea Party Movement; however, it soon became controlled and revamped by the very problems, individuals and groups the movement sought to resolve and/or remove.
The movement became a prime target of special interest politics and it was like a Panzer Movement that all but squelched the original Tea Party Movement. Even in Republican Texas, Governor Rick Perry started making appearances at local Tea Parties in the hope to show everyone what a great regular type of guy he is so that he could manipulate the parties and suck-up more votes for his reelection bid in November 2010. Soon, other Republicans and Democratic candidates across the nation started invading and changing the platform of the Tea Parties to encourage contributions and to promote their special interest candidates as well as the reelection of many incumbents who, quite honestly, should step down and let someone else perform the job in the best interest of the community at-large.
When the Tea Party Movement first began many people thought this would be the way to gain local momentum to get rid of the deadwood incumbents who continue to rule at all levels of politics and who have the corporate and wealthy special interest financial muscle to approve legislation and future direction in the interests of the wealthy corporate sector. However, once the initial movement evolved the very politicos who were being challenged by the Tea Party Movement started similar Tea Party Movements of their own. Many believed that this effort was planned to stymie and crush the real movement and in truth the plan was quite successful. The original Tea Party Movement and its real purpose were frozen and the true effort slowed down.
Similar networking efforts occurred with Face Book, Twitter and other avenues of communication that originally were developed as a means for the common people to stay in touch with one another while sharing all sorts of information. Pretty soon politicians and action groups began invading the Internet and all these other communication networking systems as the last several national elections proved that the Internet and other network systems were the next generation of getting votes and reaching out for campaign contributions, which would translate into reaching more people, attaining more money and winning elections.
Originally, the Tea Party Movement was one of the more creative concepts and positive avenues of communication that sought to enhance the community's involvement in providing legitimate information, to vote-in good and viable political candidates, to generate more monetary and volunteering efforts and to makeover the entire political system as a more positive experience and awareness for the populace; however, the Tea Party Movement already is on its way to failure because the true cause of the movement was hijacked by the very vermin it was created to eliminate. In short, the original Tea Party Movement was a good idea turned bad and as such it is a failure; however, the current Tea Party theme will continue as long as those in power find it a valuable tool for controlling the populace, pushing party platforms, gaining more votes and encouraging monetary contributions that lead to winning more elections.
My April 2010 article on the Tea Party Movement:
http://theuniverseatyourfeet.blogspot.com/2010/04/why-tea-party-movement-will-fail.html
The Tea Party is proof the "liberal media" is not really liberal, but incompetent. If the Tea Party had any relevance other than dumping corrupted Republicans and making wimpy Democrats squirm, our national media would tear them to pieces with investigative journalism and intelligent questioning.
But no, once again we are spoon fed meaningless and idiotic news about crazy people in politics who will end up destroying our nation.
Sarah Palin really overerestimates mainstream media when she tells her cult clones to keep with Fox. The only thing to fear, really, is ignorance and laziness.
Peter is right on in most respects. In fact, the entire US economy and the discussion on how to fix it has become bass ackwards as our duopoly two-party political corruption and incompetence - in concert with our lazy overpayed corporate media - continues to let big money control the political economic discussion. The Tea Party, as Peter points out, can now be included in that characterization.
The bottom line about the US economy is that wages for middle-income and poorer Americans continues to decline while upper income Americans gain greater and greater wealth - even in a recession. That reality is the primary reason our country is is under financial distress.
Yet we contantly hear whiner rich people complain about Obama, our "foreigner-loving African village Muslim President," not wanting to keep the Bush tax cuts for the rich.
So let's simlply put things into perspective. 39% under Obama's plan isn't high by any historical standard. And that's ONLY for their money over 250K. Under Eisenhower, the top tax rate was 91%. Under Nixon, it was 70%. Obama just wants to kick it back to 39% -- just three more points for those making over 250K. Not back to 91, or 70. Three points. Yet the rich, the free markets think tanks, and of course the antiquated Republican Party, goes insane.
Steve Forbes said that Obama, quote "believes from his inner core that people above a certain income have more than they should have - and that many probably have gotten it from ill-gotten ways." Which, by all normal means, many probably have gotten it in a sleazy manner.
Steve Forbes, of course, came by his fortune the hard way: he inherited it from his leather biker alternative lifestyle father, who also inherited it from his father. Of course back then then they moaned about the inheritance tax, when government took 55% percent when Daddy died -- which means he still got 45% - or billions of dollars - for doing nothing more than starting out life as sunspot at one of his father's vacations.
See, no one wants to punish rich people, but they need to show a little humility about how they got their riches - and stop complaining.
Maybe the worst whiner of all: Stephen Schwarzman, #69 on Forbes' list of richest Americans, compared Obama's over 250K tax hike to "when Hitler invaded Poland in 1939."
Give me a MAJOR break! If Obama were Hitler, Herr Schwarzman, a 3% higher tax rate only on your money over 250K would be the least of your worries.
So c'mon, Tea Party folks, who are you really advocating for? The new rich people like Sarah Palin? The Republicans who jumped on your bandwagon to save their asses from losing their government sponsored health care by being voted out of office? Or the nice lady from Delaware running for Governor who dabbled in witchcraft back in the 90s?
Throw the bums out, if you like. I'm all for that. But please replace them with competent people who know something about economics and the real ethnic diversity that exists within America.
And quit blaming Mexicans for jobs no white person wants to perform. When I start seeing Tea Party members go out and pick beans for twelve hours a day bent over in the hot sun, you will have my vote.
Mr. Stern and Mr. Boschert, for reasons that remain unstated, appear to be threatened by the grass roots movement known as the Tea Party”. Either they are too invested in either of the two national political parties or the status quo of politics in America.
What they appear to misunderstand is that the Tea Party has no relevant predecessor and can not easily be categorized into a particular group. Although it looks familiar, it is something new brought on by a breakdown of the citizen’s trust in their Government on a monumental scale. This mistrust is relative to all walks of life and can be best defined as a pre-revolution against a malignant federal government. As can be seen by their comments, the movement threatens the comfort level of these two contributors as well as others, since they do not posses the skill to appraise such a movement.
The Tea Party seems to be aimed at the Democrat Party but that is just a surface reflection and the Republicans are also threatened, maybe even more so. The movement wants our government to follow the Constitution as it was written and not later corrupted by the courts for the convenience of either liberals or conservatives.
This movement will not die as some have said, but will become more and more powerful as our political leaders steal more power and destroy our nation’s systems. The election this November will show that the Party is growing and if not heeded will accelerate its growth. Along with the continuing collapse of our economy, the government takeovers will force many citizens to join the movement.
Anonymous, you say I must be "threatened" by the Tea Party Movement? Yet I write using my own name and you are a "phantom".
Apparently, you are confused or have been manipulated by the leaders of the current movement.
In addition, you did NOT fully read and/or comprehend my words.
I agreed with your simplified overview of the Tea Party Movement; however, I agree only where your words discuss the beginning of the movement.
Read my words again and read them with a more open mind.
At the beginning of the movement, you are correct in that Tea Parties were on target as a conveyor to truth and resolution of our urgent issues. BUT NO LONGER.
Open your eyes and see the manipulation of the movement. Review my article and hear what I am saying. Please don't dismiss it. Listen and hear. Please.
Dear Anonymous Tea Partier:
I generally don't like to be a follower but I must again agree with Peter in most everything he said.
But additionally, if the Tea Party - as represented by your voice - is above criticism, then your "movement" will fail.
As I said earlier: "throw the bums out." And that includes both Democrats and Republicans, if they are bums. But any movement cannot replace the bums with people who have no idea how to govern or what the purpose of government is for.
A democratic government does not disparage other religions, foreigners, the poor, the disenfranchised, and their representatives do not, with any sense of accurate historical perspective, install a Hitler mustache on a black man. That is like asking Lindsay Lohan to run for Ms. Virgin USA.
Moreover, I have no patience for movements who take advantage of vulnerable illegal immigrants and their cheap labor when the economy is good, but then scapegoats them by not taking responsibitliy for their own incompetence when the economy turns sour.
Sir, if you think BP was irresponsible under Bush-Obama, you ain't seem nothing yet if Palin and Paul get in positions of power.
But then again, maybe it is the chaos that is more important than the solution. I think they call that anarchy.
Oh yes, Mr. or Mrs. Anonymous Tea Partier. There certainly is a precedent for the Tea Party. And it was not the Boston Tea Party.
It is the Whiskey Rebellion. I suggest you folks read about it and you will recognize many if not most of the similarities - at least from an economic perspective.
Maybe the Tea Party should be renamed "The Whiskey Party."
Post a Comment