What the "Tea Party" is really about

For the five or six nanoseconds before the theocons took over, it was looking semi-promising.

Zoombie said:

For the five or six nanoseconds before the theocons took over, it was looking semi-promising.

Click to expand...

A bunch of malcontents with no clear, unified policies or platform were promising?

Well, I guess in this country, yeah.

I didn't click the link...is it about the tea? I like tea, but prefer coffee.

As I'm not American I might be wading in shark-infested waters here, but I thought the US Constitution was emphatically clear about freedom of religion and the separation of church and state. What's with all this theocratic revisionism? I imagine there's some sort of anti-Islam backlash there but surely there's more to it, as it seems to run pretty deep.

Apologies if I'm pushing sensitive buttons, but I'm genuinely curious.

DoomBunny said:

As I'm not American I might be wading in shark-infested waters here, but I thought the US Constitution was emphatically clear about freedom of religion and the separation of church and state. What's with all this theocratic revisionism? I imagine there's some sort of anti-Islam backlash there but surely there's more to it, as it seems to run pretty deep.

Apologies if I'm pushing sensitive buttons, but I'm genuinely curious.

Click to expand...

Actually, the separation of church and state isn't as emphatically enshrined in the US Constitution as one might think.

Add to that the rising tide of Puritanical or Evangelical thinking, the attempts of groups like the C Street Brotherhood (an now the Tea Party) to affect a theocratic takeover of the government.

And don't forget that nowadays the Constitution says what those in charge say it says and not what it actually says.

All that equals the day when I leave this country for less Puritanical lands with the election of Sarah Palin or equivalently religiously motivated candidate in high office.

I suppose a true wonk could give you a detailed explanation of the waxing and waning of the Christian Right in the US since its rebirth in the late 1970s, but I think there are more fundamental issues (and when I state them I will be right there with you surrounded by the sharks).

One, is that there has always been a sort of theme about manifest destiny woven into the American cultural mythos, that lends itself to a national sense of being God's chosen. Since the pilgrims, there have been those among us who have declared our nation the New Jerusalem.

Two, as a crazy guy once said: "Die Religion ... ist das Opium des Volkes." I think not long after the formation of the Moral Majority back in 1975, the Right realized that people could be convinced to vote against their own best economic interests through the use of religion. (I assume many on the Left also realized this, but a more natural symbiosis evolved between religion and the Right.) I think the Republican party in particular (after Reagan's election) saw that by co-opting the social agenda of the religious right, they could advance their own agenda. (In furtherance of this theory, I believe that most of the megarich and powerful in this country believe they can adopt a sort of feudal oligarchy that places them above the theocratic strictures imposed upon the masses—which is why there is so much hypocrisy regularly being exposed on that side of the political spectrum.)

I also think that an anti-Islamic backlash is being fostered by the Right, but, as stated, were that not the case they would just find some other hot-button issue to exploit.

Wow, I sound radical and just a bit crazy—and I’m a moderate!

JohnnyGottaKeyboard said:

Wow, I sound radical and just a bit crazy—and I’m a moderate!

Click to expand...

Actually, that sounds like a carefully reasoned analysis, and I agree with it.

Here's the actual "survey": http://www.publicreligion.org/research/?id=386

It's as biased as the story on it, imo.

robeiae said:

Here's the actual "survey": http://www.publicreligion.org/research/?id=386

It's as biased as the story on it, imo.

Click to expand...

Gee, rob, you think a survey by the Public Religion Research Council could be biased?

Maybe next time, MSNBC can report on a survey from StormFront that proves all the tea partiers are white supremacists.

They're certainly working hard to prove their new "Lean Forward and Bend Over" motto isn't just empty promises.

Don said:

Maybe next time, MSNBC can report on a survey from StormFront that proves all the tea partiers are white supremacists.

They're certainly working hard to prove their new "Lean Forward and Bend Over" motto isn't just empty promises.

Click to expand...

Well you know, judging by this "story," the one on the rich/poor income gap, and a host of others, MSNBC is really becoming the least trustworthy news source out there.

If we accept the auto-criticism for Fox, I think it's no leap at all to accept the same for MSNBC. Agree? We can make it a new rule...

leahzero said:

A bunch of malcontents with no clear, unified policies or platform were promising?

Well, I guess in this country, yeah.

Click to expand...

Yeah. At least at one time.

robeiae said:

Here's the actual "survey": http://www.publicreligion.org/research/?id=386

It's as biased as the story on it, imo.

Click to expand...

Do you think the conclusions of the survey are inaccurate?

rugcat said:

Do you think the conclusions of the survey are inaccurate?

Click to expand...

Well, here's one of it's conclusions:

They are largely Republican partisans. ["members" of the tea party]

Click to expand...

Now, look at the actual questionnaire: http://www.publicreligion.org/objects/uploads/fck/file/AVS 2010 Topline FINAL.pdf

Scroll down to questions 5 and 6.

Is that how you'd characterize people? If someone says they lean toward the dem or repub candidate, then they're a dem/repub "partisan"?

DoomBunny said:

As I'm not American I might be wading in shark-infested waters here, but I thought the US Constitution was emphatically clear about freedom of religion and the separation of church and state. What's with all this theocratic revisionism? I imagine there's some sort of anti-Islam backlash there but surely there's more to it, as it seems to run pretty deep.

Apologies if I'm pushing sensitive buttons, but I'm genuinely curious.

Click to expand...

Actually, I'd argue that the Constitution is pretty clear cut on the matter: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.

We won't help you, but we won't hurt you, because it's not our place to choose what you believe.

However, the real thing about the United States that I think is truly why this country is great, even if people constantly ignore it in favor of the easier method of crawing about this or that or whatever...

Our history is shaped by the constant struggle to try and reach the ideals laid down by our Constitution. It shaped the suffrage movement, the racial civil rights movement, the sexual and gender civil rights movement, the Civil War...and it's going to keep on shaping our history into the future.

The thing is, not everyone wants to have our country run under all the ideas of the constitution. And as a BIG NOTE: THIS IS NOT (inherently) EVIL.

So our political discourse is, as always, a series of people who have their own vision of the future. Now, I do argue that some people's vision of the future are evil. Specifically, theocons and other oligarchs.

robeiae said:

Well you know, judging by this "story," the one on the rich/poor income gap, and a host of others, MSNBC is really becoming the least trustworthy news source out there.

If we accept the auto-criticism for Fox, I think it's no leap at all to accept the same for MSNBC. Agree? We can make it a new rule...

Click to expand...

Works for me. Their agenda is as transparent as Fox's.

Eh, they all suck. The only news I trust is the news biased towards my political axis.

Yeah, I can't see anything surprising in any of it.

I wish the Tea Party hadn't tapped into those theocracy-lovers' psyche, but it did. When do we get to stop pretending that 'the Tea Party' is full of liberals, too, and that it is socially liberal -- in line with 'small government' thinking in all subjects? It's not. These folks seem freakier than your garden-variety far-righter, imho.

I believe there is a minority there that might be socially liberal, but y'all might want to think up a new name or something. I don't know. It sucks.

Zoombie said:

Eh, they all suck. The only news I trust is the news biased towards my political axis.

Click to expand...

There you go. The death of Journalism explained in a nutshell. Factual objective reporting could never overcome that.

You know what is becoming an increasingly relevant film to this whole situation? Rashomon

Well, you don't need a reason to watch a Kurosawa movie. IMO. It should be done anyway. Often.

True.

Om nom nom Kurosawa.

But yeah, most politically savy kids I know these days know to get their news from multiple sources and compare and contrast them to try and glean out the truth.

But, you're still right. Rashomon is an excellent illustration of the problem of audience and broadcaster.

robeiae said:

Well, here's one of it's conclusions:
Now, look at the actual questionnaire: http://www.publicreligion.org/objects/uploads/fck/file/AVS 2010 Topline FINAL.pdf

Scroll down to questions 5 and 6.

Is that how you'd characterize people? If someone says they lean toward the dem or repub candidate, then they're a dem/repub "partisan"?

Click to expand...

It's clear you think the survey is flawed. My question is, do you believe that the basic conclusion is incorrect -- that there's a significant overlap between tea party members and the conservative Christian right?

backslashbaby said:

Yeah, I can't see anything surprising in any of it.

I wish the Tea Party hadn't tapped into those theocracy-lovers' psyche, but it did. When do we get to stop pretending that 'the Tea Party' is full of liberals, too, and that it is socially liberal -- in line with 'small government' thinking in all subjects? It's not. These folks seem freakier than your garden-variety far-righter, imho.

I believe there is a minority there that might be socially liberal, but y'all might want to think up a new name or something. I don't know. It sucks.

Click to expand...

The first contemporary tea party was December 16, 2007 at Faneuil Hall in Boston in support of the presidential campaign of Ron Paul, who was campaigning on a platform of smaller government, anti-war and social liberalism. The resurgence of the tea party meme after the election was essentially populist, but Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck and other theocrats and teaocons jumped out in front of the parade and have been "leading" it ever since... right over a cliff and back into the arms of her BFF Bill Kristol, the neocon's neocon.

The smaller government/anti-war/socially liberal movement is dead, a victim of SID.