The Tea Party movement and Sarah Palin give the notion that, given the existence of a “coastal America,” there is a “real” America that falls through the cracks, come election time.
The only thing that unites this conservative movement is an adamant dismissal of a liberal agenda held by the Obama administration. We’d refer to this movement as libertarian, but a libertarian is essentially a conservative minus a program of forced morality.
This movement is not united by a self-declared agenda; it simply exists because people hate an already-existing philosophy. The whimsical front, while attractive to conservatives fed up with Obama’s “socialist” ideology, has become a vehicle for Republican candidates. For example, the self-styled “movement” endorsed Scott Brown and with that win in Mass. it effectively undermined the Obama agenda.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with a grassroots movement. In fact, these types of movements are essential to our democracy.
Given the existence of a two-party system, movements like these are integral to keeping America for the people, by the people.
Grassroots movements or populist movements introduce ideas the two parties decidedly leave out — the Tea Party movement does not serve this function. It is a vehicle for the Republican Party, a ploy of smoke and mirrors created by the likes of Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly.
In the 1992 presidential election, Ross Perot ran as independent, on an agenda both Democrats and Republicans failed to address. These issues included campaign finance reform and term limits. Perot secured 18.9 percent of the popular vote on Election Day; he lost but his ideas were later pushed by a Republican Legislature.
The problem with the Tea Party movement is there are no unique ideas to push. The movement is fueled by discontent and embodied in unrealistic conservative idealism. “Put your faith in ideas. I caution against allowing this movement to be defined by one leader or operation,” Sarah Palin said at the movement’s convention in Nashville, “This is about the people.”
You’re right, Sarah, it is about the people, but your words indicate it’s about you.
Palin is no Ross Perot. She is saving her spot for the 2012 presidential election where she will run on her own agenda.
This idealism is a platform of principles that Democrats philosophically disagree with and Republicans cannot practically promise. According to USA Today, most protestors, aligning themselves with the Tea party, have the overall goal of “less spending.”
We ask what does that mean? Grassroots movements affirm specific ideas not some abstract philosophy. It is truly a shame if the Tea Party is the new face of the populist movement.
This editorial is not so much an attack on the Republican Party as it is a criticism of an American apathy. When we get riled up we do things the wrong way. Is specificity a burden? Or do the likes of Glenn Beck and Bill O’Reilly have that much power over the “real” America.
Movements like those of Ross Perot in the Reform Party or Ralph Nader in the Green Party attacked specific goals and the Republicans and Democrats picked up these goals respectively.
If the Tea Party truly has practical goals like those of past populist movements, then let them be announced because until then it will just be a vehicle for the likes of Sarah Palin.
Americans need to be proactive with their government but they shouldn’t act like the pundits they criticize. A populist movement or party cannot be based on undermining another philosophy — it must focus on issues. That’s just how our government works.
Reform is a good thing — revolution is not. This conservative belief should be echoed at every Tea Party protest.