The Tea Party: Republicans in Drag?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

I attended my first Tea Party rally last spring.
What drove me to attend was my opposition to the constantly increasing growth of government at all levels as well as my belief that both major parties represent more government, not less – and that both parties are shills for corporate America. 
Anyhow, some observations:
* Several speakers made the mistake (my opinion) of criticizing Obamacare as an example of “socialism.” But the use of the state’s police power to force people to pay money to a private, for-profit business is not socialism. It is fascism – by definition. In fact, much of what the federal government does/imposes on us is fascistic more than socialistic (the recent Supreme Court decision affirming corporate “personhood” and “free speech rights,” for example; and the use of terms such as “Homeland Security” and “Patriot” Act – not to mention the actual contents of these acts). But to the average Tea Partier, fascism means Nazis and Hitler salutes; they have no idea that the term itself was invented not by Hitler but by his mentor, Mussolini – who used it to describe the merger of the state with corporations. And that is what we have today in America.   

* Affection for authoritarianism.  There was very little criticism of current U.S. militarism and empire. No comprehension that the warfare state is as incompatible with liberty as is the welfare state.  
  The Tea Party rank and file, based on the T-shirts I saw, appears to be very much of the “support the troops” GOP type.  Which in practical application means: Never criticize any war or aggressive act undertaken by the government. That would be “unpatriotic.” My country, right or wrong.  
A telling moment came when one speaker actually said something negative about the disastrous tenure of George W. Bush, calling it – quite correctly – a “dictatorship.” (Bush’s constant invoking of Nine Eleven!  to justify everything from literally dragooning people of the street and Nach Und Nabelling them to some Gitmo Hellhole, indefinitely, without charging them with any crime, to warrantless eavesdropping on Americans’ e-mails and phone calls to his assertion of unprecedented autocratic powers makes this epithet fit as snugly as Bush’s faux flight suit). This comment  resulted in a moment of awkward silence, with the crowd clearly uneasy about the statement.

Despite everything, they still love their Chimp.  

* Flag-humping. Out of the blue, toward the start of the rally – the crowd was suddenly made to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Like well-trained seals, the entire crowd fell into line. 
I doubt one out of 100 present knows the origin of the Pledge (look into it, if you don’t; see
) or has thought much about the irony of “pledging allegiance” “to the flag” (that is, the symbol of government authority) at a rally ostensibly devoted to the advocacy of individual rights and limited government. This irony was made all the more glaring by the many references to Abe Lincoln – the man who destroyed the original republic in order to establish unlimited-in-principle (and fact) federal supremacy and who waged a genocidal war against the southern states (including the deliberate targeting of the civilian population by the psychopathic William T. Sherman) and who was nothing more than a shill for corporate railroad interests. Lincoln was arguably the prototype for every wheedling, corporate-statist politician since then. But instead of condemning him, the crowd displayed its love for Lincoln – which struck me as not unlike the shrieking, teary expressions of grief you used to see at the funerals of deified thugs such as Stalin, Kim Jong Il and Mao.    
* It’s all about money. Several speakers spoke of “running it (that is, government) like a business.” But government is not a business and shouldn’t be in the business of anything except ensuring that individual rights are respected and the rule of law maintained. No speaker said anything directly about the legitimacy of government taking money (and rights) from some in order to “help”others. Instead, the Tea Party people seem to think that “privatization” is the cure for all that ails us – including government functions. Why, just run it like a business and all will be well. They forget that WWII-era Germans ran their government like a business. And it was most efficient.  
But the Big Thing that Tea Party people don’t seem to get is that if Big Government is only bad when it is wielded by the Left, then the Right has no principled basis for objecting to Big Government as such. And if the Tea Party represents the political Right (that is, statism for the benefit of a powerful government, empire, etc., as opposed to statism for the benefit of “the poor,” etc. ) then it is doomed for that reason, since you can’t defend a principle you’ve already conceded.
* Also: No mention was made of the immigration issue; or rather of the danger presented by a literal flood of Third Worlders into the United States. I suspect the Tea Party leadership is intimidated by the catcalls of “racism” coming from its opponents. Again, very much like the GOP, the Tea Party seems absolutely terrified of dealing with an issue that is central to the problems we face. And that is the changing racial/ethnic makeup of the country and the inevitable social/political implications of this. 
Indeed, at the rally I attended in Roanoke, Va., one of the speakers was a young black woman from The Frederick Douglass Society (I had never heard of this group). She seemed well-intended and sincere. But the hard-boiled fact is that blacks overwhelmingly support Obama and the political left, by margins in the neighborhood of 9-1. 
I don’t argue that blacks should be excluded from Tea Party events. I am arguing that is crazy to pretend that blacks don’t support statism by enormous margins (as do Mexican and Central/South American “immigrants”) and that it is unlikely in the extreme that this will ever change. The math is what it is. And it is a fact of reality that people align themselves according to group interests, and these group interests to a great extent form along racial and ethnic lines. You don’t have to like it, but it’s no less true for being an uncomfortable truth. 

The GOP notion that America is a “propositional nation” and its disastrous corollary that race/culture is irrelevant (when it’s clearly not) has leached deeply into the consciousness of Tea Party People. Like the GOP, they seem mortified at the very idea of challenging any of the fashionable PC orthodoxies (and idiocies) that amount to national hari-kari. Do they really believe that, say, Somali immigrants are interested in George Washington, Thomas Jefferson and the rest of the legacy of all those Dead White Men? In their hearts, they know it’s bullshit. But they won’t say so openly. Which means, national suicide by default. 
* The “god talk.” 
As a Libertarian, this made me uncomfortable. I came to the rally to hear about what we can do to get the government off our backs and the parasites out of our pockets. 
I didn’t come to praise His Name – or be made to feel I should at least be pretending to. Religion should be left at home and kept private, but the thing about modern evangelical Christianity is that it’s well, evangelical. The good news must be spread. Even when it’s utterly beside the point and probably alienates a lot of people who might otherwise be simpatico. 
As with the Flag Humping, the God Talk smelled a lot like the Republican Neo-conned Right to me – Of John McCain and Sarah Palin. Of corporatism and money-grubbing; of “privatization” and the War on Terrah. 
And if that’s what the Tea Party is brewing, I’m not interested.


  1. Arguably, “big business” ends up having the same negative effect upon individual liberty as “big government,” though I agree this is usually the result of big business using the power of big government to achieve its ends by force, etc. (The recent health care “reform” is an excellent case in point).

    But big business (that is, concentrated wealth) will inevitably lead to big government because that is a consequence of human nature.

    Power always corrupts, whether its political power or economic power. Many Libertarians I know/read forget (or don’t accept) this. However, that doesn’t mean it’s not true. Human nature is what it is and there will always be people who are not content to live and let live but who desire to dominate others and wield power over them. Does it really matter whether the person doing the oppressing is a government apparatchik or a corporate CEO?

    I think a step in the right direction would be to get rid of the idea of corporate “personhood” as only individual humans have rights. It might even be worth considering the idea of outlawing corporations, period. Let commerce be conducted by individuals; let shops and enterprises be owned by a specific individual/family. This keeps the human element in commerce. Corporations, on the other hand, are soul-less machines whose only object is essentially sociopathic: The pursuit of profit to the exclusion of any and perhaps all other considerations. A corporation does not care whether it ruins a landscape, or destroys a community, or grasp that is vicious to “outsource” jobs to a slave-labor economy in order to “increase shareholder value” (that is, shower massive riches on the minuscule and already rich “investor class” at the expense of thousands of people’s livelihoods). Etc.

    Like Jefferson, who believed that local control was essential to political liberty, I think local/human-scale business is likewise essential to a human economy. Perhaps it would not be the most “efficient,” but efficiency ought not to be the central organizing principle of society. We are human beings, after all. Not cogs in a machine, who exist merely to enhance the “productivity” of a corporation….

  2. The Great Shell Game of America
    The basic theme of Orthodox Historiography or at least the storyline we were all taught in school and of almost all historians has been;
    ‘The rise of federal state regulation and the progressive period basically came about because in the late 19th century we had the massive rise of big business. This large scale industry became uncontrollably ‘monopolistic’ and overbearing within the free market.
    Due to the overbearing evils of monopolistic industry that were perceived by a rising group of workers, farmers and reform intellectuals, this groups organized, regulated and corrected these evils during the measure of the great progressive period, the new freedom, the fair deal, the new deal, the new era, the new society, the great society, the new nationalism, etc.
    These are needed programs that arose to fight the evils of and to reform big business monopoly that could only have been accomplish due to the imbalance of freedom in the market’
    The true story of what happened is almost exactly the opposite. Big Business did not lose, they did not give up, they did not ‘pull a Grinch’ and ‘have a heart grow three sizes that day’, They WON.
    What actually occurred with the rise of big business and large scale industry was a truly progressive (in the small p sense), increase in industrial output/invention, standard of living and productivity in the highly competitive free market.
    Many big business interests would have liked to achieve market control through cartels, monopolies and trusts in the free market and many of these cartels were attempted across the nation; however they almost all failed and quite miserably because of rapid winds of competition in the freemarket. (This is demonstrated excellently in Rothbard’s lectures: links below)
    Various Big Businesses, having seen that these attempts were complete failures, turned to the state apparatus to do the cartelization for them, to create the monopolies that they could not achieve in the free market.
    This is the simplified but correct historical interpretation of the Progressive Movement, The New Nationalism, The New Socialism, etc. of the Progressive Period.
    Roger Rabbit’s ToonTown A Corporatoon’s Story in the Defence of the Public Domain
    The Wizard of Oz is to unrestricted Interest Free government Bi-Metalism, 1789 => Gold Standard, 1900 => Fiat Debt/Interest Based Land of Balloonist/Inflationist Make-Believe Standard, 1913.
    Who Framed Roger Rabbit is to Corporation Personhood, 1895 => Corporate Charter Mongering, 1920 => Total Corporate Autonomy, Consolidation and Ownership/Partnership of the Public Domain by National-ess Corporate Statism, 1945.
    Judge Doom Dipped the Public Domain. The ToonTown Merry Go Round Broke Down and Dorothy Never Clicked Her Silver Slippers.
    End of the US Century with over 70% dominance in the entire world’s Currency. The World Reserve Currency will no longer be in Bankcorupt US Dollars.

  3. I dunno.

    Yes, the Tea Party was founded by Libertarians but from what I can tell, based on things like the enthusiasm for Palin (a neo-conned GOP hack if ever there was one) the Republicans have taken over, or at least, have become a dominant element. My area Tea Party, for example, has become a cheering squad for Republican office seekers.

    I know some believe the GOP can be infiltrated and reformed from within; I think that’s a pipe dream. The GOP is a wholly owned subsidiary of corporate America and the idea that it will ever be anything other than a shill for corporate America is naive, even silly. The only way we will see a return to freedom – that is, to individual property rights and individual liberty – is for a third party based openly on those principles to arise and challenge the DemoPublican stranglehold on the politics of this country.

  4. Actually, we Tea Partyers are Libertarians in Republican drag. The Libertarian Party founded the Tea Party in 2007. And I fully admit that we Libertarians have infiltrated the Republican Party to move it more towards our limited government beliefs.

    Guilty as charged.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here