"More than four in 10, 41%, of respondents said they had a very or somewhat favorable view of the Tea Party movement, while 24% said they had a somewhat or very negative view of the group. ....Meanwhile, the Democratic Party, which controls both the White House and Congress, has a 35% positive rating compared with a 45% negative rating....The Republican Party identifies closest to the Tea Party movement's ideology, but the group has also caused splits within the GOP. Republicans currently hold a 28% favorability rating compared with a 43% negative one." Wall Street Journal
During every great economic upheaval a populist revolt emerges against the people and the institutions most perceived to have wrecked the economy. It usually comes in left and right flavors.
In the 1930s for example, all manner of progressives, socialists and communists argued for massive reforms and even the wholesale transformation of capitalism. The right wing populists, so very fond of fascism, attacked the wealthy often using anti-Semitism as the causal explanation - that the crisis was caused by an international Jewish conspiracy of bankers.
In Europe a virtual civil war broke out between left and right. Even Brooklyn featured street fights between Nazis and Communists during the 1930s as the fiery radio preacher, Father Couglin, spewed anti-Semitic, anti-capitalist, anti-Roosevelt vitriol over the airwaves.
But the progressive upsurge captured our national debate during the Great Depression. A consensus emerged that we needed a mixed economy where government would police the financial sector, constrain the distribution of wealth and aid working people enhance their standard of living through labor laws, unionization and federal job programs.
Not this time around.... so far. During our current Great Recession, the Tea Party folks rule the roost. There is no massive left response. In fact the nearly all of the revulsion against the economic collapse and bailouts for the super-rich is captured and expressed by the Tea Party. Their recent poll numbers cited above, however fleeting, are astounding. There's no progressive formation that could even be placed onto a poll.
Why?
You can't pin this on some mysterious domestic malaise that somehow impacts progressives only while leaving the Tea Partyites fired up and raring to go. No dispirited diatribes about too much consumerism or debt or TV or Internet porn can explain away the failure of progressivism. We have to look deeper and soon.
As labor activist Mark Dudzic points out, the Tea Party has at least one big advantage: It's backed by an extremely large and powerful amplification system in the form of Fox News. Of course, the left has Huffington Post, AlterNet, Air America and a few other outlets. But as yet they don't match the wattage of Fox and Rush.
The Tea Party also has a very clear message - the problem is big government, big business, and corrupt politicians. Sure, when you push on their program, it's full of contradictions, like how to control big business without a government that can match Wall Street's strength. But the Tea Party expresses the fury of Americans who have watched the financial elites rip off the economy, then crash it, then cash in on government bailouts, and then commence to rip off the economy all over again. It sure does look las if the federal government is aiding and abetting the very people who crashed the system while tens of millions go without work.
Finally, the Team Party is passionate. Its activists are willing to express their anger. They are not worried about offending the elites or sounding shrill. They don't care if they cripple Obama or sink the Republicans. They're just venting as loud and as hard as they can. They believe in what they're saying even when it makes no sense.
So why aren't we hearing more from progressives? After all, this is the perfect time to build a progressive populist response in behalf of Main Street against Wall Street.
First of all, it's considerably harder to be positive than negative. This means we have to know what we stand for and clearly articulate it without sounding like policy wonks. Right now, we're all over the place. Ask any two progressives what they stand for and you'll get three different answers. Do we want more regulation on banks or do we want to break them up? Do we want to nationalize them or return them to private investors? Do we want salary caps for all financial institutions or just the ones with TARP money? Do we want the Federal Reserve abolished or reformed? Do we want more stimulus or direct jobs creation?
Not only don't we have a clear cut agenda, but we are unwilling to break with the Democrats and they know it. The Tea Party folks have no trouble trashing Republicans who stand in their way. But we are far more entwined with the Obama administration and with all levels of the Democratic Party. So our message is restrained for fear of hurting the Democrats and aiding the Republicans. We act like inside players not movement leaders.
The muted message also comes across as a lack of passion, especially on economic issues. Many of us seem willing to fight hard on environmental and social issues, and so we should. But we don't have the same fire in the belly when it comes to jobs and economic reforms.
There is one more critical difference that we should not underestimate: Our new billionaire bailout society is not threatened by the Tea Party. In fact, the Tea Party's anti-government, anti-regulatory call is precisely what Wall Street wants: the less government interference, the more profits and bonuses. Also, the Tea Party is not calling for pay caps, or financial transactions taxes or jobs programs or the return to Glass-Steagall. Wall Street can live with their rabble rousing rhetoric.
Yes, the Tea Party opposes the bailouts that are making Wall Street fatter than ever. But our financial dons know that too big to fail is entrenched national policy. The bailout money will be there when needed.
Progressive ideas, however, could be more threatening to the established order, should we dare to get our act together. What if Arianna Huffington's populist call to move our money out of the big banks caught on? What if a coalition of progressive groups and unions formed to fight for a new hard-hitting anti-Wall Street, pro-Main Street agenda? What if progressives of all stripes found a way to bolt from the two major political parties?
Dream on? Maybe. But, until progressives build something bolder and more visible, Wall Street can sip tea and sleep tight.
Les Leopold is the author of The Looting of America: How Wall Street's Game of Fantasy Finance destroyed our Jobs, Pensions and Prosperity, and What We Can Do About It, Chelsea Green Publishing, June 2009.
Follow Les Leopold on Twitter: www.twitter.com/les_leopold
We have Wall Street Liberals everywhere in Congress, the Democat Party and in the Obama Administration.
The Dems are supported by a huge number of billionaires - besides the Gates, Soros, and Buffetts are the Hedge Fund billionaires who pay ONLY 15% tax on their profits, a lower percentage than any middle-class American (thanks to Chuck Schumer).
The Dems have backroom meetings and deals (thats Obama's transparency for you) with lobbyists from Wall Street, Bank Street, Drug Industry and Health Insurance that make Cheneys secret Big Oil meetings seem quaint.
I once thought the Republican party was the party of Big Business and the wealthy. No more.
300 private jets flew into Bush's last inauguration 2004 near the height of the bubble... 600 flew into Obama's. Dems = BIG Biz and BIG unions and any special interest money can buy. Sickening and tragic.
They complain about deficits, but then compalin about taxes to pay for the wars they supported.
They complain about healthcare as they use their medicare and worry that if more have health insurance.. they will wait longer.
The complain about mosqitos and then complain that the government is not spraying....
They love Sarah.. who comes from Alaska , a welfare state where everyone gets a socialized share of the oil revenue (land all of us Americans paid for) .. and was the biggest welfare queen when it came to earmarks and took ioth a city and a state from almost no debt to much.much more debt.
Regards
Many progressives are waiting to see what the President and Congress can accomplish, since the progressives were part of the majority that elected them. However, they are becoming more disappointed in the compromises and inaction that are occurring. We need real financial reform, real consumer protection, real mortgage assistance, real climate/energy policy -- not half measures or loophole-ridden legislation.
It may be time for the progressives to throw their support behind a national party that is willing to push for the real changes that are needed -- to insist only on supporting candidates that won't bow to the corporate interests that are weakening the recovery and prosperity of the nation.
It would be an initial step that would add a lot of spine to the Democrats (the Fraidycrats). Third party attempts can be awfully expensive and progressives don't have the financing or the prospects of obtaining financing.
As for this post, I will enlighten you on the Soviet Union. It was communist. You can read up on that in between tea bag parties, but suffice it to say centralized pricing of virtually all products was bound to fail. What that has to do with progressive idea I have no idea - and neither do you.
http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=CC0C00AEA5ADEBFC
Well, this is yet to be seen.
I notice that Sarah Palin is going to be the keynote speaker for the National Tea Bagger gathering. Some of the conservative insiders say her fee could be up to $100,000 for the talk. Tickets to hear her are $349 or $359 each. I can't imagine many middle class or poor people who could attend that.
BINGO!
The Democratic Party absorbs and neutralizes the energies of the "left".
Direct jobs creation will give us much better results, more bang for our buck.
Consider this--
Three weeks ago in Indiana it was disclosed that a major portion of the stimulus funds for weatherization were filtered to the building association who had given Gov. Mitch Daniels $185,000 in campaign contributions since 2004. That building association had no experience or knowledge in weatherization. They finished 3 houses instead of the 834 houses projected. So, stimulus funds can just end up as political payoffs without any appreciable distribution for jobs. (You don't think those PAC funds were for nothing, do you?)
Also, if we wait for private enterprise to deliver jobs, the corps. will just milk the gov. further. And, when the jobs come, people will end up as day laborers as the trucks drive around town to pick up people for a few days work. We need a real jobs program.
Bottom line: there should be a job for everyone who wants to work. Government should be the employer of last resort, but OUR government should show an interest in individual and our collective well-being.
I am a lifelong Republican and a lifelong Centrist. I do not support the Tea Partiers - who are far more Libertarian than classically Republican - in any way, shape, or form.
Your readers might want to take a look at my brand-new series for Centrists, The Rest of U.S.
"Centrists - Who We Are and What We Stand For" http://wp.me/PHjxC-7
Thank you.
Ellen Brandt, Ph.D. (Founder of the new Centrists Group at Linked In and new Centrists Twibe at Twitter)
Maybe, but for now that group is just letting off steam. To be meaningful, they need to advocate a remedial course of action. I heard on the MSM news tonight that Sarah Palin will be keynoting two big TP gatherings. Their reaction to her will tell more about them. I wonder how vague she will be in her talks.
More importantly, working toward purpose and justice for the whole U.S. requires dialogs with new terminology which focuses on issues and priorities. Any reference to dems, repubs, cons, neo-cons, progs, libs, capitalism, communism, socialism, et al is simply divisive and counter-productive. It's stupid name-calling which further separate us. The general issues are far more important to all of us; for example, why should we allow PAC funds at all?
To begin freshly--
1. Withdraw from any political party affiliation and become an independent.
2. Email your elected officials (regardless of their party) and let them know what you've done. Also, ask for a list of who their PACS are. And further, if it's true that they can keep leftover PAC funds when they leave office.
3. Don't trust rich people to make political decisions for you. They have their own agenda.
4. Petition Huffpo to provide some web pages for an Independent party.
Those tools could make a start.
No, we're saying No to the giant govt/corporate power grabs in HCR and cap and trade. We should all should be yelling STOP!, and the majority of Americans are appalled by what's going on, if you look at the polls. Most Americans ha te congress and oppose these huge bills that are being passed in secret.
I don't think so. Many of us are distrustful of congress as well as angry and frustrated at the whole institution. We feel that many congressmen are bought and paid for. Some citizens may never trust congress again. Some may stop voting altogether. But I wouldn't call it hate.
The only hateful action I've witnessed came from congress when Rep. Joe Wilson yelled at Obama, "You lie!" When the camera focused on Wilson, I saw his face and it showed more hate more anger (I thought).
There's no room for hate. It won't do anyone any good. When hate comes into play, the next step is bringing out the guns.
The rest of the world is single payer healthcare thats not in cost of goods produced.. and cost half as much ... the rest of the world has a national industrial plan, import tarrifs, VAT tax rebates on exports (between that, tarrifs and healthcare , they have up to a 60% pricing advantage), does not spend 20 times more on militray than anyone lese, spends twice as much on infrastucture. Europe/Japan/Canada have higher wages, 5 week paid vacations, paid for college and healthcare, unionized, retirment age six years ealrier and have trade surpluses not trade deficits larger than the rest of the world combined. ..
Upset yes, solutions or even an understanding of the problems/facts.. NOPE!
You think Obama tripled the deficits.. nope, he inherited a projected 1.7 trillion dollar deficit and reduced that.
The world is kicking our butt, they have trade surluses, and you wntstay the course.. dont do what is winning.
Regards
The rest of the world also has big business and big government and how do you compete in the world against big business with just small businesses and how does a small government control big businesses.. a problem Teddy Rosevelt faced and the BUSH deregulation has us doing again.
Your analysis is like saying the problem with fire is its HOT. Well yes...
The problem is to regulate the FIRE to your advantage... not just shout its HOT.
Regards