The burgeoning conservative "teabagger" movement, and the "tea party" demonstrations set for Wednesday, has created opportunities aplenty for ridicule (as one would expect from a movement that shares its name with a frat boy prank involving a scrotum). However, beyond risibility, the "tea parties" are also an occasion for something more substantive; namely, a chance to test the resolve of America's 21st Century anti-intellectual movement. We saw this during the 2008 election season, where fatuous myopia, paranoia and frothy-mouthed rage set in at McCain/Palin rallies -- calling for then-candidate Obama's head, or at least his birth certificate, and deifying Sarah Palin for her contempt of all things informed or worldly.
That shameful, rabid anti-intellectualism went dormant after the landslide election results posted, but it is now on the rise again with troubling charges to pull one's children out of college ("brainwashing institutions") and to "burn the books" with "that evolution crap" (whatever evolution has to do with taxation or increased government outlays is beyond me).
[WATCH:]
Really, it's come to this? People like that guy are running the show? A prudent question: just how serious are these resurgent anti-intellectuals? Hardly anyone in the video even flinched when the woman seriously called for books to be burned. One wonders if there's anything you couldn't say in these settings. "Kill all puppies?" "Grab your guns?" "Let's burn this mother fucker down?"
Anti-intellectualism is defined by, inter alia, abject paranoia of the perceived educated elite -- which, in the US, is a group that's been growing for decades alongside steady economic growth, fueled by innovation. Granted, this is all very simplified, few would deny that the driving force for America's economic growth now is educated innovators. This, sure enough, will drive any future economic growth as well. Manufacturing has moved across seas, and regrettably much of American brainpower in the past few decades has been directed towards the financial sector. But that may be set to change, and the alternative is not retrogression towards willful ignorance or a widespread, intentional drop in college enrollment -- it is simply a shift in focus towards science, math and technology, whereby education remains as important as ever.
It is categorically accepted that access to education should not be denied to anyone, regardless of socioeconomic standing. Millions of young people are being furnished with educational opportunities that would have been pure fantasy for their parents or grandparents. And yet the man in the above video calls for his compatriots to deny this opportunity to their own children. (By the way, these potential vacancies would gladly be filled by "sea turtles" from the developing world, or by underprivileged students here at home.)
The sad fact is that there is simply no place for this type of wretched anti-intellectualism in America anymore. It can be expected from the margins, but it's troubling to see it embraced and validated by more mainstream entities. This movement represents the lost and left-behind. And, pitifully, it's a one-way street. It is not as though there are educated or "intellectual" people who crave ignorance and despise knowledge. Anti-intellectualism is a purely circumstantial outlook, whereas education or knowledge acquisition is indisputably a normative societal goal. Thus, it is no surprise that anti-intellectualism is promptly defenestrated as soon as alternative options become available. It is, in short, a last resort, knee-jerk reaction to abject desperation.
All that being said, some very important questions remain -- namely, why the hell is this populist, boastful ignorance being actively encouraged and exploited by conservative corporate lobbyists, Fox News and, indeed, the Republican Party, as Jane Hamsher outlined Monday on this site. As if the 2008 election was not evidence enough that pulling on the atavistic, anti-intellectual thread of America's social fabric is a failed political strategy.
The most obvious answer, I daresay, is that this rabble is easily roused. It's surely the most reliable -- the GOP's loyal, doltish puppy. But by embracing the current hullabaloo, is the party not taking the easy way out? Rather than endeavoring to redefine itself as a party of well-reasoned, informed conservative viewpoints, GOP politicians are simply crawling back to the usual bunch of idiots -- a group that ululates resonantly while carrying an ever-more puny stick. New studies suggesting a mass political realignment towards the Democratic Party bode ill for this strategy. Moreover, it bodes ill for a properly functioning democratic system. When the music dies, one hopes we won't be left with only one credible party. However, that is looking increasingly likely.
Follow Stuart Whatley on Twitter: www.twitter.com/stuwhat84
I believe that their main issues are: big government, big spending and some very left wing appointments that put all of us at significant risk. Here are some examples: Geitner - Here is the new Treasury Secretary who not only doesn't pay his own taxes but takes the money that was supposed to pay the taxes and pockets it. Napolitano - Refuses to use the term "Islamic Terrorist" but is concerned about the possibility of our returning military becoming terrorists. Holder - Calls us a nation of "cowards".
I also think that many of the "right wing, bigot, haters are very concerned about the new push to create 20 to 30 million new citizens who will then be in the pockets of the liberals who gave them amnesty.
Barack Obama lied about Wright and Ayres during his campaign. Now he lies when he says that he didn't bow down to Faisal. If he had bowed anymore he could have kissed his shoes. His moral compass and his judgement are being called into question by many.
These people and there are many of them who don't attend rallys are very concerned about the future direction that this bus is going and the bus driver who is taking them there.
Today's America operates as an open society-- systems of individuals and groups relating in a variety of ways-- through family, work, teaching-learning, government, law and religion. Its systems continue to develop at points in human history interconnecting with other peoples and systems. Therefore, what happens in our economy and government affects and is affected by other economies and governments. Its too late to turn back.
Politicians know that we are no longer a nation of 20 million or 100 million and that state and national government become complex to meet increased needs. They know, however, that many in "The Young and The Restless" nation." would rather escape "As the World Turns," than think. We are after all, are " Displaced politicians want to "send the fools further." The population continues to grow.
Ignoring the need to spend for our society's future will lead our grand-children a nation that devolved by mid-century into the 3rd world -- holding our legacy of condescension at other societies.
I for one was in constant fear he would start a third world war if someone didn't control that mouth of his ,"a nuclear war at that which would have wiped us all off the face of the earth ! Bet you never gave it a thought did you ?
I would rather have a president who is intelligent ,thoughful and level headed than a no brain ,arrogant hot head who thought he was king !
quote:
However, beyond risibility, the "tea parties" are also an occasion for something more substantive; namely, a chance to test the resolve of America's 21st Century anti-intellectual movement.
/quote
Surely, you meant "more primal" not "more substantive" to describe these protests against Obama's campaign promises on taxes, which will reduce taxation for 95% of us.
There's nothing primal about people wanting to keep what they earn, that's what the original Tea Party was all about and therefore this event was grassroots and fitting the label perfectly.
You neglected to point out the biggest and best welfare of all: approximately 2/3 of big corporations paid NO TAXES into our coffers at all last year. Offshore tax havens alone accounted for 100 billion lost dollars just last year. That's BILLION. Destructive welfare, indeed!!!
Go ahead, keep quibbling about the oak seed at your feet while you don't see the 40 foot full grown tree crashing down on your head.
We will never get out of this unless people like you really do WAKE UP.
I'm not sure you're aware of this, however Ayn Rand was purely an idealist. Libertarians plagerized her work and misrepresented them to back their anarchy-fashioned collectivism.
Mises has documented sources degrading feminism. Anyone who considers women to be just a "tax deductible service to her husband" does not want a FREE market. FREE consists of liberties that do not exist in a collectivist society.
Discrimination is an obstruction to the free markets, it's also a main symptom of collectivism. Ron Paul represents Mises and he associates very closely with Stormfront; two very collectivist minded organizations. With that being said, a centrist republican is completely opposite the libertarians with regards to values. I cannot share your sentiment about Ron Paul.
With that being said, be your third party,. Warning, stand for something (in 1st person) or you'll fall for anything.
Read http://www.opednews.com/articles/Want-to-Show-Your-Tea-Bag-by-Gustav-Wynn-090414-720.html
Send Congress republicans and Faux News commentators packets of Kool-Aid!
How soon everybody forgot the GOP is the "Kool-Aid Drinkers' Party"....
Conquest by violence and conquest by legalistic fraud are motivated by the same lack of character. I think "from Idaho" is exactly right.
Sales tax in Cali is the highest in the state, just bumped-up by a Republican Governor.
Taxation Without Representation---we just had an election--not in a fight for our sovereignty.
Other columnist have recently written some history lessons--read for yourself-- about the Boston Tea Party and how the analogy fits this mess is a mystery, and add to that this strange call to arms, teabagging, the non-vetted sexual innuendos that then rained down and you have another disastrous PR embarrassment by the right.
These crowds just can't get enough of the punishment the Right Wing policies have inflicted.
Just watched Wayne Slater tell Rachel Maddow he believes the teabaggers in Kentucky who he queried earlier today do not know about the sexual innuendo attached to using "tea bag" as a verb. I believe him, and I wonder why Fox set up their loyal viewers to be made laughingstocks, by writing their own scripts to describe today's protests as "tea bagging" repeatedly in the past week. Might Fox and the corporatist sponsors of these events [Dick Armey, Newt Gingrich, et al] stand to benefit from having the participants viewed as "fringe" by the mainstream? I know it seems conspiratorial but it also is perfectly consistent with Lee Atwater's "wedge" strategy.
But stranger things have happened.
Also how can, let's be generous, 95% of the people not see a tax increase if new taxes are levied on; big oil, big business (often including Mom and Pop's), increase various fees for various things? Someone will have to pay the increase in tax. It is a cost of business, therefore it is a cost of production and therefore a cost of the product. Hence the cost of the product will go up and be PAID BY THE PEOPLE. I guess that means 95% of the people will be paying a hidden tax!
If there is any free market, Exxon-Mobil's *historically unprecedented* profits leave plenty of for competition without driving *any* refiners, shippers, miners or retailers under. The market will only bear what it will bear, and our response to $4/Gal. oil is well documented. Profit margins can be reduced to roughly 1% of operating expenses without causing any current producers to abandon a market, because in short, that's 1% of a very large amount and so many expenses (salaries, rent and lease agreements, property taxes, most supplies, etc.) are fixed at the beginning of each year, or several years in advance in the case of leases from the federal government. The claim that increasing corporate taxes will necessarily increase prices is false. In the current heavily subsidized, over-capitalized petroleum market that argument is utterly without merit.
Two things, I think.
1) Life experience:
a) Even though I own my own businesses now, I spent 26 years holding the sh*tty end of a stick which was managed at the other end by people who in their guts (thought they'd never admit it) felt their position and their money made them intrinsically better than me - for all that I was smarter and more creative than most of them, and more honest, to boot.
b) Since 1980, I have been battling insurance companies and bug business in one way or another on almost a daily basis. They are evil, dishonest, greedy and corrupt. NOTHING matters to these people but their image and the bottom line. And if forced to choose, the bottom line trumps image.
2) Philosophical growth. I believe I have evolved a seamless and global personal philosophy which is in no way internally contradictory. Part of this philosophy is that all people and all life are interdependent. What hurts you hurts me. Hence, if I hurt you to help myself, my act is entirely futile.
You all just think, pass the law, sign the bill and now things are fixed. If you run a business then you must know how stupid it is to put faith and $$ into big Gov...
If it is your conviction that needful programs "can't possible be administered" then you hold that government cannot work, and cannot be made to work. Might I commend you to Somalia? Their style of "government " (ie no government at all) should suit you well. It is a living fulfillment of your belief in the uselessness of government, and provides and ideal environment to test how well private enterprise can survive in a secuirty vacuum.
Re: government - big vs little is a red herring. Servant vs Master of the people is more to the point. Government is our collective societal expression of where our individual goals, purposes and yes, values, coincide. A people inevitably gets the government they seek. A government small enough to be drowned in a bathtub is too weak to serve its people and enforce their agreements.
Re: education - insofar as it it broken, it must needs be fixed - not abandoned.
Re: disribution of wealth - what a man or woman produces must be bargained for in good faith - including by their employer. What I make is not yours just because I work for you. It is yours only to the degree that I have agreed to sell it to you for a certain price. My labor does not belong to you. Who is obscenely wealthy did not create that wealth, but accumulated it through a one way filter - more coming in than going out. That is not fair exchange. That is theft.
Individuals have a tendency to look at immediate returns just as private businesses do. So who takes care of our long-term needs and sustainable growth? Gov should. And, gov is not some alien entity out there, it's a collective power that is bestowed by voters. Voters need to keep gov in line and accountable.
If we look at the financial mess hard enough, we'll find it's a failure of gov, which bowed to lobbyists and corporate power and deregulated financial industry at end of 1999. Which means some Congressmen acted not in their people's interests but in their corporate doners'. Which means those who voted for these Congressmen should think hard why they voted for them, and vow not to repeat that mistake in future. A more knee-jerk reaction is, gov failed in regulating financial industry, therefore, gov bad, we get rid of gov.
Hello, Kettle?
This is The Pot,
You're black.
I seem to remember the Dems crying that Bush stole the election for the last eight years, not to mention the cries of impeach Bush right up to the election.
This would be really huge except most people on the Tea Bag side are actually working...