The Tea Party and its Future
October 29, 2010
GARY NORTH, an economist and social conservative, posted some interesting reflections on the Tea Party at his site. The movement lacks a real leader, he writes, and that is an asset. Its libertarian side will probably fade with time and it will become a growing force in politics. He predicts that it will be led by the best and brightest of homeschooled adults who are accustomed to rejecting the mainstream.
He describes ten key facts about the Tea Party. I reprint the article in its entirety below:
Ten Key Facts About the Tea Party that Hardly Anyone Talks About
by Gary North
1. There is no party. The Tea Party is a play on words. It relates to the 1773 event in Boston. It is not a national political movement. It is a local grass roots effort to slow down the drift over the fiscal falls. So, the following assessment makes no sense.
For over 17,000 Americans taking one of MyType’s psychology surveys, we inserted a question about the Tea Party to reveal the demographics, values, morals and personalities of the movement’s supporters (see the full report). Looking for the defining characteristics of a presumably cohesive party, we instead found the movement in the middle of an identity crisis. According to MyType’s data, devoutly religious conservatives comprise 22.5% of the Tea Party and are its fastest growing segment. They bring with them a fundamentally different set of values, morals and personalities than libertarian supporters, a core group that represent 17% of the party. While the former tend to be morally charged, family-oriented traditionalists, many libertarian supporters are neither religious nor traditional — rather, they are independent, intellectual, and morally permissive. The rising prominence of religious conservatives within the movement, highlighted by recent religious right rhetoric from several prominent figures affiliated with the Tea Party, appears to be driving away libertarians and others. Despite the surge in support from religious conservatives, overall support for the Tea Party is in decline.
We read: “Looking for the defining characteristics of a presumably cohesive party, we instead found the movement in the middle of an identity crisis.” If they were looking for cohesion, they were looking for knowledge in all the wrong places. Second, the ethical sentiment is rising, precisely because of the arrival of the religious Right. The religious Right began in 1979. There are millions of these people out there to serve as a recruiting pool. There are hardly any libertarians out there, and they are mostly anti-political. Ron Paul buffs are mostly religious Right people. This has always been true. Even his original staff was divided in 1976. The inevitable result of a growing Tea Party is the percentage decrease of libertarians. That was true from day one. Thus, there is no identity crisis. There is expansion.
2. The movement has no spokesmen. This is the crucial fact for now. No one speaks for the Tea Party. Several people can draw a crowd. Palin is one. Ron Paul is another. Glenn Beck is another. Palin could draw a crowd anywhere. So could Beck. Paul does well on YouTube. But no one speaks for it. This is a major strength of the Tea Party. No one can sell it out.
3. The movement has only a few large mailing lists. I know the man who owns several of the largest ones. He has been at this for only two years. This is a new movement.
4. There is no creed/platform. It is not “let’s get this agenda passed.” It is “let’s get new spending laws stopped.” This indicates that the movement is fluid. It’s a negative ideological movement at this point. It is not a national political movement. People will vote against incumbents who are perceived as big spenders. This is positive.
5. It is a negative ideological movement. This means it will serve as a spoiler. It will not build anything until it becomes better organized. “You can’t beat something with nothing.” It is an operational veto, not a program of national institution-building.
6. It is a Web-generated phenomenon. These people have come out of nowhere in protest to the Establishment. They are Web people. The Web is decentralized. The Tea Party reflects this. It is more like Facebook than a political party. It is a wild card. The Establishment cannot handle it.
7. There is no Secretary-Treasurer. Back in the Communist Party/fellow traveler days, if you wanted to find out what an outfit was, you found out who the Secretary-Treasurer was. That was the advice of the master organizer and creator of Communist fronts, Willi Münsterberg. (He deserves a Wiki page.) The Tea Party has no central organization. This is good.
8. It is less than two years old. It has barely begun. It is growing. It has communications tools like never before. This is going to be a growing force in politics. But it will not conform to the previous rules of politics. These people are interested in stopping events, not building an alternative. Not yet, anyway. When the government’s checks bounce, then there will be talk of building local alternatives.
9. It is a grass-roots movement. It is not sophisticated compared to talking heads. It is educated by Web pages, Fox News, and YouTube. This is democracy. Most members are not yet trained in serious ideological materials. That will take years. The broad masses will watch Glenn Beck. They will not read Mises. But they are far better trained, already, than the average voter. They know what the Federal Reserve System is. They are a threat to the Establishment.
10. The home schoolers will be the future leaders. I am guessing, of course, but it’s an educated guess. Home schoolers are educated outside of the system. They instinctively are Tea Party material. Over time, Tea Party events will be their training ground. In a crisis, they will take over local positions.
This phenomenon is in its infancy. To attempt to apply criteria relating to pre-Facebook party politics is to miss the main point. The main point is this: they are as mad as hell, and they won’t take this any more.
— Comments —
MarkyMark writes:
I’m more inclined to agree with Vox Day; the so-called ‘Tea Parties’ will fizzle out. One, they’re mostly women who have time for political activisim, but do not have the stones to really FIGHT the statists and aspiring tyrants of the left. Two, unless we’re going to party like it’s 1773, don’t talk to me about ‘Tea Parties’! If we’re going to have effective tea parties, then we have to have ’em old school style.
