Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - A View of What's Left: a Tea Party

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

A View of What's Left: a Tea Party
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

Big_Bird

Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...

Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 12:23 am Post subject:

comm wrote:

Big_Bird wrote:

Oldham infiltrated some of the movement's key organising events, including the 2009 Defending the American Dream summit, convened by a group called Americans for Prosperity (AFP).

Note that that's 2009.

The original Tea Party (as it was established based on basic principles of economic and personal freedom), like any other party, is easily hijacked by people with money and an interest in diverting it from its natural path.

If I generate some discussion in my home town, name my group the "Path of Liberty Party" and start posting some fliers for a BBQ, people will show up. If the "Path of Liberty Party" gets very popular, a powerful group will start hosting their own "Path of Liberty Party" events. Only their events will be advertised in newspapers, online and on TV. Their event wont be a BBQ, it will be a media circus complete with big name national figures who will bring their own personal (and financial) interests into the event. And in the course of this, everyone will forget what the "Path of Liberty Party" was when Comm started it, but only know it as the "Path of Liberty Party" which is over hyped by Fox news, filled with moralists and headed by Sarah Palin.

Yes, but how does that detract from the main thesis of the article - that this party is being used cynically by elite interests?

visitorq

Joined: 11 Jan 2008

Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 12:32 am Post subject:

Big_Bird wrote:

comm wrote:

Big_Bird wrote:

Oldham infiltrated some of the movement's key organising events, including the 2009 Defending the American Dream summit, convened by a group called Americans for Prosperity (AFP).

Yes, but how does that detract from the main thesis of the article - that this party is being used cynically by elite interests?

Obviously that the original premise behind the Tea Party is good and what needs to be focused on, rather than allowing the whole thing to be discredited by a few phony libertarian-in-name-only billionaires (the Koch brothers) and the GOP who have co-opted it. Also means it's better to be smart and show some discernment instead of lapping up all the garbage the New York Times et al throw your way.

Big_Bird

Joined: 31 Jan 2003
Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...

Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 4:07 am Post subject:

visitorq wrote:

Big_Bird wrote:

comm wrote:

Big_Bird wrote:

Oldham infiltrated some of the movement's key organising events, including the 2009 Defending the American Dream summit, convened by a group called Americans for Prosperity (AFP).

Yes, but how does that detract from the main thesis of the article - that this party is being used cynically by elite interests?

I haven't read the NYT in years, darling. Anyway - I'm afraid watching the garbage that is spouted out of the Tea Party people themselves is enough to alienate me. I feel they're living in another universe.

visitorq

Joined: 11 Jan 2008

Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 5:16 am Post subject:

Big_Bird wrote:

visitorq wrote:

Big_Bird wrote:

comm wrote:

Big_Bird wrote:

Oldham infiltrated some of the movement's key organising events, including the 2009 Defending the American Dream summit, convened by a group called Americans for Prosperity (AFP).

Yes, but how does that detract from the main thesis of the article - that this party is being used cynically by elite interests?

The Guardian then, same diff (same leftist drivel, written by globalist stooge George Monbiot). The article you posted echoed the previous NYT one almost exactly.

Your problem is that you call out the "Tea Party" without even defining it. If you're talking about the GOP hijackers posing as libertarians, then fine. But the so-called "Tea Party" movement started before this (actually the libertarian ideas go back decades) and was legitimate. I wonder if you've ever listened to a Ron Paul speech before? He certainly isn't to be lumped together with the likes of Sarah Palin.

mises

Joined: 05 Nov 2007
Location: retired

Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 5:19 am Post subject:

The people who go to Tea Party events and identify with Tea Party characters are about 50% mainline Republican and 50% Ron Paul style Republican. The Republican types will melt away with the next R president. The people who are from the Ron Paul campaign won't. The monied interests benefit from focusing on the Tea Party. They've successfully manipulated the whole society into a "crazy anti-government idiot" or "sane" category. The D establishment and their media want dissent from Obama marginalized. Why don't middle class people protest in the United States as they do in France? Dissent is categorized and labeled and then repeated a million times. This was done with the anti-war protesters (anti-American, Taliban loving queers) during the Bush years. Label, marginalize, ridicule. That's the game. Doesn't matter who. Protesting the war(s)? Government waste? Civil liberties? The bullsh.t health care bill? Does not matter. Label, marginalize, ridicule. Self-respecting people who think themselves normal don't want to belong to or associate with a 'fringe' group.

comm

Joined: 22 Jun 2010

Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 6:41 am Post subject:

Big_Bird wrote:

Anyway - I'm afraid watching the garbage that is spouted out of the Tea Party people themselves is enough to alienate me. I feel they're living in another universe.

"I'm afraid watching the garbage that is spouted out of the Muslims themselves is enough to alienate me. I feel they're living in another universe."

We're supplying evidence of two important things:
1. Many Tea Party members are rational libertarians who want to reduce government influence in economic and personal freedoms.
2. The Tea Party itself was originally founded on these principles.

To ignore the evidence provided and assume that all Tea Party members are psychotic hatemongers may serve your political interests, but is no better than the revision I made to your quote above.

Fat_Elvis

Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Location: In the ghetto

Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 6:49 am Post subject:

visitorq wrote:

(actually the libertarian ideas go back decades)

Yes, and support for libertarian and free market ideology by big business also goes back decades. The Koch brother's father served on the governing body of the John Birch society, Murdoch has used Fox news and other news outlets to push this line for years, and the Ford Foundation paid for the Chicago Boys to be trained at the University of Chicago with Milton Friedman before their free market theories were used in Chile under General Pinochet's military dictatorship.

Hugo85

Joined: 27 Aug 2010

Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 7:16 am Post subject:

The Tea Party should branch out from the republicans and form their own party. Perhaps we'd start seeing democracy at work in the US with a three-party system?

comm

Joined: 22 Jun 2010

Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 7:21 am Post subject:

Fat_Elvis wrote:

and the Ford Foundation paid for the Chicago Boys to be trained at the University of Chicago with Milton Friedman before their free market theories were used in Chile under General Pinochet's military dictatorship.

You do know that Pinochet had buried his country in social welfare programs and the free market reforms of the Chicago Boys kept the economy from completely collapsing.

I'm assuming that either you learned about them in an economics course like I did, or someone's blog... Since you're referring to them with negative connotations, I'm guessing it was the latter.

Last edited by comm on Tue Oct 26, 2010 10:17 am; edited 1 time in total

comm

Joined: 22 Jun 2010

Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 7:27 am Post subject:

Hugo85 wrote:

The Tea Party should branch out from the republicans and form their own party. Perhaps we'd start seeing democracy at work in the US with a three-party system?

It's called the "Libertarian Party" and unfortunately nobody votes for it.

The Happy Warrior

Joined: 10 Feb 2010

Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 8:14 am Post subject:

Fat_Elvis wrote:

the Ford Foundation paid for the Chicago Boys to be trained at the University of Chicago with Milton Friedman before their free market theories were used in Chile under General Pinochet's military dictatorship.

Somebody has read Naomi Klein and is under the erroneous belief that he therefore knows what he's talking about.

visitorq

Joined: 11 Jan 2008

Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 11:56 am Post subject:

Fat_Elvis wrote:

visitorq wrote:

(actually the libertarian ideas go back decades)

Yes, and support for libertarian and free market ideology by big business also goes back decades. The Koch brother's father served on the governing body of the John Birch society,

The John Birch Society is complicated in a libertarian context. They're not exactly libertarian, but had a lot of the same anti-establishment views. Basically the JBS was founded by and tightly run by Robert Welch, who was anti-communist and believed the federal government had been taken over by communist forces (basically he was correct, but his rhetoric was so strong it alienated a lot of people). Fred Koch was a member, but held little power over Robert Welch (who was independently wealthy).

Quote:

Murdoch has used Fox news and other news outlets to push this line for years, and the Ford Foundation paid for the Chicago Boys to be trained at the University of Chicago with Milton Friedman before their free market theories were used in Chile under General Pinochet's military dictatorship.

None of this has anything to do with libertarianism or Ron Paul. Fox News is a complete joke (no need to even go there). The University of Chicago has been in the Rockefeller orbit since day 1 (John D. Sr. was the founder). And the Ford Foundation is obviously one of the largest and most influential sources of funding for globalism in the country (you'd be hard pressed to find a more liberal institution).

As for Friedman, although he espoused certain free-market beliefs in common, he certainly wasn't a libertarian; his Monetarist theories were a lot more similar to Keynesian macroeconomics than to Austrian economics. Basically if you're lumping him in with libertarians, you don't really know what you're talking about...

Fat_Elvis

Joined: 17 Aug 2006
Location: In the ghetto

Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 4:10 pm Post subject:

visitorq wrote:

Basically if you're lumping him in with libertarians, you don't really know what you're talking about...

I wouldn't like to lump them together but they all belong on a spectrum of decreasing government involvement in the management of the economy and society. And many such views have been funded over the years by big business as if such views become policy their profits increase.

visitorq

Joined: 11 Jan 2008

Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 7:11 pm Post subject:

Fat_Elvis wrote:

visitorq wrote:

Basically if you're lumping him in with libertarians, you don't really know what you're talking about...

In a free market big business and wealthy people are desirable: they provides jobs, produce real wealth, invest wisely, increase our living standards, develop technology etc.

Unless you're talking about cartels/monopolies. In that case the government is, in every case, required to enforce it. By far the biggest "business" is the government-enforced banking cartel that is the Federal Reserve, sucking off the American people since 1913. Big oil, big pharma, big Agriculture, and others are the same. They use the government to dominate society, fund themselves with our taxes, and regulate away the competition.

caniff

Joined: 03 Feb 2004
Location: All over the map

Posted: Tue Oct 26, 2010 11:15 pm Post subject:

visitorq wrote:

In a free market big business and wealthy people are desirable

Up to a point, I'd say. The top 5% controlling 90% of the wealth (for instance) doesn't seem very desirable to me.

(Unless I end up in the top 5%.)

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> Current Events Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next
Page 2 of 4

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe