It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Tea Parties, lets get something clear.

page: 2
54
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:03 AM
link   
reply to post by BubbaJoe
 


Many in the tea party care, just like other groups, it's just they aren't yelling and jumping around like the other TPM are, so we really aren't hearing everything that is being said or suggested.

You ask great questions.




posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:07 AM
link   
The Tea Party is the most likely candidate for Brownshirtification and utter Putschery (yes, I make up my own words as I see fit...you know what they mean, so what does it matter?)

Don't get me wrong...not because I fall in with the idea that the WHOLE tea party is racist or that they are all stupid. But what are they all? ALL ANGRY. Anger is directed at the federal government and to a lesser extent sovereignty issues like the border (though one would think there would be more antiwar sentiment with such a libertarian theme).

The reason why I think the Tea Party can be made the infantry of a popular (and unfortunately, violent) movement is exactly due to that anger. It's probably, in the broadest sense accurately focused. But the government is the front, the illusion of the real problem. What percentage of the Tea Partiers are aware of the corporate control in this nation? What percentage are listening to Glenn Beck who spins the Citizens United decision to make it out to be a free for all for Unions (please, what Union can compete with Halliburton or Exxon????)? What percentage of Tea Partiers are customers of Walmart? ...Chain Restaurants?

So, are those people aware of the damage they do to their own efforts every time they choose to spend their money at those places?

Probably not, for most, just as most regular people are unaware.

As for all the posts on here about Obama trying to create this or that youth group whereby - in the fame of Hitler youth - he will take over the cities from the ground up: while it's a nice thought, the youth in this country are far too distracted with facebook, twitter, cell phones, movies, tv, sports, video games. They barely have enough time to study, let alone become informed. Sure, being informed is perhaps antagonistic to being controlled and manipulated. However, I would say that for the communication that twitter and cellphones allow for dissemination of information, young people are more apt to join a flashmob than Krystallnacht, let alone organize a flash "rally" against the war - the best possible outcome.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by DINSTAAR

Conservatives, Liberals, Muslims, Evangelicals, Libertarians, Socialists, and Federalists are not evil.... government is
....




government, as a function of society, is NOT evil. humans need to organize. government is a tool of organization.

is the director of a movie evil?
is the captain of a ship evil?
is the principal of a school evil?

these are all system's of governance.

can this tool be abused... of course. we witness this chronically. and of course our modern governments are little more than corporate shills.


but to say governing people is evil is rather limiting.

how else should we organize? even most social animals have a system of governance, from the alpha wolf to the silverback gorilla.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:15 AM
link   
Not a cohesive group huh? Well, we'll see come November.

The Tea party is about fundamental rights of Americans. Its an outlet to voice our disdain about our liberties being taken away from us. Sure its been infiltrated by the GOP and has been attempted to be torn apart by Liberals. The bottom line is that, as people or human beings better yet, If we do not stand up for what is right and what is being taken away from us at this moment, we will one day wake up and wonder what happened to our so called freedom. At that point it will be too late to get one thread of our Liberties back. The movement is about accepting our moral obligation to better the country as a whole for the benefit of generations to come. Follow History down the path it has taken and tell me there is not one thing that you wouldn't change. If we don't take action now we'll be stuck in the preverbial snow globe forever.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by ~Lucidity
 


I tend to agree with you here. I think the "Tea Party", which may have been at some point a real movement, is being used by the right-wing "faction" of TPTB to steer anger in the populace. Much in the way Soros and his ilk steer anger in the left.

Now don't get me wrong. I'm not saying people shouldn't be angry, but generally speaking, walking around being angry doesn't solve any problems. You can't unite behind a feeling of general discontent. There has to be a unifying goal beyond "I hate all these people kick them out". There are no leaders. I just don't see this as a viable political group.

Anger is fine at first, but without a real direction you will find yourself wandering aimlessly. I think that's the whole point of the thing now-just sending people out to the wilderness.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:21 AM
link   
reply to post by Sphota
 




Anger is directed at the federal government and to a lesser extent sovereignty issues like the border (though one would think there would be more antiwar sentiment with such a libertarian theme).


Sadly, I think the libertarian that made up the early days of the movement have been overshadowed by the populists and social conservatives. LETS REMEMBER WHERE THE TEA PARTIES STARTED in the modern sense. It used to be a libertarian movement... antiwar, anti-government. Now, it seems, to have become a talk-radio conservative movement.

It is interesting, though, how many people Fox is bringing in who are libertarian. John Stossol, Judge Napolitano, Tucker Carlson, and a couple of the late night hosts are very libertarian (sometimes too much for Fox). They still keep them on the Business channel or in obscurity, but they are making headroom. I do not consider Beck a libertarian because he only uses that term to describe his economic views.

I have also noticed a few minor players on other networks who have said many very libertarian things.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by badgerprints
 


No, disenfranchised does not mean pissed off. But if you want to change the definition because that helps you with a jumping off point for your dissertation, go for it. Glad to oblige.

By the very premises in the OP, the Tea Party is comprised of just about every ideology and concern across the entire spectrum, so that would be what as far as ideologies go? The entire country?

So, the Tea Party has started off fractured...almost at the very level of fracture it took this country almost 250 years to achieve.

My opinion remains that the Tea Party is a failed experiment. Good luck with that.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by antonia


Now don't get me wrong. I'm not saying people shouldn't be angry, but generally speaking, walking around being angry doesn't solve any problems. You can't unite behind a feeling of general discontent. There has to be a unifying goal beyond "I hate all these people kick them out". There are no leaders. I just don't see this as a viable political group.

Anger is fine at first, but without a real direction you will find yourself wandering aimlessly. I think that's the whole point of the thing now-just sending people out to the wilderness.


If you suggest anger cannot unite I suggest you look up early Americans and the Labor Unions they formed, they became so powerful they destroyed much industry with their entitlements.
Our task will be to figure out at what point they became so strong as to be able to do that and avoid it.
As far as direction we need to vote out all career politicians and put small people into those positions and in the future make sure there are no more career politicians.
As well we need to rid ourselves of lobbyists.
There is a good example of direction I think.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:28 AM
link   
reply to post by antonia
 


Fair enough. One point I will respectfully yet vehemently disagree with is that it's okay to be as angry as some examples that we see daily from those wearing the label of the Tea Party. Anger is not the way...particularly when it can be viewed as a scatter-shot type of lashing out with no particular focus. That really marginalizes things...and there is no real power in it.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:29 AM
link   
reply to post by DINSTAAR
 

Thank you for saying this. And that is exactly what has disenfranchised many who have viewed themselves as libertarians for quite some time now. Me, for one. Could you tell?


[edit on 7/29/2010 by ~Lucidity]



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by g146541


If you suggest anger cannot unite I suggest you look up early Americans and the Labor Unions they formed, they became so powerful they destroyed much industry with their entitlements.
Our task will be to figure out at what point they became so strong as to be able to do that and avoid it.
As far as direction we need to vote out all career politicians and put small people into those positions and in the future make sure there are no more career politicians.
As well we need to rid ourselves of lobbyists.
There is a good example of direction I think.


Anger was a factor, but Unions had actual demands. There were also visible leaders such as Samuel Gompers. They also tended to share the same demands. This is what separates the Tea Party from many other political movements. There are no unifying leaders. There is no specific platform. You can sit here and tell me every thing you think should be done, but it still would not be representative of the "Tea Party". That's the problem. How do you sell something without a leader or a platform?

[edit on 29-7-2010 by antonia]



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:36 AM
link   
reply to post by antonia
 

How the anger manifests is a huge concern. Do we not all see what is happening today? While some of it may be unfounded, how much of it is? And does it really even matter so long as the perception is out there?

Leadership tends to be a huge challenge with a diverse anything...nation...party...any group. It's an art with a cohesive group and almost a sheer impossibility with a group containing so many factions.

No true leader has come forward, and it's a huge doubt in my mind that one will. That alone would probably be a bloody battle that the party doesn't even appear to have a stepping off point for.

As to the poster who says, we'll see in November. What do you think you'll see? We are still bound by the confines of a one-party system. Where are your candidates? The same place as your leaders?

[edit on 7/29/2010 by ~Lucidity]



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:38 AM
link   
reply to post by mythos
 




government, as a function of society, is NOT evil. humans need to organize. government is a tool of organization.


Utilizing a systematic threat of violence to subjugate people in an arbitrary geographical association is evil. Governments, because they are made of people, are just as, if not more so due to evils obsession with power, susceptible to corruption. Instead now, the corruption has the ability to start a war or a genocide, and get otherwise benevolent people to do it in the name of patriotism. Humanity does not require force to act in its rational self interest.

You caught my little quip at the end there.
I was hoping someone would bring it up.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:40 AM
link   
reply to post by badgerprints
 





Failed experiment? I don't see a failed experiment. I see a group of people that have nothing in common except the fact that they know the established political base is corrupt and self serving.


I agree with your comments. The fact the Tea Party members have nothing in common is probably what concerns those in power. When we start erasing the lines between liberal and conservative and unite for a cause, there is nothing that should concern them more. The fact the Tea Party has refrained from naming a leader is also bad news for them.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Sphota
 


You can't have "Brownshirtification" without a collectivist ideology.

Most tea partiers, with the exception of the neo-cons, are not collectivists.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:44 AM
link   
Most people don't realize it, but the Beatles were T.E.A. Party.



They believed in peaceful protest, like the T.E.A. Party.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:48 AM
link   
Yes they make appear disenfranchised to the welfare recipiant,social network group,funny thing bet 99% percent have jobs or have saved for a good retirement,those who have worked all their lives,OP must be a teenager



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:54 AM
link   
reply to post by Oldtimer2
 


Hey, are you on the side of the tea partiers? I am just wondering. I think the OP was pretty straight forward in his views.

Could you just clarify a little bit?



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 11:57 AM
link   
I do hate those "why don't we all just get along" type threads but I felt compelled to start this one as I am constantly barraged by BS from all sides and I want to have an ATS that discusses thee issues, not just speculating the motivations behind them.

We have lost our sensibilities as a nation of debaters. The debate is no longer about finding the best way to solve societies ills, but is now a tirade of insults and marginalizations in order to simply win. Winning isn't worth anything if you are wrong in the first place.

Now, our political parties are like the Buckeyes and the Wolverines. They are different colors, have different personalities, but both sides are virtually the same thing(hope those of you outside of Ohio and Michigan get that analogy).
There is no debate of actual issues. Image and rhetoric is all that matters. These monkeys in office just know what buttons to press and when.

The Tea Parties are now another symptom of this idea, but I will not sink as low as to call them racist. Accusing someone of racism is just like saying "Screw you guys I'm going home!"



Its just a way to make debate impossible.



posted on Jul, 29 2010 @ 12:07 PM
link   
reply to post by Oldtimer2
 




Yes they make appear disenfranchised to the welfare recipiant,social network group,funny thing bet 99% percent have jobs or have saved for a good retirement,those who have worked all their lives,OP must be a teenager


We have a winner! Oldtimer2 is the first person on this thread to try and marginalize someones ideas by insinuating that they are unqualified to remark on such issues due to a matter of their mental fortitude.

People like you are the problem that led me to make this thread in the first place. It is also kind of funny that you don't seem to be responding to anything I said.



new topics

top topics



 
54
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join