Tea Party
-
I've been thinking a lot about the people involved in the Tea Party movement lately---this subsection of extreme conservatives who like Glenn Beck and seem to have outlandish views on the intent and reality of the Obama administration. A part of me hesitates to go down the road of psychoanalyzing people in the way I'm about to; it's something I condemn often enough. But I can't deny thinking this way.
The election of Obama was really something. The country was in shambles militarily and economically. A really unpopular president was about to exit. And in this campaign emerged one of the most charismatic candidates we've seen in recent decades, right up there will Bill Clinton. But while Obama had the charisma and smarts of Clinton, he also had an air of high moral values that Clinton lacked. And he was to the the first African American president of the United States.
The feeling around the time of the election was so happy and hopeful. And all of us who campaigned for Obama felt we were a part of something historic. As we watched his acceptance speech on TV, we saw people of color weeping with emotion, and we felt part of a great community and a great moment.
On the outskirts of this moment of great collective meaning, however, were . . . the losers. If you voted for Bush, you had nothing: no triumph, no community, nothing to be a part of, nothing to be proud of. You felt, perhaps, unimportant. And you had to sit and observe the glow of triumph and community radiating from those who defeated you. I'm sure some people even felt that African Americans having a moment of special celebration put them in a bad light: as the oppressors, or at least as people who aren't a part of or haven't earned a "moment."
These people needed something. They needed an identity, a cause, and a community. And that's what the Tea Party movement (to use it as a shorthand for all this rising tide) offered. From losers they became the opposition. From loners they became a movement. And they gained an identity: patriot, constitutionalist, lover of country.
In a way, there's nothing wrong with this. It's what we all try to do with our experiences: spin a loss into something positive. The problem emerges from the nature of opposition, though. To really get the kind of attention and respect these people craved, to feel the kind of heroicism and significance they needed, they had to create a crisis---to make the present situation something big and scary that they, in turn, would be heroic and significant for opposing.
And that's where the lies begin. Tyranny, death panels, outlawing of guns, Maoists in the White House. It's just a long string of lies that nonetheless serves to provide the Tea Partiers with a justification for their activity: for their meetings and protests and declarations. No matter that they sat through the skyrocketing deficit of the Bush years. No matter that Bush, conclusively, factually, lied about the war in Iraq, which cost thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars. No matter that the only citizens who truly are in the same position as the original American revolutionaries are the residents of Washington, DC, who pay federal taxes and have no representation in Congress. Not a single representative in the House; not a single senator, much less two.
These are inconvenient truths. But the Tea Partiers aren't really interested in truth. They're interested in identity and power. They're interested in mattering. We can only hope that once they feel that they matter, they'll also feel able to stop lying and start really engaging in the political process in an honest way.
-
I've been thinking a lot about the people involved in the Tea Party movement lately---this subsection of extreme conservatives who like Glenn Beck and seem to have outlandish views on the intent and reality of the Obama administration. A part of me hesitates to go down the road of psychoanalyzing people in the way I'm about to; it's something I condemn often enough. But I can't deny thinking this way.
The election of Obama was really something. The country was in shambles militarily and economically. A really unpopular president was about to exit. And in this campaign emerged one of the most charismatic candidates we've seen in recent decades, right up there will Bill Clinton. But while Obama had the charisma and smarts of Clinton, he also had an air of high moral values that Clinton lacked. And he was to the the first African American president of the United States.
The feeling around the time of the election was so happy and hopeful. And all of us who campaigned for Obama felt we were a part of something historic. As we watched his acceptance speech on TV, we saw people of color weeping with emotion, and we felt part of a great community and a great moment.
On the outskirts of this moment of great collective meaning, however, were . . . the losers. If you voted for Bush, you had nothing: no triumph, no community, nothing to be a part of, nothing to be proud of. You felt, perhaps, unimportant. And you had to sit and observe the glow of triumph and community radiating from those who defeated you. I'm sure some people even felt that African Americans having a moment of special celebration put them in a bad light: as the oppressors, or at least as people who aren't a part of or haven't earned a "moment."
These people needed something. They needed an identity, a cause, and a community. And that's what the Tea Party movement (to use it as a shorthand for all this rising tide) offered. From losers they became the opposition. From loners they became a movement. And they gained an identity: patriot, constitutionalist, lover of country.
In a way, there's nothing wrong with this. It's what we all try to do with our experiences: spin a loss into something positive. The problem emerges from the nature of opposition, though. To really get the kind of attention and respect these people craved, to feel the kind of heroicism and significance they needed, they had to create a crisis---to make the present situation something big and scary that they, in turn, would be heroic and significant for opposing.
And that's where the lies begin. Tyranny, death panels, outlawing of guns, Maoists in the White House. It's just a long string of lies that nonetheless serves to provide the Tea Partiers with a justification for their activity: for their meetings and protests and declarations. No matter that they sat through the skyrocketing deficit of the Bush years. No matter that Bush, conclusively, factually, lied about the war in Iraq, which cost thousands of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars. No matter that the only citizens who truly are in the same position as the original American revolutionaries are the residents of Washington, DC, who pay federal taxes and have no representation in Congress. Not a single representative in the House; not a single senator, much less two.
These are inconvenient truths. But the Tea Partiers aren't really interested in truth. They're interested in identity and power. They're interested in mattering. We can only hope that once they feel that they matter, they'll also feel able to stop lying and start really engaging in the political process in an honest way.
-
posted by Anonymous at
5:38 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home