Tinfoil momemt....on the tea party

[nadinbrzezinski]

Look, I have been calling on a popular uprising comming for a few years now. It's the damn trends. If I, a lowly historian with limited resources, can see it...imagine people with real resources. The tea party is pure AstroTurf. We all know this. But it's also something else, it was an effort to get ahead of the wreck and control the course of history. They are controlled and they are allowed to vent spleen on their hate of government. But I got the sneaky it was also an attempt to get ahead because lord knows OWS (true grassroots from what I can tell and government response) can't be controlled.

I know that tinfoil looks pretty but it is also based a tad on European and yes, Kock family history.

[JohnnyRingo]

1. I'm not so sure about their "grassroots" status.

I often question 'Baggers about how they seem to hold the exact same economic views as Steve Forbes. The added 2nd amendment issues got a lot of them on the bandwagon.

In my tinfoil theory, the Koch Bros, Glenn Beck, and Dick Armey planned the whole thing on the back of a cocktail napkin to mutually line each others pockets and bring more repubs to the voting booth in 2010. That's how it seemed to work out anyway.

[nadinbrzezinski]

3. Alas did not say it was grassroots

That's the point. It was created to control and focus the anger.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

2. I'm not sure I'm following

To get ahead of your anti-government call for a popular uprising the PTB (read: government) create a phony anti-government movement with the Tea Party?

How does the phony anti-government movement created by the government work? It only works if all of those people in the phony movement actually want more government while carrying signs to the contrary.

But why would they carry signs with anti-government messages? The purpose of messaging is to convince other to agree with you.

What does the TP do with converts? Take them inside, pull off their masks and yell, "Surprise! We're really pro-government!"

Do you really think the TP members sit in their meetings talking about the need for MORE banking regulations?

[nadinbrzezinski]

4. Read on the black shirts in Italy

Or in less colorful ways the brown shirts. The rank and file came from very angry people who's anger was carefully focused on an enemy. Both were anti government until they became the government.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

7. Wow. Zero to Godwin in 4 posts

[nadinbrzezinski]

8. If you care to read history you'll get it

You asked a question, you got an honest answer. But the t parties are modern day right wing political cadres.

Oh and Goodwin stopped truly applying a while ago.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

9. Fascists are pro-state control. Unless I misread TP signs, the TP opposes state control

And I'm of the opinion that the left-right delineation of political belief is almost as overly-simplistic as your self-professed "limited" reading of history. Politics is far more complicated than Me-progressive-you-fascist or Me-conservative-you-commie.

If your conspiracy theory was viable it would explain how TPers carrying signs in favor decentralized, limited government serve the machinations of a presumed centralized, expanding government. Claiming some thing happened some place else at some other time is not an explanation; it's just a statement with no connection. Yes, there were fascists in Italy but that does not draw a line to the TP.

In fact, it could just as easily/poorly be argued that the OWS "rank and file came from very angry people who's anger was carefully focused on an enemy. Both were anti government until they became the government" just like the Blackshirts. Just because OWS is angry with the government and will feel assuaged when their policies become affected (read: they become the government) doesn't make them fascists.

[nadinbrzezinski]

10. So were the black shirts in particular very early on

And the brown shirts were also against the government until they became the government. The tp movement is quite proto fascist thank you very much.

Oh and it would be a crazy loony conspiracy theory in the way you mean it if citizens for prosperity and other front groups funded by the Kock were not behind it.

Now if you mean it in a legal sense, they have been very careful not to cross legal lines.

You really need to read Shirer's first chapters on the rise and fall, readily available.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

11. "You really need to read..." is just code-speak for "go away 'cause I can't answer"

Your theory states that the TP is a fake movements meant to channel popular disconent to head-off the real movement of popular discontent and channel it towards ends that serve the PTB --

The tea party is pure AstroTurf. We all know this. But it's also something else, it was an effort to get ahead of the wreck and control the course of history. They are controlled and they are allowed to vent spleen on their hate of government. But I got the sneaky it was also an attempt to get ahead because lord knows OWS (true grassroots from what I can tell and government response) can't be controlled.

Now, if the TP is astroturf that means they serve the PTB. They don't hate the government, they are tools of the government, albeit unwittingly and as soon as their behind-the-scenes financing/logistics dries-up so do they (unless the TP becomes a Frankenstein's monster to the PTB).

So, that means the OWS movement is the real, authentic anti-government group. Your unqualified description of anti-government groups is --

The rank and file came from very angry people who's anger was carefully focused on an enemy. Both were anti government until they became the government.

That means you just called the OWS movement proto-fascists.

Unless your OP CT really is just that poorly constructed. I'm getting a lot of mixed lines of thought here. You went from calling the TP a phony front group in service of the status quo to claiming they're attempting to replace the status quo.

[nadinbrzezinski]

13. I answered

Your Goodwin reference was code speak to I really think the us is exceptional.

And it is quite clear. The Koch brother's in particular tried to control events by creating a highly controlled proto fascist movement.

Have a good day.

Oh and one last thing you need to read on fascism. There are terms you could apply to OWS that include proto, some here have, it's not fascism though.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

15. That has absolutely nothing to do with

why your OP CT makes no sense on its own terms.

BTW - It's spelled g.o.d.w.i.n. and no, it's not about thinking the US is exceptional it's about the fact you went from one claim to a non-sequitor about fascism when it was pointed out you CT makes no sense on its own terms.

[nadinbrzezinski]

18. And now spell nanny

Goodbye

(no I do not place non on ignore but we're ! done)

[Nuclear Unicorn]

21. Dude, if it gets pointed out that you CT makes no sense there's no shame in

admitting it or revising it. Getting poopy and storming off in a huff doesn't do anything except leave criticisms of whatever point you're attempting to make stand unanswered.

[nadinbrzezinski]

22. The point, since you need it that clear

Is that powerful people tried to get ahead of the trends to control events. That's the point. CLEAR NOW OR YOU NEED IT IN SMALLER WORDS. and the people who did that are proto fascists.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

27. You still sound confused

Supposedly, the TP are tools of the establishment to co-opt popular discontent.

Supposedly, the proto-fascists are seeking to replace the establishment for their own ends.

Supposedly, the OWS movement is the authentic movement seeking to overturn the establishment.

Your definitions, not mine.


Those definitions are at odds with each other. To say something is fake ergo it is proto-fascist is a non-sequitor. To say one anti-government movement was once fascist ergo all anti-government movements are fascist is the fallacy of the undistributed middle AND it paints the OWS as proto-fascist. You have to reconcile your data points. All I did is point that out in conjunction with the fact that limited government messaging is at odds with an controlling-government agendas.

Heck the title of you OP self-dismissively refers to it as "tin foil" I don't know why you feel so defensive over something you only take half-seriously.

[nadinbrzezinski]

28. Go read some political theory

I really can't help those who are willfully ignorant.

Have a long fracking day.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

30. Reading someone else's book won't unconfuse your non-sequitors and fallacies

Again, you're just copping-out.

How do fake establishment fronts become genuione establishment threats?

If genuine establishment threats are proto-fascists are you calling OWS proto-fascists?

Or do you just run around pretending you know something about political theory and history so you can toss around terms like "proto-fascist" to disguise the fact you can't even form a cogent CT?

[nadinbrzezinski]

32. And so it goes ...

Can't help those who really are building strawmen. Enjoy, there is more hay over there...

[Nuclear Unicorn]

33. But I've quoted you at-length about how you've defined each data point

All I'm doing is demonstrating that your terms are at odds with each other.

It's a poor debating technique (admission of loss, really) to just say "strawman!" and run-off. Perhaps you need help with debating techniques.

For instance, I stated up-thread that you had committed the fallacy of the undistributed middle. An example of that would be to claim since all horses were animals, all animals must be horses. I applied that to you statement that the TP was proto-fascist and then proceeded to state the reasons why: Apart from being pure argument by assertion only it also fails because the TP is for limited, decentralized government, i.e. they're big fans of cutting federal agencies and enforcing the 10th amendment. This would be at odds with fascism, which seeks centralized, statist control. The mere fact they oppose Democrats doesn't make them fascists. Certainly fascists have a history of opposing communists but Democrats are not communists no matter how many TPers impose THAT fallacy of the undistributed middle.

[nadinbrzezinski]

34. Ah and so it goes

No, you are not quoting, no you are not listening. You are building.

Enjoy the barn ful.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

38. "No, you are not quoting, no you are not listening. "

Liar, liar, pants on fire.

Post 11

[Obamanaut]

39. You are by now aware that you are wasting your time pouring lucid

thought on this OP.

All you can get in response will be, as you've seen, dismissal and rambling thought.

[Taverner]

25. Stop "OHMYGODWIN"-ing. Poopling on the board does not mean you won the chess match

[Myrina]

6. Anti-gov't when it comes to business, pro HUGE gov't when it comes to people control.

I've found that as the underlying principle of the 'conservatives'.

[jwirr]

12. The control freaks (PTB) are in this case not the government but

the rich & their corporations that run the government.

[Nuclear Unicorn]

14. Not really gonna agrue against that.

[nineteen50]

5. I agree. It was an attempt to get ahead of the curve and

define the message. just look at the last election.

[KharmaTrain]

16. Rebranding...

After the '08 election the rushpublicans were a mess. They had been wiped out from the House, Senate and White House. If you recall Rep. Tom Davis claimed the rushpublican brand was a major liability. You also started hearing some of the hate radio types...especially dreck and rushbo...claim how the rushpublicans may have lost but "conseverative principals" did not. The seeds were sown not to create the "grassroots" but to rebrand a badly tarnished brand. While republican mean the party of boooosh and his failed wars, the destruction of the economy and the overall corruption of government. By creating a new "party" this allowed rushpublicans to play the plauisble deniability game...it wasn't their fault they supported boooosh and that all problems obviously started the day Obama took office.

99.9% of teabaggers are rushpublican...to me that's not some new kind of poitical movement and as others have pointed out...surely not "graasroots".

Of course they'll be "anti-government" until they gain control...then you dare not question...

[nadinbrzezinski]

20. It was partially rebranding

And it hasn't worked too well

[KharmaTrain]

23. It's Worked Very Well...

...the 2010 elections are the result.

It was using all the media the right wing has assembled over the past three decades that made the rebranding possible...and fattened their wallets in the process.

Again...as a "grassroots" movement the teabaggers are a massive fail. As a promotional and marketing tool, they've been a big success. We'll see how this plays out in the primaries ahead...especially if Mittens wins the nomination...as to if they'll "fall in line" or run a third party candidate. That's where the difference between being a pawn and a separate political movement will be exposed...

[kctim]

17. Resources must be really limited

if you couldn't see the trends showing alot of people were getting fed up with what they believe is government intrusion into their personal lives and were eventually going to push back.

And the theory that the TP is "pure AstroTurf" with the Koch brothers controlling the thousands of rallies all across the country is as silly as saying OWS is some socialist conspiracy to take over the US.

Tinfoil moment indeed.

[nadinbrzezinski]

19. Question

So citizens for prosperity (Armey's group) had nothing to do with the tea party and Rachel Maddow lied when she uncovered THAT link?

And that is just one of them.

[kctim]

29. Answer

The Tea Party would not have succeeded if not for all of the local rallies. Sure, there are special interest groups behind ALL large rallies and protests, but surely you don't believe groups like the one you mentioned and AdBusters are tied to all of the local TP rallies and Occupy protests, do you?

Sorry, but I cannot say if Maddow lied or not. I do not watch opinionated propaganda shows, so I do not know the content or context of what she claims.

[nadinbrzezinski]

31. Propaganda shows.

That's all I need to know from you

What's next? Oh never mind.

[kctim]

35. Yep, propaganda shows

Partisan OPINIONS promoted as fact in order to convince others to believe as you want.

For the far-left:
Rush and Hannity = propaganda.
Oberman and Maddow = truth.

OR, for those on the far-right:
Rush and Hannity = truth.
Oberman and Maddow = propaganda.

This is why you "say" the Tea Partys are all controlled by Koch or Armey or whoever, but cannot explain why or how all the local Tea Partys survive without them.
It is also why the far-right "says" Soros, AdBusters, Jones etc... are all behind OWS, but cannot explain the small local occupies.

This is why only a few hundred thousand out of hundreds of millions tune in and watch those shows.

[nadinbrzezinski]

36. Okey Dickie

When investigative reporting...oh never mind.

It's like whistling in wind.

Have a joyful day.

[kctim]

37. As expected.

A joyful day to you also.

[Taverner]

24. You predicted the OWS because you read Marx

Marx has been spot on so far

[nadinbrzezinski]

26. I'd say Hegel has been spot on

:-)

But we're quibbling.

[opihimoimoi]

40. the Koch Bros and Dick Armey figured the GOPer image needed some ordinary peeps

They lured some into public office who then went all hubristic and arrogant on us and Armey ....outta control...

Now, they lead the DEATH SPIRAL of the GOP