So what about a "tea party" for those of us who live in reality?


6 comments posted
According to your

According to your description, you are a moderate Libertarian. The Tea Party movement is very broad, and like all diverse movements, the media sells newspapers by focusing on the most colorful members. Nevertheless, according to this article, the movement contains two wings, one socially conservative, and one libertarian.

Charles Hope's picture
Posted by Charles Hope (not verified) on 20 May 2010 - 1:16pm
Perhaps your description is apt

Perhaps not. I'm not convinced. Treasuring civil rights is a progressive politics value.

The "libertarianism" of Ron Paul is not to my taste. For one thing, he's a social conservative, which to me is inconsistent with leave-people-be values.

And as long as the tea baggers are led and fed by the radical right with dominionist ambitions, I and I suspect the vast majority of voters will not be interested.

media girl's picture
Posted by media girl on 20 May 2010 - 3:54pm
The Libertarian balance

The Libertarian balance between civil rights and individual rights leans in favor of noncoercive solutions, as opposed to the coercive power of the state. This use of satyagraha should not be misinterpreted as tacit acceptance for evil.

Ron Paul is personally socially conservative, but he's not willing to legislate his morality, which I find an entirely civilized compromise in a diverse society with multiple moralities.

In keeping with the emphasis on nonviolence, Libertarians are very uncomfortable with Empire, which was once considered to be a shared cause with the left until Obama became president and all military adventures were suddenly blessed. The Palinites are eager to advocate a Strong National Defense. I share your distaste for the Christian right, but unfortunately, their embrace of perpetual war may make them the more viable wing.

Charles Hope's picture
Posted by Charles Hope (not verified) on 20 May 2010 - 4:51pm
ron paul may not want to

ron paul may not want to legislate his morality in the us congress but he seems fine with states legislating morality. as if thats better? individual rights are individual RIGHTS. not privileges at the pleasure of the state governments. so i disagree.

nota bene's picture
Posted by nota bene (not verified) on 20 May 2010 - 8:22pm
Treasuring civil rights is a progressive politics value

Really? Lincoln signed the 13th amendment and MLK was a Republican. Singer was a progressive, FDR rounded up Japanese Americans and LBJ hijacked the civil rights movement.

Greg Moss's picture
Posted by Greg Moss (not verified) on 18 November 2012 - 10:35am
You're thinking about political party

You're confusing political party with politics. Don't get so hung up on party. Progressive politics aren't a party thing.

media girl's picture
Posted by media girl on 12 January 2013 - 11:30am