Tea party vs. Tea Party Caucus

[Matt Collins]

To anxious Republicans trying to channel grass-roots conservatism, the Congressional Tea Party Caucus (http://topics.politico.com/index.cfm/topic/TeaPartyCaucus) is part of the solution. To many in the tea party, the caucus seems like part of the problem.




Instead of embracing the caucus and its 49 House members, many tea party activists see it as yet another effort by the GOP to hijack their movement — and symptomatic of a party establishment that, they say, is condescending and out of step with their brand of conservatism.


Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/40528.html#ixzz0vTo7y8py (http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0810/40528.html#ixzz0vTo7y8py)

[djdellisanti4]

Well I guess we should all be glad that Ron Paul didn't join the caucus.

[givemeliberty]

agreed

[Anti Federalist]

Well I guess we should all be glad that Ron Paul didn't join the caucus.

That, alone, is pretty telling of what the TPC is all about.

I'll defer to Ron's judgement on this.

[cooker263]

I'm standing more and more clear of anything that speaks "tea party" - hijacked to a significant extent or not, it's already quite tarnished.

[pcosmar]

These caucus suckers just don't get it.

IMHO

[someperson]

If only more individuals would come to the realization that one of the most critical problems that individuals face in political activity isn't deciding which labeled group to identify with; rather, the problem is desiring to identify with a labeled group, in the first place.

The nameless organization of individuals based on ideas: This is what spontaneously erupted during the 2008 campaign, with millions of disparate individuals coming together around specific ideas - a message - and this kind of organization is far more powerful than any labeled group.

Once a group of individuals is labeled, it becomes targetable; this is critically important to understand. With the ability to propagandize individuals via label, the individuals in the media, and others, are able to define, and redefine as necessary, the enemies and allies of a group in order to manufacture any paradigm of their convenience. The label empowers them to define, and redefine, the ideas of the group to both "outsiders" and bandwagon "insiders" (Did you know? [LABEL] wants to attack the axis of evil). Further, it allows them to willfully distort group characteristics and traits ([LABEL] are all isolationists/radicals/you-get-the-idea-ists), in order to manipulate "public opinion." These redefinitions tend to push out the "originals" of the group, which, in turn, facilitates further redefinition.

For the media, the "Tea Party" label served well (too well) in collectivizing the majority of dissenters in this country under a single banner. If you realize what the "Tea Party" has become, please don't repeat the same mistake. Don't just seek a new label to identify with; break the cycle of label reassignment and represent yourself by your ideas and organize with others based on those ideas.

Oh, and to conclude in melodramatic fashion: Death to parties and labels. Thanks for reading :)