Riding the Tea Party Tiger
As I’ve said before the right wing of American Politics is a pretty fractious bunch. It now appears that the Pro-business wing is getting pretty worried about the anti-business rhetoric of the Tea Party Populists. Conventional wisdom is that Republican gridlock is good for big business but in the Wall Street Journal it was noted that the stock market’s recent fall started the morning after Scott Brown’s win in Massachusetts.
So why did stocks collapse the moment the vote was tallied in Massachusetts?
It’s because the immediate reaction to the Brown election—in both parties—has been a dangerous lurch toward antibusiness populism. The Obama administration’s strategy has been to latch onto something that both parties can agree on: lynching Wall Street.
Republicans have to be careful what they wish for. John McCain under attack from the right, is no longer the maverick.
Yet Mr. McCain now finds himself jammed, moving starkly — and often awkwardly — to the right, apparently in an effort to gain favor among the same voters whom Mr. Hayworth, a consistent voice for the far right, could pull toward him like taffy come summer.
Mr. McCain now sharply criticizes the bailout bill he voted for, pivoted from his earlier position that the Guantánamo Bay detention facility should be closed, offered only a muted response to the Supreme Court’s decision undoing campaign finance laws and backed down from statements that gays in the military would be O.K. by him if the military brass were on board.
Crib-note reading Sarah Palin, clearly positioning herself to run in 2012, suggests that Obama’s best strategy to run against her would be to invade Iran. Last night on Hardball Chris Matthews had Republican strategist Mark McKinnon and Newsweek’s Richard Wolfe on discussing Palin’s weekend of speeches.
MATTHEWS: You know, Budd Schulberg couldn`t write better than this. This — you know what I mean, A Face in the Crowd
? You know…
MCKINNON: Oh, yes, no…
MATTHEWS: … coming out with somebody who has little hand things written on their palm, calling for revolution, calling for secession, calling for declaring war on third-world countries. And people are cheering!
MCKINNON: Yes. No, I was actually thinking as we were coming on the program about this would make a screenplay and people would probably reject it as being too…
MATTHEWS: You know, Huey Long wasn`t the most sane guy in the world, Richard, but he said that when fascism comes to America, it will call itself anti-fascism.
Some of you have taken me to task for worrying about the potential rise of fascism in this country. But to read the whole Gramsci quote about the Interregnum is to understand that anything can happen in this political vacuum: “The old is dying and the new cannot be born; in this interregnum there arises a great diversity of morbid symptoms.” 25 million underemployed Americans can be a volatile mix. We like simple solutions in this country–Revolution, Secession, Invasion–then everything will be alright. The possibility that we are in the twilight of American Empire may be very hard for much of the right to accept. Rather than seeing the great possibilities in Life After Empire, they may want to return to our martial past–a fantasy world that Sarah Palin already inhabits.
the country has grave problems clearly–but the biggest problem seems to be the dominance of the minority gruops from both the right and the left–the vast middle , which is needed to solve alot of the problems has always been to passive to step up and fight for the logical solutions and the answers are drowned out by the screaming from both parties extremes– I had hoped that Obama would govern fron center left and bridge the middle but to this point he seems to be captured by the left–I still have hope but untill the country’s leaders can govern from the middle in a bi-partisen way we are stuck in a bad sittuation
the country has grave problems clearly–but the biggest problem seems to be the dominance of the minority gruops from both the right and the left–the vast middle , which is needed to solve alot of the problems has always been to passive to step up and fight for the logical solutions and the answers are drowned out by the screaming from both parties extremes– I had hoped that Obama would govern fron center left and bridge the middle but to this point he seems to be captured by the left–I still have hope but untill the country’s leaders can govern from the middle in a bi-partisen way we are stuck in a bad sittuation
Now we’ve got wall streeet CEOs threatening the Obama administration with curtailment of campaign contributions. Obama hasn’t enacted any financial reform — all he has done is verbally rebuke them.
Now we’ve got wall streeet CEOs threatening the Obama administration with curtailment of campaign contributions. Obama hasn’t enacted any financial reform — all he has done is verbally rebuke them.
The Democrats twist their knickers and the Republicans give us Betty Boop. America doesn’t choose a side. It plays all sides against the middle.
I wonder what America would be like if the social networks voted on everything. Despite what the markets sell, social networks tend to ignore the adds and keep up with the conversation.
Social networks become scenes. Characters and players self-select roles natural to their daily slog. In media with higher integration, it is these boxes plus the fully animated character and voice. And so on. A fully realized scene.
Local self-selection is cohesive. Life chooses life. Ideas only matter in the sorting of such choices. Other relationships are more powerful.
Social networks insulate against division by very large knives.
The Democrats twist their knickers and the Republicans give us Betty Boop. America doesn’t choose a side. It plays all sides against the middle.
I wonder what America would be like if the social networks voted on everything. Despite what the markets sell, social networks tend to ignore the adds and keep up with the conversation.
Social networks become scenes. Characters and players self-select roles natural to their daily slog. In media with higher integration, it is these boxes plus the fully animated character and voice. And so on. A fully realized scene.
Local self-selection is cohesive. Life chooses life. Ideas only matter in the sorting of such choices. Other relationships are more powerful.
Social networks insulate against division by very large knives.
Can it be that we (and I use the collective noun only as a shallow reification of convenience, that obscures the important distinctions and fine detail) only THOUGHT we were an empire?
“We” did extract a lot of resources, cheap, sometimes by force, from elsewhere in the world, and had a huge military, and did our own mercantilist thing, and now we are raising up armies of mercenaries, and since so many of them are citizens, how you gonna keep ‘em out on the “sites” and on the far side of the Rubicon?
And “we” sure seemed, and still seem, to be short on ideas about who good “allies” are, in the long haul, and how to honestly identify, react to and handle “enemies.” And how about those global wars on drugs and terror? Those are working out great, right? I hear the feds back in Prohibition days managed at best to stop or spill maybe 3% of all the “uncustomed liquor” that came out of the bathtubs or the holds of ships. I wonder if “we” are doing even that well with “drug interdiction,” in relation to the price “we” pay in corruption, murder, “porous wall” technologies and the rest. Among other stupid behaviors that ran on because they benefitted and enriched a very few of us at the expense of the rest of us, like so many other crows that have come home to roost.
This old blind Tiresias knows that there is SOMEthing on the far side of the black cloud that is the immediate future — no seer is needed to know that. I like Jon’s allusion to riding the tiger, because the chances of becoming lunch seem a lot better than even.
Anyone know how you “community organize’ to increase the chances that the dismount from the tiger’s back will not be over the head and into the fangs and claws?
Can it be that we (and I use the collective noun only as a shallow reification of convenience, that obscures the important distinctions and fine detail) only THOUGHT we were an empire?
“We” did extract a lot of resources, cheap, sometimes by force, from elsewhere in the world, and had a huge military, and did our own mercantilist thing, and now we are raising up armies of mercenaries, and since so many of them are citizens, how you gonna keep ‘em out on the “sites” and on the far side of the Rubicon?
And “we” sure seemed, and still seem, to be short on ideas about who good “allies” are, in the long haul, and how to honestly identify, react to and handle “enemies.” And how about those global wars on drugs and terror? Those are working out great, right? I hear the feds back in Prohibition days managed at best to stop or spill maybe 3% of all the “uncustomed liquor” that came out of the bathtubs or the holds of ships. I wonder if “we” are doing even that well with “drug interdiction,” in relation to the price “we” pay in corruption, murder, “porous wall” technologies and the rest. Among other stupid behaviors that ran on because they benefitted and enriched a very few of us at the expense of the rest of us, like so many other crows that have come home to roost.
This old blind Tiresias knows that there is SOMEthing on the far side of the black cloud that is the immediate future — no seer is needed to know that. I like Jon’s allusion to riding the tiger, because the chances of becoming lunch seem a lot better than even.
Anyone know how you “community organize’ to increase the chances that the dismount from the tiger’s back will not be over the head and into the fangs and claws?
doug,
The Republican leadership has you exactly where they want you. Watch as they reject moderate Republican ideas as “socialism” and play “Lucy with the football” with Obama and the hapless Dems over and over and over again.
Ah, but BOTH parties are SOOOO extreme.
Enjoy your golf game. Somebody needs to fiddle while Rome burns.
doug,
The Republican leadership has you exactly where they want you. Watch as they reject moderate Republican ideas as “socialism” and play “Lucy with the football” with Obama and the hapless Dems over and over and over again.
Ah, but BOTH parties are SOOOO extreme.
Enjoy your golf game. Somebody needs to fiddle while Rome burns.
Excellent post, Jon.
I remember when Palin was first announced as McCain’s VP I wrote that there’s quite a lot to fear from the immense spike in McCain’s chances for election that week.
You and other wrote that there’s nothing to fear but fear itself. I’m glad that the consensus around the theocratic/corporate fascism that she represents has coalesced. And that the concerns I voiced about her and those she represents have been validated.
Corporate use of copyright laws and secret anti-counterfeit agreements to stifle free speech on the internet is another part of this fascist movement trying to inject itself into the interregnal vacuum.
Corporate fascism is riding on top of the theocratic movement and is, in fact, feeding it. They are inseparable in my mind.
I’m also glad to see the Tea Party movement is anti-business (read as anti-big business). It means that a smart focused progressive movement could potentially dip into that Independent demographic. If they get their act together fast enough.
On that last part, Obama is not the vessel for such a movement. He has shown as much in his first year in office. And he continues to do so in his rhetoric for the coming elections to congress.
A clear left/progressive alternative to Obama must form before the 2012 elections – if they’re ever to become a serious player in this interregnum.
Here’s hoping.
Excellent post, Jon.
I remember when Palin was first announced as McCain’s VP I wrote that there’s quite a lot to fear from the immense spike in McCain’s chances for election that week.
You and other wrote that there’s nothing to fear but fear itself. I’m glad that the consensus around the theocratic/corporate fascism that she represents has coalesced. And that the concerns I voiced about her and those she represents have been validated.
Corporate use of copyright laws and secret anti-counterfeit agreements to stifle free speech on the internet is another part of this fascist movement trying to inject itself into the interregnal vacuum.
Corporate fascism is riding on top of the theocratic movement and is, in fact, feeding it. They are inseparable in my mind.
I’m also glad to see the Tea Party movement is anti-business (read as anti-big business). It means that a smart focused progressive movement could potentially dip into that Independent demographic. If they get their act together fast enough.
On that last part, Obama is not the vessel for such a movement. He has shown as much in his first year in office. And he continues to do so in his rhetoric for the coming elections to congress.
A clear left/progressive alternative to Obama must form before the 2012 elections – if they’re ever to become a serious player in this interregnum.
Here’s hoping.
Oddly enough, strangely too,every party, left, right or tea, needs a leader. Who would lead the Progressive Party?
Oddly enough, strangely too,every party, left, right or tea, needs a leader. Who would lead the Progressive Party?
Invade Iran? Caesar’s effing ghost.
I’m glad you like Gramsci, Jon. I do too. Some of his neo-Marxist admirers, I think, are blind to his occasional expressions of sheer conservatism in the sense that he believed that if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Leave the top to spin. His intellectual courage was mighty. You really never know what you’re going to get from his pen.
Invade Iran? Caesar’s effing ghost.
I’m glad you like Gramsci, Jon. I do too. Some of his neo-Marxist admirers, I think, are blind to his occasional expressions of sheer conservatism in the sense that he believed that if it ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Leave the top to spin. His intellectual courage was mighty. You really never know what you’re going to get from his pen.
This may be unfair, but I keep thinking of Tea Partiers as people who are furious, furious about the government taking over Medicare.
In the opening pages of 1984Orwell described the disconnect between rage and reality like this.
Sound familiar?
This may be unfair, but I keep thinking of Tea Partiers as people who are furious, furious about the government taking over Medicare.
In the opening pages of 1984Orwell described the disconnect between rage and reality like this.
Sound familiar?
Only too. Gee, do you think any of Palin’s and Hubaugh’s and Gingrich’s and Rove’s guys and gals haven’t read, learned and inwardly digested 1984? Another case of a small tail, being able to wag a very large dog…
Only too. Gee, do you think any of Palin’s and Hubaugh’s and Gingrich’s and Rove’s guys and gals haven’t read, learned and inwardly digested 1984? Another case of a small tail, being able to wag a very large dog…
I love misspelled repetitions of The Narrative, complete with almost all the Talking Points.
“Then we’re stupid, and we’ll die.”
I love misspelled repetitions of The Narrative, complete with almost all the Talking Points.
“Then we’re stupid, and we’ll die.”
Alex, why such animus over against the tea partiers? For one thing, they’re heterogeneous, as Jon has just shown. You probably know that when Orwell was dying he decamped to Ireland, where he finished1984. There he was looked after by a trio of friends, the American filmmaker John Huston, a classic Yankee individualist, the English hack Malcolm Muggeridge, who I suppose we now would call an ex-Fabian neocon, and the Anglo-Irish writer Claud Cockburn who then probably was Britain’s most prominent Communist. And yet they all welcomed Orwell, the social democrat. So the ecclecticism of these tea partiers is not bad necessarily.
Nor do I see them as entirely antagonistic or destructive. They seem to share a constructive patriotism. At the same time they do evince a taste for what the Dixiecrats used to call, with ominous euphemism, “that old time religion”. They are, in other words, suspiciously Caucasian.
Having said that, I think that what binds their loose coalition probably is not race resentment or even defense of Medicare, but rather a sense that Big Brother serves a party that “seeks power for its own sake.”
In any event they’re nascent and have yet to shake out. Moreover, in sheer electoral terms, they’ve peaked far too soon. I advise keeping a sense of humor, as well as a weather eye.
Alex, why such animus over against the tea partiers? For one thing, they’re heterogeneous, as Jon has just shown. You probably know that when Orwell was dying he decamped to Ireland, where he finished1984. There he was looked after by a trio of friends, the American filmmaker John Huston, a classic Yankee individualist, the English hack Malcolm Muggeridge, who I suppose we now would call an ex-Fabian neocon, and the Anglo-Irish writer Claud Cockburn who then probably was Britain’s most prominent Communist. And yet they all welcomed Orwell, the social democrat. So the ecclecticism of these tea partiers is not bad necessarily.
Nor do I see them as entirely antagonistic or destructive. They seem to share a constructive patriotism. At the same time they do evince a taste for what the Dixiecrats used to call, with ominous euphemism, “that old time religion”. They are, in other words, suspiciously Caucasian.
Having said that, I think that what binds their loose coalition probably is not race resentment or even defense of Medicare, but rather a sense that Big Brother serves a party that “seeks power for its own sake.”
In any event they’re nascent and have yet to shake out. Moreover, in sheer electoral terms, they’ve peaked far too soon. I advise keeping a sense of humor, as well as a weather eye.
We’re all Independents now Jon.
Len-Beatific. Those last two stanzas were like poetry to me.
JTM-I think the dismount is the key to the future. We better start practicing.
Hugo- I’m more with Armand on this one. I don’t thing the Tea Parties are just another political faction. But I do think that many of their adherents can be peeled away by a clear progressive alternative narrative.
Whoa!
Sarah Palin is a terrifying crypto-fascist. Actually scratch the crypto. If the tea-party movement is as decentralized and emergent as it has often been portrayed, it will, hopefully, reject neo-con/progressive warmongers.
If only Obama had a clue about economic policy instead of following this delusional keynesian fantasy land, we’d be in much better shape economically.
Both parties say the right stuff out of power because they want restraints on their opponents. Both parties do the wrong stuff in power because they want more of it.
The best we can hope for in American politics is divided governance. We are clearly better off with the Congress and President are divided.
We are living in historic times. It’s kinda fun. Scary, but fun.
And if you want a little pleasant sauce to go with the main dish, take a look here:
Shared Sacrifice
How does one (or do a few, or maybe many) make this kind of thinking and behavior into a viral phenomenon?
I’m sure the gentlemen of the Weimar Republic and the Upper Crust in 1788 France and them folks in Italy and Spain in the ’30s shared your sentiments about the Sans Culottes of their time…
The flood of shite in the bitstream increases asymptotically (here’s my latest stool), and there’s an infinite number of points one could sample, like soil profiles gotten by cutting one-foot holes on one-foot centers, but here’s one that seemed to integrate a bunch of the pieces: I wonder if the NewWorldOrderUniversity offers any advanced degree programs, or if it’s all auditing and clinical skill-building?
Judson Phillips, who is vamping to become a, or the main, Tea Party “leader” and claims credit for herding the wildcats to Nashville, delivered what to me was the most telling, briefest bit in his opening peformance: “Welcome, fellow patriots!!!!!” To what the partisan reporter would call a “trememdous roar from the crowd.” What’s that line again? “What’s in a word? A Patriot by any other would shoot as straight…”
And if you are interested in what can happen in interregni, you might look here and find worse insights into the chaotic, fractal but maybe quantum behavior of the Foule Fou.
I’m sure the gentlemen of the Weimar Republic and the Upper Crust in 1788 France and them folks in Italy and Spain in the ’30s shared your sentiments about the Sans Culottes of their time…
The flood of shite in the bitstream increases asymptotically (here’s my latest stool), and there’s an infinite number of points one could sample, like soil profiles gotten by cutting one-foot holes on one-foot centers, but here’s one that seemed to integrate a bunch of the pieces: I wonder if the NewWorldOrderUniversity offers any advanced degree programs, or if it’s all auditing and clinical skill-building?
Judson Phillips, who is vamping to become a, or the main, Tea Party “leader” and claims credit for herding the wildcats to Nashville, delivered what to me was the most telling, briefest bit in his opening peformance: “Welcome, fellow patriots!!!!!” To what the partisan reporter would call a “trememdous roar from the crowd.” What’s that line again? “What’s in a word? A Patriot by any other would shoot as straight…”
And if you are interested in what can happen in interregni, you might look here and find worse insights into the chaotic, fractal but maybe quantum behavior of the Foule Fou.
Oops,, meant to attach previous post as a reply to Hugo.
Oops,, meant to attach previous post as a reply to Hugo.
JP, I for one would take any kind of governance, divided or otherwise, as I understand the term. As opposed to either Free Market Open Season, or Despotic Rule.
JP, I for one would take any kind of governance, divided or otherwise, as I understand the term. As opposed to either Free Market Open Season, or Despotic Rule.
Free Market Systems have voluntary, competitive governance, JT. Your notion that our two choices are statism or hobbsian social darwinism is false.
Interventionism by the monopolist state is the root of lobbying and corporatist capture. Big corporations love powerful government because they have the money to buy it and use its weapons against enemies and competitors.
Take Scotland’s free banking system for instance. It was sound and stable for a CENTURY without any central bank or regulations by the state. What it has was competition, reputation and unlimited liability of the creditors. If a bank failed, the owners and creditors were on the hook personally to replenish depositors. This is a complete rejection of the narrative that our crisis is a result of “deregulation”.
THAT’s voluntary, competitive governance and it’s got a long history of success.
But monopolist dictate is a sham. Let’s have competitive governance, aka Federalism. If people think, say, NJ or CA sucks… they can move. It works. It put pressure on the rulers to change. Our Federal government should be shrunken to Grover Norquist levels and, if desired by the people, provide the room for local governance to fill any gaps.
At this point, it’s obvious that the Feds are worthless.
Community works. Competition works. Distant dictate doesn’t work and isn’t ethical or justified.
Free Market Systems have voluntary, competitive governance, JT. Your notion that our two choices are statism or hobbsian social darwinism is false.
Interventionism by the monopolist state is the root of lobbying and corporatist capture. Big corporations love powerful government because they have the money to buy it and use its weapons against enemies and competitors.
Take Scotland’s free banking system for instance. It was sound and stable for a CENTURY without any central bank or regulations by the state. What it has was competition, reputation and unlimited liability of the creditors. If a bank failed, the owners and creditors were on the hook personally to replenish depositors. This is a complete rejection of the narrative that our crisis is a result of “deregulation”.
THAT’s voluntary, competitive governance and it’s got a long history of success.
But monopolist dictate is a sham. Let’s have competitive governance, aka Federalism. If people think, say, NJ or CA sucks… they can move. It works. It put pressure on the rulers to change. Our Federal government should be shrunken to Grover Norquist levels and, if desired by the people, provide the room for local governance to fill any gaps.
At this point, it’s obvious that the Feds are worthless.
Community works. Competition works. Distant dictate doesn’t work and isn’t ethical or justified.
I have but two words for you folks Dennis Fries.
and Hugo, if you think the TP is all that egalitarian try going on their site, any of them, and having this type of a discussion.
I have but two words for you folks Dennis Fries.
and Hugo, if you think the TP is all that egalitarian try going on their site, any of them, and having this type of a discussion.
@Hugo
I suspect the ‘low taxes and limited engagement with the outside world’ view is what attracts a lot of people to Tea Parties. And yes, these views taken together (which amount to the Government doing one thing, and not much of it) can provide common cause for a range of otherwise disconnected groups. And to the extent that they represent a view which recognizes fundamental breakage in our government (and not just a direction they dislike) then their emergence is to be taken seriously and for positive reasons.
But that’s not what I was talking about. I was talking about the kinds of people who’d pay Palin $100k to read empty slogans from her hand, right after defending Limbaugh’s (public) characterization of House Democrats as ‘retarded’ – and demanding Emmanuel’s resignation for having said the same thing about the same people months before and in private.
Observant humans are noticing that she’s more than hyper-partisan. Her sense of personal accountability is non-existent, and she has the same manipulative relation to the truth as flat-out sociopaths. None of this is news. And yet, a significant portion of the Tea Party crowd will pay her $100k to appear before them, and speak on their behalf. There are even Senators who seek her approval.
In other words, there’s an exceptionally nasty and unhinged element nested within this Tea Party movement. And the mindset of this subgroup is what I saw Orwell illuminating. It’s a short paragraph, but one packed with a number of remarkable elements.
The first is the ecstasy of violence – with the desire to loose all self-control while performing an act of punishing brutality. This becomes the dark antipode to sexual desire (which, not surprisingly, was suppressed in Orwell’s scheme). Orwell describes the experience of this group hate as a form of insanity.
Then there’s the social aspect, which not only amplifies the feeling, but does so in a way that makes sanity impossible to maintain. At the same time the individual’s resistance to this is melting, the crowd itself is becoming a unified thing, functioning like a single organism.
Finally, (and most disconcertingly) there’s the utter disconnect between the feeling, and any particular cause, or any definite end. The erosion of self-possession and dignity means that whoever is inciting this rage is freed from any commitment to coherence, consistency, or governing convention – there’s only immersion in this ecstatically violent mob which has come to see destruction as an end in and of itself.
People prone to this don’t mind, for instance, a leader who says use of the word ‘retarded’ is a firing offense on one day then a defensible example of satire the next. Not only do they accept the instant reversal of position, they don’t mind bastardizing the word ‘satire’ in the process.
And yet, her followers accept this kind aggressive and manipulative dishonesty without question. That, as Orwell put it, is the “abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one objected to another like the flame of a blowlamp.”
Of course, in Oceania this emotion had been harassed completely, whereas its American expression is met with embarrassment, denial, alarm, and ridicule. And there’s no telling whether cooler heads will prevail, and if the Tea Partiers themselves will suppress this instinct, or, at the very least, tie it to some unwavering and justifiable end.
At the moment, the movement is host to a growing streak of pure nihilism. Given Palin’s now explicit lack of integrity, you can see waxing and waning support for her as an indicator of this element’s influence.
Given what we’ve seen from Republicans – and, increasingly, from Democrats like Nelson, Bacchus, and Johnson – I’d say the influence is growing.
@Hugo
I suspect the ‘low taxes and limited engagement with the outside world’ view is what attracts a lot of people to Tea Parties. And yes, these views taken together (which amount to the Government doing one thing, and not much of it) can provide common cause for a range of otherwise disconnected groups. And to the extent that they represent a view which recognizes fundamental breakage in our government (and not just a direction they dislike) then their emergence is to be taken seriously and for positive reasons.
But that’s not what I was talking about. I was talking about the kinds of people who’d pay Palin $100k to read empty slogans from her hand, right after defending Limbaugh’s (public) characterization of House Democrats as ‘retarded’ – and demanding Emmanuel’s resignation for having said the same thing about the same people months before and in private.
Observant humans are noticing that she’s more than hyper-partisan. Her sense of personal accountability is non-existent, and she has the same manipulative relation to the truth as flat-out sociopaths. None of this is news. And yet, a significant portion of the Tea Party crowd will pay her $100k to appear before them, and speak on their behalf. There are even Senators who seek her approval.
In other words, there’s an exceptionally nasty and unhinged element nested within this Tea Party movement. And the mindset of this subgroup is what I saw Orwell illuminating. It’s a short paragraph, but one packed with a number of remarkable elements.
The first is the ecstasy of violence – with the desire to loose all self-control while performing an act of punishing brutality. This becomes the dark antipode to sexual desire (which, not surprisingly, was suppressed in Orwell’s scheme). Orwell describes the experience of this group hate as a form of insanity.
Then there’s the social aspect, which not only amplifies the feeling, but does so in a way that makes sanity impossible to maintain. At the same time the individual’s resistance to this is melting, the crowd itself is becoming a unified thing, functioning like a single organism.
Finally, (and most disconcertingly) there’s the utter disconnect between the feeling, and any particular cause, or any definite end. The erosion of self-possession and dignity means that whoever is inciting this rage is freed from any commitment to coherence, consistency, or governing convention – there’s only immersion in this ecstatically violent mob which has come to see destruction as an end in and of itself.
People prone to this don’t mind, for instance, a leader who says use of the word ‘retarded’ is a firing offense on one day then a defensible example of satire the next. Not only do they accept the instant reversal of position, they don’t mind bastardizing the word ‘satire’ in the process.
And yet, her followers accept this kind aggressive and manipulative dishonesty without question. That, as Orwell put it, is the “abstract, undirected emotion which could be switched from one objected to another like the flame of a blowlamp.”
Of course, in Oceania this emotion had been harassed completely, whereas its American expression is met with embarrassment, denial, alarm, and ridicule. And there’s no telling whether cooler heads will prevail, and if the Tea Partiers themselves will suppress this instinct, or, at the very least, tie it to some unwavering and justifiable end.
At the moment, the movement is host to a growing streak of pure nihilism. Given Palin’s now explicit lack of integrity, you can see waxing and waning support for her as an indicator of this element’s influence.
Given what we’ve seen from Republicans – and, increasingly, from Democrats like Nelson, Bacchus, and Johnson – I’d say the influence is growing.
Show me a sustainable,large or local, Free Market
System, ok? Scottish banks? Self-regulation? Stiff collars, walnut paneling, marble counters and wrought-iron grilles and gewgaws and mistresses and opium habits?
Gee, saith the wee Scot, I can make a nice p-r-r-rofit digging Welsh coal with semi-slave labor, and bor-r-r-row the money from a nice Scottish bank that I can r-r-rrely on until the larger economy falters and oh, Killer Smogs start knocking off the depositors.
And hey, I could set up coaling stations for the Br-r-r-ritish Navy, to help extend the benefits of Empir-r-r-re to the Heathen Wogs! Give ‘em a whiff of powder smoke and Calvin.
I guess the Free Market Ideal says that all this is supposed to be self-regulating across a large span of space, time, interests, and the nature of humanity that in part is addressed by the discussion on the Uberness of the Idmensch, above:
“Going berserk”
The actual fit of madness the berserker experienced was referred to as bärsärkar-gång (“going berserk”). This condition has been described as follows:
“This fury, which was called berserkergang, occurred not only in the heat of battle, but also during laborious work. Men who were thus seized performed things which otherwise seemed impossible for human power. This condition is said to have begun with shivering, chattering of the teeth, and chill in the body, and then the face swelled and changed its colour. With this was connected a great hot-headedness, which at last gave over into a great rage, under which they howled as wild animals, bit the edge of their shields, and cut down everything they met without discriminating between friend or foe. When this condition ceased, a great dulling of the mind and feebleness followed, which could last for one or several days.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berserker
My two cents worth is that it’s a waste of energy to try to force-fit the randomly shaped pegs called humans into a set of holes carefully prescribed by uncritical if deeply-studied and highly definitized adherence to a Grand Design that would work only if humans were very different from what they seem to this observer to be.
But like I remember you writing a while ago, “Ideals are important.” A somehow-regulated means of exchanging labor and goods and stuff WILL exist, maybe more toward the buccaneer end of the spectrum (take by force, give wounds or death) or the FRETHA-TEATHN end. Contend for your Utopian view, but please keep your eyes open…
agreed: most of the federal government is “worthless,” the part that serves to upwardly mobilize wealth and profit and downwardly socialize pain and risk. Community works, (stated thus broadly without the needed caveats and descriptors and aspirations), unregulated competition sucks, self-regulation is wishful thinking. But there are good bits incorporated into the complex alterntive universe you posit. Maybe you could start up an Amana-colony or Shaker-style model community along the lines you contend for, and do what you can to impel or persuade its members to adhere to the standards and style you contend for. It would be a most interesting experiment, with the chance of maybe becoming a catalyst for great change.
Rap on, muh man…
Show me a sustainable,large or local, Free Market
System, ok? Scottish banks? Self-regulation? Stiff collars, walnut paneling, marble counters and wrought-iron grilles and gewgaws and mistresses and opium habits?
Gee, saith the wee Scot, I can make a nice p-r-r-rofit digging Welsh coal with semi-slave labor, and bor-r-r-row the money from a nice Scottish bank that I can r-r-rrely on until the larger economy falters and oh, Killer Smogs start knocking off the depositors.
And hey, I could set up coaling stations for the Br-r-r-ritish Navy, to help extend the benefits of Empir-r-r-re to the Heathen Wogs! Give ‘em a whiff of powder smoke and Calvin.
I guess the Free Market Ideal says that all this is supposed to be self-regulating across a large span of space, time, interests, and the nature of humanity that in part is addressed by the discussion on the Uberness of the Idmensch, above:
“Going berserk”
The actual fit of madness the berserker experienced was referred to as bärsärkar-gång (“going berserk”). This condition has been described as follows:
“This fury, which was called berserkergang, occurred not only in the heat of battle, but also during laborious work. Men who were thus seized performed things which otherwise seemed impossible for human power. This condition is said to have begun with shivering, chattering of the teeth, and chill in the body, and then the face swelled and changed its colour. With this was connected a great hot-headedness, which at last gave over into a great rage, under which they howled as wild animals, bit the edge of their shields, and cut down everything they met without discriminating between friend or foe. When this condition ceased, a great dulling of the mind and feebleness followed, which could last for one or several days.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Berserker
My two cents worth is that it’s a waste of energy to try to force-fit the randomly shaped pegs called humans into a set of holes carefully prescribed by uncritical if deeply-studied and highly definitized adherence to a Grand Design that would work only if humans were very different from what they seem to this observer to be.
But like I remember you writing a while ago, “Ideals are important.” A somehow-regulated means of exchanging labor and goods and stuff WILL exist, maybe more toward the buccaneer end of the spectrum (take by force, give wounds or death) or the FRETHA-TEATHN end. Contend for your Utopian view, but please keep your eyes open…
agreed: most of the federal government is “worthless,” the part that serves to upwardly mobilize wealth and profit and downwardly socialize pain and risk. Community works, (stated thus broadly without the needed caveats and descriptors and aspirations), unregulated competition sucks, self-regulation is wishful thinking. But there are good bits incorporated into the complex alterntive universe you posit. Maybe you could start up an Amana-colony or Shaker-style model community along the lines you contend for, and do what you can to impel or persuade its members to adhere to the standards and style you contend for. It would be a most interesting experiment, with the chance of maybe becoming a catalyst for great change.
Rap on, muh man…
JP,
As much as your ideas are lovely, the fact remains that no party or politician will ever cut any government back to 1779 Federalist levels. It’s disingenuous to even think of that circumstance becoming a reality. It’s also naive to believe that competition alone will keep speculators and traders honest when they’re so grandly rewarded for short-term profits.
Rand stated that people do what is in their self-interest. In that she was not wrong. In reading over the comments from innumerable op-eds, opinion pieces, and economic blogs, I’m constantly amazed by the extreme extent to which people think of their own self-interest regardless of the needs of others and their community.
There is a large streak of Birch-ism out there that’s being pushed by what Bruce Barlett, Reagan’s domestic policy adviser, calls the “tin-hat group.” Most other economists consider Norquist’s policies screwy, unrealistic, and fiscally irresponsible.
So, while I agree that we need to get rid of the very concept of corporate welfare, devise a system whereby financial companies can fail without putting the entire economy at risk, and change the tax system (the WSJournal will hate me, but how about a VAT?), I know that SS and Medicare will not go away. There’s a greater chance of the DOD budget being cut as a percentage of GDP than eliminating these highly popular programs.
So, John, instead of railing against what exists for something that will never be, how about putting that logical mind of yours to work on what can feasibly be done to deal with the fiscal problems and return our economy to growth? I’m not disparaging you: I want ideas. I’ve given my own in a previous post.
As Upton Sinclair said, “It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his salary depends upon his not understanding it.”
“but to this point he seems to be captured by the left”
That’s funny, I thought he was captured by Big Big Business and the burgeoning Total Police State Party.