This month’s Word from Afar essay focuses on the nature of and differences between proactive and reactive political movements, with particular reference to the Tea Party movement.
Kiwipolitico
This month’s Word from Afar essay focuses on the nature of and differences between proactive and reactive political movements, with particular reference to the Tea Party movement.
Seems to me that if you want to explain the unifying factor amongst the teabaggers, you would be looking for a psychological rather than a political explanation.
Opposition to government, when it’s not their own, is easy for supporters of a defeated party – especially so for a political party favouring less big/smaller government.
Howerver there are new elements,
1. modern media – (net and media partisanship – talk radio to Fox) enables the (astro-turf) public groundswell to be (nominally) manufactured independently of the deposed political party.
2. a psychology based in religious faith – adventism – where believers in the coming of the kingdom of Christ/Christian righteousness government rebel against any “big secular government of urban liberals”.
The Congressional elections are about denying consent to be governed by a “false Christ” (not born American, not really a patriot, not really a Christian, etc).
Note that adventism is really the expectation of the end of democratic pluralism in their lifetimes and the US government established to serve as an agent of God on Earth or is replaced. Thus adventism is really a methodology by which consent to the rule of secular governments is being denied.