Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] critique of the ideology of the Tea Party needed W
Tenthers (the Tenth Amendment cult) are largely people who move in the area of law, scholarly activity, intelligentsia, but I think it is clear that they overlap with the Tea Party activities, which tends towards rallies and media events. I'm not sure how coherent tentherism is when you get to its dissemination among the 'masses'. The irony of states rights as an expression of it is that it destroys the constitution it claims to uphold--that is not just incoherence but a destructive paradox. I think in actual practice, though, its a constitutionally oriented form of right-wing libertarianism, and the actual paradox there is: fiscal conservative but unwilling to do anything about runaway military budgets. Perhaps even more so than libertarians who want to stand outside the constitution and even the inherited precedent of applied constitutional law and court decisions of the past 200 years. That is because most would when forced to decide say that the only thing the federal government should do is provide for the common defense, and that would then be used to justify 1.5 trillion dollars a year on military, national security, intelligence (and this figure goes even higher if you factor in legacy costs, such as servicing that portion of the debt created by deficits that are caused by runaway military spending, but also veterans' benefits, and militarized foreign aid, such as 'foreign aid' going to Israel, Egypt, Pakistan and this is really most US foreign aid). This is however why whether they are tea party people, tenthers, fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, Christian reactionaries, etc. they all fit together once they get to Congress--that is they compete to get more federal spending for their district, state, important factions of their voters, their local party people, etc. I have to disagree about less government. In practice, the past 30 years has given us ever more people employed by the government, not even counting military active duty (which, without a large conscripted force, seems small, but is actually enlarged by the use of reserve and guard on active duty). I doubt there is another country in the OECD with the levels of government employment as the US. Certainly not Japan, which actually has a rather tiny level of government employment when compared to the US. Where are the government jobs? School districts, municipal and county governments, LAW ENFORCEMENT AND PRISONS, and of course the military-industrial complex (which has been privatized so to quite an extent through a proliferation of contractors, sub-contractors, sub-sub-contractors, etc.). You might find this interesting, although I have to disagree with its idea that white working class voters vote against their interests when they vote Republican or right-wing populist independent. To make that argument you would have to show that the Democratic Party or some other viable political power ready to take power does represent their interests--or die trying to show that. As the presidency of Bushwar Obomber shows all too well, his health care plan doesn't provide health cover to working Americans. It's a 'compromise' that unifies the divided and competing interests of private health care providers, big pharma, and those citizens who already have (what they believe to be) sufficient coverage--a compromise that will probably hold stable for 3-5 years and then collapse when prices can't inflate beyond the system's ability to pay those prices (which was also the source of a sense of crisis when BO promised health care). http://prospect.org/cs/articles?article=rally_round_the_true_constitution Today, however, the tenthers tap into the same populist outrage that inspired a generation of working-class religious conservatives to enthusiastically vote against their own interests. Fox News star Glenn Beck exhorts his audience to be a constitutional watchdog for America by lining up against health-care reform, cap-and-trade legislation, and the stimulus package. Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, who enthusiastically backed a tenther state sovereignty resolution, told a right-wing radio host that he is willing and ready for the fight if this administration continues to try to force their very expansive government philosophy down our collective throats. Tenther-inspired claims that federal spending violates the Constitution are so common at tea party protests that it is impossible to tell where the tenthers end and the tea baggers begin. More important, there is something fundamentally authoritarian about the tenther constitution. Social Security, Medicare, and health-care reform are all wildly popular, yet the tenther constitution would shackle our democracy and forbid Congress from enacting the same policies that the American people elected them to advance. After years of raging against mythical judges who legislate from the bench, tenther conservatives now demand a constitution that will not let anyone legislate at all.
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] critique of the ideology of the Tea Party needed W
You also have a huge 'ghost' force of 'shadow workers' who comprise a quasi-civil service. And the info. in this article is over 10 years old, pre 9/11 and the 'national security' bubble of the Bushwar-Obomber years. See: http://www.govexec.com/features/0199/0199s1.htm ___ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] critique of the ideology of the Tea Party needed W
On Wed, Nov 10, 2010 at 3:43 AM, CeJ jann...@gmail.com wrote: Tenthers (the Tenth Amendment cult) are largely people who move in the area of law, scholarly activity, intelligentsia, but I think it is clear that they overlap with the Tea Party activities, which tends towards rallies and media events. I'm not sure how coherent tentherism is when you get to its dissemination among the 'masses'. The irony of states rights as an expression of it is that it destroys the constitution it claims to uphold--that is not just incoherence but a destructive paradox. CB: Truly. The whole main body of the Constitution, i.e. _THe_ Constitution that the Amendments , like the tenth amendment, amend, enumerates powers of the federal government. The idea that the Tenth Amendment sort of revokes all that went before it is incoherent, as you say. Where exactly would all the Constitution itself concerning the Legislative, Executive and Judiciary of the federal government physically rule and take place if not in states as there is only Washington, D.C. as territory of the United States that is not part of state territory ? But I think I heard a report that a court turned down the suit by rightwing attorney generals to strike down the health care legislation .That suit would have been tenther based. Ridiculous. Evil clownish like the Tea Party. That's what a lot of Tea Party stuff is, evil clownish. Rightwing harlequinism. Like Mussolini. Didn't he used to clown making speeches up there on the balcony ? ^^^ I think in actual practice, though, its a constitutionally oriented form of right-wing libertarianism, and the actual paradox there is: fiscal conservative but unwilling to do anything about runaway military budgets. Perhaps even more so than libertarians who want to stand outside the constitution and even the inherited precedent of applied constitutional law and court decisions of the past 200 years. That is because most would when forced to decide say that the only thing the federal government should do is provide for the common defense, CB: Shouldn't this be called out as fascist, despite the stupid taboo on its usage among some sections of the left ? Libertarian fascist. Insane militarism is part of fascism or fascist ideology. and that would then be used to justify 1.5 trillion dollars a year on military, national security, intelligence (and this figure goes even higher if you factor in legacy costs, such as servicing that portion of the debt created by deficits that are caused by runaway military spending, but also veterans' benefits, and militarized foreign aid, such as 'foreign aid' going to Israel, Egypt, Pakistan and this is really most US foreign aid). This is however why whether they are tea party people, tenthers, fiscal conservatives, social conservatives, Christian reactionaries, etc. they all fit together once they get to Congress--that is they compete to get more federal spending for their district, state, important factions of their voters, their local party people, etc. I have to disagree about less government. In practice, the past 30 years has given us ever more people employed by the government, not even counting military active duty (which, without a large conscripted force, seems small, but is actually enlarged by the use of reserve and guard on active duty). I doubt there is another country in the OECD with the levels of government employment as the US. Certainly not Japan, which actually has a rather tiny level of government employment when compared to the US. Where are the government jobs? School districts, municipal and county governments, LAW ENFORCEMENT AND PRISONS, and of course the military-industrial complex (which has been privatized so to quite an extent through a proliferation of contractors, sub-contractors, sub-sub-contractors, etc.). You might find this interesting, although I have to disagree with its idea that white working class voters vote against their interests when they vote Republican or right-wing populist independent. To make that argument you would have to show that the Democratic Party or some other viable political power ready to take power does represent their interests--or die trying to show that. As the presidency of Bushwar Obomber shows all too well, his health care plan doesn't provide health cover to working Americans. It's a 'compromise' that unifies the divided and competing interests of private health care providers, big pharma, and those citizens who already have (what they believe to be) sufficient coverage--a compromise that will probably hold stable for 3-5 years and then collapse when prices can't inflate beyond the system's ability to pay those prices (which was also the source of a sense of crisis when BO promised health care). http://prospect.org/cs/articles?article=rally_round_the_true_constitution Today, however, the tenthers tap into the same populist outrage that inspired
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] critique of the ideology of the Tea Party needed
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 10:10 PM, Phil Walden philwald...@gmail.com wrote: I have been scouring websites in the USA to try to find a good socialist critique of the ideology of the Tea Party. But so far I have found nothing. The WSWS website says absolutely nothing to critique the ideology of the Tea Party. It seems that many on the left are adapting to the reactionary ideas of white sociologically working class men. ^^^ CB: TP ideology is not different from standard rightwing US ideology since Reaganism. Balancing the budget, yet cut taxes . That's the supply side economics/Laffer curve of Reagan; cut government social and welfare spending based on the budget not being balanced; that's Reaganite deficit hawkism. Racism, while denying that they are racists; that essential Reaganism. The same critique that Marxists and Communists have been doing for thirty years of the rightwing applies to the TP. They are a fake new whatever. They aren't new. They are the same ole-same ole. ^^^ If no good socialist critique of the Tea Party is written, you are going to end up with Sarah Palin as President. Can someone let me know where I can find a good socialist critique of the ideology of the Tea Party? Here's some Marxist critique of Tea Party http://www.peoplesworld.org/ginning-up-racism-its-winners-and-losers/?commentStart=10 Worried, even from England, Phil Walden ___ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis ___ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
Re: [Marxism-Thaxis] critique of the ideology of the Tea Party needed
full: _http://www.lrna.org/2-pt/articles/v20ed5art5.html_ (http://www.lrna.org/2-pt/articles/v20ed5art5.html) Small Government, Big State: Southern Program Points the Way It is conceivable that fascism could proceed as a movement to defend democracy and a return to the principles of the Constitution, a refrain that is being heard more and more stridently from the South, particularly in the calls for secession and states’ rights, and from the organizers of the Tea Party movement. The calls for small government, less taxation, deregulation, and an anti-union environment characterize the form of rule of the Southern states even as it is paired with accelerating the process of privatization and outright corporate welfare. Like any movement, the Tea Party movement is a mixture of various forces still in motion, with myriad groupings and individuals contending for leadership. There are the entrenched establishment who fund and play a role in organizing, such as, Dick Armey (Freedom Works), Ralph Reed (formerly of the Christian Coalition), Ron Paul and his son Rand (libertarians), Newt Gingrich, and Phil Gingrey, both from Georgia. There are the Glenn Becks and Rush Limbaughs, all of whom compose the ideological shock troops to advance their objectives. And there are a myriad of other organizations, such as, the The Oath Keepers with their roots in the military and prepared to take up arms, the Fair Tax Nation that calls for replacing all taxes with a national sales tax, and anti-immigration nativists who demand that the undocumented be hunted down and deported in the name of national security. They elevate the Constitution to the level of a sacred religious text, with particular emphasis upon the 10th amendment, which supposedly provides for the supremacy of states rights. This was also the basis of the Southern defense of slavery and the framework for the secession and formation of the Confederacy. Today it is utilized to resist federal government stimulus funds, as well as to oppose the establishment of national health insurance. The State is being reshaped to serve the interests of the ruling class in the defense of private property. This is not simply a set of policy choices. In a time in which the mode of production itself is shifting to accommodate the decline of value brought on by laborless production, the State is moving to direct control by the corporations, and privatization and the shrinking of the public sector is a necessary consequence of this process. It is experienced by the masses as the destruction of society itself as we know it. The focus of the American revolution now underway is centered squarely upon the question of the role of government. This email was cleaned by emailStripper, available for free from _http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm_ (http://www.papercut.biz/emailStripper.htm) ___ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
[Marxism-Thaxis] critique of the ideology of the Tea Party needed
I have been scouring websites in the USA to try to find a good socialist critique of the ideology of the Tea Party. But so far I have found nothing. The WSWS website says absolutely nothing to critique the ideology of the Tea Party. It seems that many on the left are adapting to the reactionary ideas of white sociologically working class men. If no good socialist critique of the Tea Party is written, you are going to end up with Sarah Palin as President. Can someone let me know where I can find a good socialist critique of the ideology of the Tea Party? Worried, even from England, Phil Walden ___ Marxism-Thaxis mailing list Marxism-Thaxis@lists.econ.utah.edu To change your options or unsubscribe go to: http://lists.econ.utah.edu/mailman/listinfo/marxism-thaxis
