So the British version of the ‘Tea Party’ movement was apparently launched in Brighton today. Seemingly, most of that delightful seaside resort responded with indifference at this apparently ‘historic’ event. Personally, I’m pretty alarmed that the most crankish part of an increasingly crankish Republican Party (see my post here about the rightward drift of an already right wing GOP) seems to want to replicate itself over here. The last thing we need is a British version of the tea party movement.
The first reason I don’t like this idea is that it is an unwelcome and unnecessary distraction from the election campaign to come. While we should be resolutely and absolutely focused on the election, some members of the Party seem to think that their time is better spent on British ‘tea parties’. It seems like a very curious sense of priorities on the part of the ‘tea party’ organisers to me.
Secondly, the entire ‘tea party’ movement in the States is driven by a near hysterical anti Government agenda. There is no coherent theory of Government in the tea party movement. There is no acceptance that Government is necessary and can be a force for good. The American tea party movement is driven by a divisive, shrill, simplistic view of politics that is driving moderate Republicans like Charlie Crist out of the GOP. This is just the kind of politics we do not need in the UK.
Thirdly, look at the nature of the tea party movement in the US. They are driven by the hysterical and frankly at times delusional agenda of Fox News presenters like Glenn Beck and Sean Hannity, as well as various right wing shock-jocks. The Times talks of a “dark underbelly” at the heart of the tea party movement, crystallised by the utterly offensive speech by Tom Tancredo at the start of the tea party convention in Nashville last month. Conservative journalist Jonathan Kay turned up at the tea party convention and was shocked by the “toxic fantasies being spewed from the podium”, including the thoroughly horrific and offensive ‘birther’ movement, which was well represented at the convention.
Kay argued that the US tea party is “dominated by people whose vision of the government is conspiratorial and dangerously detached from reality.” Of course, any movement that looks to Sarah Palin as a potential President surely fits the definition of being “dangerously detached from reality.”
Fox News, Beck, Hannity, Limbaugh et al can keep their right wing conspiracy theories. The tea party movement is something that British politics can absolutely do without.
Related posts:
Most of your piece focused on what is know as the ‘ad hominem’ fallacy, in which you attack the people behind the movement rather than what the movement argues for itself.
If the Conservative party was more sceptical of the state, was pushing for lower taxes and was more anti-government it would be a more coherent ideology than the sort of mushy middle ground the party currently occupies. Cameron’s Conservatives have no ideology, and so claim to be pragmatists. Pragmatists, as Keynes said are just slaves to the ideas of long forgotten philosophers and economists.
I welcome any coalition which argues for a reduction in government power, economic control and spending. As a Conservative shouldn’t you do the same?
I have developed a healthy distrust of people who employ Latin phrases in an argument. It is normally a good predictor that I am engaging with someone trying to hide a lack of knowledge, insight or understanding behind a veneer of intellectualism. The author of the comment above is a great example of this. Their critique of this article and subsequent attack on Cameron is hopelessly flawed.
Let’s start with Skelton’s attacks on the tea party movement. He outlines 3 key objections. Firstly, it may act as a distraction from the upcoming election campaign (it may). Secondly, it does not provide any coherent vision of government and represents a simplistic view of politics (correct). Finally, he suggests the agenda of the movement, which is best characterised by the ramblings of people like Sean Hannity, is also unpleasant since it serves as a rallying point for delusional ideas represented by the likes of birther movement. Skelton’s argument may be one you don’t agree with, but it most certainly does not qualify as an ‘Argumentum ad hominem’. Unless you don’t understand what ‘ad hominem’ actually means…
Interestingly, the poster then misrepresents a Keynes quote to ‘prove’ that Cameron’s pragmatism is not a basis for a coherent ideology. I actually find the idea of a Conservative Party based on the principles of empirical skepticism (Cameron’s pragmatism) a sounder basis for a broad conservative movement than a simplistic anti-government philosophy and much more in line with conservative tradition. As a Conservative, how can you not?
Jonathon Kay is a fellow at the foundation for the Defense of Democracy and he writes for liberal newspapers, so really not an unbiased report by him. The tea party that was televised with Palin, was not the tea party movement most normal folks are associated with, and I definitely do not support her. The New York times is also left wing reporting! We’ve had protests here in America outside of the news media telling them to tell the truth.
My guess is both reporters have never attended a local tea party where I’m at and see that it’s normal people with jobs who quite frankly have never protested before. It’s the main stream media and the current administrations tactics to demonize us in order to shut us up. Not gonna happen as we don’t want the country to go socialist, and we don’t want the future generations paying for all of this debt.
So John mc, once we have cut through all the fancy rhetoric, how is Cameron going to sort out the UK’s public finances? Short answer: he hasn’t got a clue, although if he gets the chance, I am sure he will attempt to plunder pension funds again. He certainly won’t cut spending because he is as committed as Brown to squeezing the private sector.
Michael, what fancy rhetoric are you referring to? Surely you see the benefit of Cameron trying to explain how individual policy ideas fit within a wider theoretical framework? Or do you prefer to stick with simple slogans?
I tend to disagree with your analysis of Cameron’s economic position and likely actions on public finance but I think your question is a very valid one. How he manages to answer it will clearly play an important role in the Conservative’s election chances.
@ThinkStrat @NikDarlington @PlatformTen Nice piece. I also wrote something abt a ‘British tea party’ last year, here : http://t.co/93MPBVg