June 2, 2010

"The Tea Party Movement Isn’t Racist," says John B. Judis...

... because he's found a way to say it's worse than racist.
If the Tea Party movement, with its fanatic libertarianism and selfish individualism, were to gain any measure of power, it would wreak havoc on the economy (imagine America without a Federal Reserve System), shred the social safety net, and undermine what exists of the great American community.... it’s very possible to believe that the Tea Party is not the latest manifestation of the Ku Klux Klan or White Citizens’ Councils—while still believing that it is a terrible menace, nonetheless.

51 comments:

Hoosier Daddy said...

...selfish individualism...

Translation: All your paychecks belong to us.

These people are truly unhinged.

TMink said...

I would call it successful individualism, but he gets a lot correct while totally misunderstanding the consequences of our eventual transcendency.
Trey

Original Mike said...

"its fanatic libertarianism and selfish individualism"

Yeah, it really is eye-opening to see what some people equate "live within our means" to.

Hoosier Daddy said...

You know what's really ironic is how he thinks the Tea Party will wreak havoc on the economy, in part, by 'shredding the social safety net' when in fact, its the social safety net which in large part is wreaking havoc on the economy unless of course $67 trillion in unfunded liabilities isn't a collapse waiting to happen.

Guess this moron, like the Dems currently running the country into the sewer aren't paying attention to what the social safety net is doing to a good chunk of Europe.

kent said...

The New Republic? Really?

Good heavens. Does anyone other than the most mossbacked and embittered old Stalinists, muttering peevishly into their morning cups, actually still read that vanity press project for wattled, truculent red diaper babies, nowadays...?

AJ Lynch said...

Judis has made a nice living by viewing everything American thru his race meter.

AJ Lynch said...

And Hoosier hits it- the "safety net" was loaded with tons of liberal programs so it snapped. That now threatens the solvency of the entire country.

So Mr. Judis, you got what you wanted - 100% of us are now in danger of falling thru your vaunted safety net. Let's meet at the bottom- ain't equality great?!

Meade said...

The [Democratic] Party Movement Isn't Racist

It’s very possible to believe that the [Democratic] Party is not the latest manifestation of the Ku Klux Klan or White Citizens’ Councils—while still [observing] that it is a terrible menace, nonetheless.

jayne_cobb said...

The recent eruption of vitriol towards libertarians is quite informative of their perceived influence.

Where once they were considered a political curiosity by the left, many of whom would claim sympathy towards their views (liberaltarianism anyone?), they are now apparently viewed as a threat.

vnjagvet said...

Judisism - Hyperbolic bullshit.

rhhardin said...

Lefty thought works by assigning perverse consequences to some other cause.

edutcher said...

If the Tea Party movement, with its fanatic libertarianism (oh, gee, people who believe in liberty)

and selfish individualism (they actually think they have a right to keep what they make),

were to gain any measure of power,(we know what's best for them)

it would wreak havoc on the economy (the government would actually pay for what it enacts)

(imagine America without a Federal Reserve System) (yeah, nobody playing games with the money supply),

shred the social safety net (that was supposed to be people's retirement funds, but The Zero and the rest of the Demos are taking care of them),

and undermine what exists of the great American community (the people might finally throw the Leftists out of power in this country).

Fixed it.

Paul Zrimsek said...

Did "liberaltarianism" ever find any takers on the liberal side? The only actual exponents I ever came across were libertarians like Will Wilkinson and Brink Lindsey, who thought that if they strained at enough conservative gnats while swallowing enough liberal camels, the cool kids like Klein and Yglesias would let them sit at their table.

Original Mike said...

"And the University of Washington poll is limited to seven states, several of which are likely to house more than the usual share of racists."

For those playing at home, that would be Georgia, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, North Carolina, Ohio, and California.

Dark Eden said...

Is it wrong that 'fanatic libertarianism and selfish individualism' just strike me as very funny?

I imagine Obama wrestling with you to take your wallet away screaming, "Why are you so selfish as to demand you keep some of your money!"

Scott said...

Libertarian societies don't engage in genocide, ethnic cleansing, or killing political opponents in large numbers. Those techniques are the exclusive province of the statist left.

Why any person endowed with a sense of humanity and even a scintilla of intelligence would be a statist is beyond me.

Scott said...

To off-load your civic duties to a government of elites, and to let them decide how you should run your life, is lazy.

And for you to force others to become subjects to this elite cadre just so you personally can "benefit" from their "wisdom" is immensely more selfish than letting people do what they want with their lives.

I mean, who the fuck made liberals magnanimous saints? They're not. They are just massive narcissists who want to force others to buy into their identity politics.

John B. Judis needs to get a life.

c3 said...

from the piece:
"Psychologists have speculated that within such movements you would find a disproportionate number of people who harbor racial resentments."


It's not just me speculating, its PSYCHOLOGISTS!!

Larry J said...

"Psychologists have speculated that within such movements you would find a disproportionate number of people who harbor racial resentments."

Back in the old Soviet Union, psychologists sent many people who disagreed with communism to insane asylums. It sounds like some of their American counterparts are looking to do the same thing - make political disagreement a mental illness.

As for the dire consequences of libertarians winning political office, what's wrong with people who want to leave you alone?

Roger J. said...

OK--I'll bite: who in the hell is John Judis and why should I listen to him? The American people are so stupid as to need pontificators to tell them what to think?

The fact that this rube thinks he is so smart to deliver us from our mistakes says much more about him than it does about others.

Synova said...

Yes because any libertarianism is fanatic libertarianism; any individualism is selfish individualism.


"Let's meet at the bottom- ain't equality great?!"

Heh.

traditionalguy said...

His story is the best defense the Dems have now for losing the 2010 mid-terms, only five months from now. The plan is to call the GOP candidates "Libertarians that want to wreck everything". That will be aimed at the undecided voters, not us. I expect that it will be mass media's agreed background truth and illustrated by them for the next 5 months with continuous Rand Paul images and quotes.

Theo Boehm said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Theo Boehm said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
MadisonMan said...

My own opinion (MOO) is that people are racist. Movements are not. Even if a movement is populated by racists, it's still the people not the movement who are racist.

Paul Snively said...

John B. Judis: ...it would wreak havoc on the economy (imagine America without a Federal Reserve System)...

I'm trying to imagine more havoc being wreaked on the economy than having the Federal Reserve system!

AlphaLiberal said...

Good point from a great writer.

Tea Partiers could care less about their fellow Americans. They just want more money. Greedheads!

AlphaLiberal said...

And, to be clear, it's wrong to say all the TPers are racist. It would, however, be very accurate to say they have a lot of racists and white supremacists in their ranks, which they deny.

It's overwhelmingly white and bears no resemblance to the nation at large.

HDHouse said...

Hoosier Daddy said...
"...selfish individualism...
Translation: All your paychecks belong to us.These people are truly unhinged."

Speaking of unhinged....perhaps you would rather walk across a field to work...highways are built by tax dollars remember..or get your water from a rainbarrel...perhaps just toss your trash out the back door (not that you don't do that now) and watch your home looted and burned with no fire or police...

So what you are, other than a hypocrite, is someone who just wants what makes your particular life easier and your ability or desire to help anyone else in society ends at your front door.

What a wonderful human being you must be. Talk about the eye of the needle and heaven.

HDHouse said...

Meade said...
"The [Democratic] Party Movement Isn't Racist .. It’s very possible to believe that the [Democratic] Party is not the latest manifestation of the Ku Klux Klan or White Citizens’ Councils—while still [observing] that it is a terrible menace, nonetheless."

Collective generalizations are as worthless as those who utter them...excluding this one.

jayne_cobb said...

AL,

Really, that's all you've got today?

Tea Party Demographics

But for those too lazy to click through, the TP is:

-79% white
-6% black
-15% other

Trooper York said...

Aren't you the guy who is proud that he doesn't pay his taxes hd.

I bet Hoosier Daddy does more charity work in a week than you did in your entire life.

jayne_cobb said...

Via the CIA World Factbook:

-white 79.96%,
-black 12.85%,
-Asian 4.43%,
-Amerindian and Alaska native 0.97%,
-native Hawaiian and other Pacific islander 0.18%,
-two or more races 1.61%
(July 2007 estimate)

HDHouse said...

Ahhh the great libertarian montra..."Give me all of mine and most of yours or give me death".

Only thing I ever saw a Tea Partier share was the shirt off of someone else's back.

ya'betcha

Pogo said...

The left is intent on sharing other people's money, as much as they can grab, by force if need be.

With an ample cut for their own hard work, too.

jayne_cobb said...

HDHouse,

Yeah, those uncaring conservatives who just happen to be more charitable than liberals:

here

MadisonMan said...

It would, however, be very accurate to say they have a lot of racists and white supremacists in their ranks, which they deny.

It's overwhelmingly white and bears no resemblance to the nation at large.

The same can be said for the Republican Party at large, and the Democratic Party at large. Or the State of Wisconsin. Or for the vast majority of states.

Accuracy in a statement sometimes means nothing.

Blue@9 said...

AlphaLiberal said...

Tea Partiers could care less about their fellow Americans. They just want more money.

Liberals could care less about their fellow Americans. They just want more of your money.


And, to be clear, it's wrong to say all the TPers are racist. It would, however, be very accurate to say they have a lot of racists and white supremacists in their ranks, which they deny.

And, to be clear, it's wrong to say all the Democrats are racist. It would, however, be very accurate to say they have a lot of racists and white supremacists in their ranks, which they deny.

Do you deny it? If you do, I say you're a racist and a denier of your own racism.

Synova said...

Indeed. There is nothing *generous* about sharing other people's money.

Libertarians are dangerous. Not because they have so many numbers or have undue influence in the Tea Parties or are extreme or fantatics or anything else.

Libertarians are dangerous (along with Objectivists and others) because they are essentially the only group of thinkers in this nation who think about the THEORY of government.

Which is, of course, where Rand Paul screwed up. He thought he could talk about theory... about why and what and impacts on freedom and the larger shape of it all and how it relates to everything else.

The statist, conservative or liberal, never questions the role of government or the purpose of it or any foundational element of it. The State exists to do what people want done and all else is irrelevant.

Only the libertarian can say that I want this thing, but it is wrong for government to provide it; I believe this thing, but it is wrong for government to coerce it; I abhor this thing, but it is wrong for government to forbid it.

Fen said...

AlphaLibtard: It's overwhelmingly white and bears no resemblance to the nation at large.

The Tea Party is color blind. Blacks are welcome.

The reason there aren't many blacks is because blacks are the most racist demographic in America (see: FBI Hate Crime stats).

HDHouse said...

jayne_cobb said...
"Yeah, those uncaring conservatives who just happen to be more charitable than liberals:"

I failed to see where the giving was tied to a percentage of net worth..hmmm now that would drive the rich republicans crazy...but the subject is tea..high tea perhaps.

Larry J said...

Speaking of unhinged....perhaps you would rather walk across a field to work...highways are built by tax dollars remember..or get your water from a rainbarrel...perhaps just toss your trash out the back door (not that you don't do that now) and watch your home looted and burned with no fire or police...

Typical ignorant liberal strawman argument. No one I know of is advocating the complete elimination of all government. Government has legitimate functions such as those spelled out in Article I of the Constitution. However, just because I like a steak now and then, it doesn't mean I want a whole cow crammed down my throat. Is there ever a point where a liberal would say, "That's not a legitimate function of government?" other than, perhaps, national defense?

Scott said...

Unions like the one AlphaSockPuppet works for are the most racist institutions on the planet.

Synova said...

"Is there ever a point where a liberal would say, "That's not a legitimate function of government?" other than, perhaps, national defense?"

And, correct me please, but wasn't the interstate highway system primarily a national defense project?

The Crack Emcee said...

Wait - now I'm confused:

There's something worse than racism?

Considering all the posts about it, you could've fooled me,...

Sam Spade said...

AL is an idiot. Every subgroup in this country has different demographics than the country as a whole. In AL's view they all must be racist. Of course he may subscribe to the view that only white people can be racist. Idiot.

c3 said...

AL;
Greedheads!

That must have been a typo, I'm sure you meant to type
Poopyheads!

Meade said...

It’s worth noting that a movement doesn’t have to be racist in order to be dangerous. Few have done more to damage America’s foreign policy than the [Democrats under Jimmy Carter] or the [Democrats under Bill Clinton], but I would not call either movement racist. Ditto the [free-spending welfare state movements of the 1930s and 1960s]. Its proponents [produced the so-called New Deal and the so-called Great Society], but not for reasons explicitly involving color. -J. B. Judis p2

HDHouse said...

@Larry J...

ohhhhh Article 1...obviously you are referring to the part you might really admire...that headline, banner right or off limits right that starts off Section 9...your fav huh?

HDHouse said...

@Meade

then we can safely assume J. B. Judis was dead during the Bush (either or both) years and when Reagan lapsed into early alzheimers....

JAL said...

for HD

"Although liberal families' incomes average 6 percent higher than those of conservative families,
conservative-headed households give, on average, 30 percent more to charity than the average liberalheaded
household ($1,600 per year vs. $1,227)."

So you are saying the wealthy should get to keep more of their money percentage wise because they make more money? Aha!

Greedhead.

Your boss said not too long ago something about there comes a time when "you've made enough money."

(And check out the first and second families... the Obamas giving went up considerealbly when he was headed for the national stage. The Bidens are total tidewads.)