Which is more important? Overlap or divergence?

A commenter to my last post pointed out a study which focuses on the divisions between libertarians and social conservatives, and I found this chart interesting:

While it looks like there is a lot of divergence between Libertarians and the “Christian right,” the interesting thing is the way both are able to work with and identify with the Tea Party. The above survey (full report here in pdf) was done by a group with liberal Brookings Institute connections, and what I find fascinating is that while 39% of Libertarians are said to identify with the Tea Party (a figure amplified significantly when those who “trend Libertarian” are factored in), there is no similar statistic for the so-called “Christian right.”

“Christian right” and “white evangelical” are used quite a bit — as if the goal is to exclude black evangelicals from being considered evangelical. (I wonder why no similar divisions are made between white and black Catholics.)

Another item I found fascinating was a statement issued by one of the founding Tea Party groups: in response to another anti-gay crackpot acting under cover of religion:

Like a lot of you, we were quite surprised, and saddened by this recent Gawker.com headline:

“Tea Party Leader Wants to File Class Action Suit Against Homosexuality”

As one of the true founding Tea Party groups, TeaParty365 would like to take this opportunity to once again, and once-and-for-all, distance ourselves –and the larger Tea Party Movement– from the self-serving antics of Rick Scarborough, and his ilk.

TeaParty365 does not support this idiotic notion. We feel it is counter-productive to the national conversation, and ultimately harmful to the Tea Party brand, and the country.

Let’s remember, the Tea Party was a true, national grassroots upwelling, initially a reaction to Bush’s profligacy. It exploded in early 2009 when it became obvious Obama was doubling-down on financial, and governmental stupidity.

The Tea Party is and always has been about 4 very simple things:

1) Smaller Government

2) Fiscal Responsibility

3) Personal Responsibility

4) The Constitution

Because our beliefs are so wonderfully simple, you can be a “Tea Partier” and also be involved in other political issues that aren’t mutually-exclusive, e.g., Gun Rights, Immigration, Abortion, The War on Drugs, etc.

This is a blessing, and a curse. There are Tea Partiers across the country who are on all sides of these issues, and are also, still, technically “Tea Partiers” because they adhere to the 4 core tenets. The problem arises when these other issues override the core issues of the Tea Party. But the fact remains, when you are arguing for, or against, an issue that is ancillary to our 4 key tenets, you are no longer speaking for the “Tea Party.”

I totally agree, and I find myself wondering why these people keep trying to invoke the Tea Party mantle to focus on issues having nothing to do with the core principles. They are only harming a cause they claim to support.

Maybe I should put “claim” in quotes. (I doubt their commitment to smaller government, as well as the Constitution.)

 


Posted

in

by

Tags:

Comments

5 responses to “Which is more important? Overlap or divergence?”

  1. notaclue Avatar
    notaclue

    OK, I confess I didn’t read the report, only looked at the Venn diagram, so maybe the report addresses this issue: I’m taking this survey with a huge grain of salt unless it makes a clear distinction between political philosophy on the one hand, and actual membership/ participation/ donation to causes on the other.

    Personally, I fall in the sweet spot where the three circles converge. But that’s more a matter of philosophy than anything else. I’ve never donated to or joined a Libertarian party. I’ve never attended a Tea Party rally. I participate actively in a church, but the only formal “Christian Right” things I’ve ever done are some slight support for pro-life rallies and organizations. So in what sense am I a Tea Partier or a Libertarian? Only in the depths of my heart, certainly not out where anyone might notice.

    I make this point because “the Tea Party” or “the Christian Right” or even “the Libertarians” are slippery concepts.

    Now someone who has read the report so I don’t have to, please correct me.

  2. Bram Avatar
    Bram

    Those 4 very simple things easily fit within the libertarian circle. Any libertarian who isn’t in favor of those things, just isn’t a libertarian.

  3. Frank Avatar
    Frank

    Donald Sensing believes that the Tea Party is irrelevant.

    This president has only one goal in his second term: to eliminate political and economic competition to himself first and the Democrat party second. There is no other Obama agenda. Not jobs, not economic growth, not anything. Emplacing permanent one-party rule in this country is the sole goal for term two.

    The Republican party is wholly irrelevant. The Tea party is, too. The Democrat party is never going to relinquish power. It is never going to lose the White House: it will win the election honestly if it can, dishonestly if it must (count on the latter).

    My prediction: the Democrats will control Congress from 2014 on, even if they do not gain a numerical majority in the House next year, because enough McCain Republicans will be co-opted as to make it unnecessary. The Democrats will gain seats in the Senate. As for 2016, the name of Democrat nominee will be irrelevant. No matter who they nominate, that person will take the oath of office 20 days into 2017.

    Sensing posted the above at AmericanDigest, if anyone wants to go there. (I’ve tried but am unable to link to the specific article in Sidelines at Vanderleun’s site. He’s set it up to link to all the articles – which rotate daily.)

  4. Frank Avatar
    Frank

    Here is the link anyway, for as long as it lasts. The comments are telling.
    http://americandigest.org/sidelines/2013/10/

  5. CTimbo Avatar
    CTimbo

    What “notaclue” said, except that I have attended one Tea Party Rally.