I went to a Tea Party protest near my office last night. Overall, a well behaved, reasonably well dressed, normal-looking middle class crowd. Lots of Gadsen Flags. But it was a pretty disorganized affair, with the constant speechifying of a Flat Tax advocate seemingly unaware that a national sales tax would not necessarily cure our ills, which are driven by spending. The tax code is only a symptom. More important, since so many taxes are paid by the wealthy, who consume relatively less than the poor, any consumption tax would have to force the poor and middle classes to pay substantially more in taxes than they do now. This would probably be a good thing, as nearly half of Americans pay no income tax, but it would also be unpopular and hurt many of the middle class people at these protests. And it wouldn’t reduce the tax burden over time. A better system would be a more transparent and deliberately painful tax, perhaps a monthly bill and no withholdings. The current system, with its rebates for the approved classes, conceals how much we pay in taxes and allows various increases to be hidden in relatively small impacts on biweekly paychecks. A national sales tax would have the same problem; a penny raise here and there would not be noticed. We’d be boiling the frog.
I think the Tea Party movement overall is pretty healthy. Unfortunately, it seems already to be under the threat of hijacking by the Sara Palins and GOP establishment figures of the world. The kryptonite of accusations of racism has already been employed to good effect by critics. And the limited focus on government spending ignores the many other ways that Obama is a very bad president, such as his contempt for America’s historic people, limits on the office, and our proper relationship with non-European countries like Iran or China. Ultimately, if the movement is not connected to a more comprehensive political program, one that looks not only to government spending but demographic and moral drivers of national decline, then it is little more than a noisy fringe of the vaguely anti-government Republican Party.
Subscribe To This Feed
Ultimately, if the movement is not connected to a more comprehensive political program, one that looks not only to government spending but demographic and moral drivers of national decline, then it is little more than a noisy fringe of the vaguely anti-government Republican Party.
The trouble is people are willing to discuss the demographic trouble we face in private, but not in public. The Left has succeeded in making the term racist public enemy number one, so much so, that republicans, conservatives and others on the right are quick to disavow those who do lest they also become branded. As a result we hear these folks planning the next election, dreaming about the Constitution and a return to small government while seemingly oblivious to the fact that they are going to become a minority in the land they created to a bunch of folks who probably don’t share their values.
I can’t imagine how lucky the Japanese feel right now.
Well said. It’s like watching an arsonist run around lighting fires while sincerely wondering, “Wow, things sure seem to be catching fire a lot lately.” The cause and effect of mass immigration of leftist peoples and empowerment of the same and mass transformation of our political institutions is lost (at least in public, as you say).
I think if more people watched the NumbersUSA video with the gumball analogy to immigration, or read some of the facts Pat Buchanan laid out in State of Emergency, they might become more vocal in their concern about our demographic future.
There really is something for everyone in opposing this demographic change. Environmentalists should be alarmed at the growing impact to our water and land resources. Traditionalists should be alarmed at the changing political leanings of the populace. Union leaders should be alarmed at the effect on working wages. Yet all have been gelded into keeping quiet.
More important, since so many taxes are paid by the wealthy, who consume relatively less than the poor, any consumption tax would have to force the poor and middle classes to pay substantially more in taxes than they do now.
Well, any consumption tax would, not any consumption tax package. The Fair Tax comes with a prebate that nullifies its regressive effects at the low end. I’m a mild Fair Tax supporter, myself, but some rightists seem to loathe it.
As far as penny raises in the sales tax not being noticed, well, they would certainly make big news. Congressional votes on much less important matters seem to get decent TV attention. But then people are also pretty good at ignoring political news.
(BTW, I completely agree with you both about immigration. Other issues are interesting, but none come close in importance. I also agree that Palin is a distraction.)
I don’t have any empirical data, but I’m convinced the Tea Partyites (ers?) have done a good job in terms of reframing the debate.
Jump back to Reagan for a second. Before the liberal media awoke, the silent majority, catalyzed by Reagan, rose Lazarus-like and ushered in the conservative tide. Few saw it coming and fewer saw its permeating magnitude.
The Tea Party might very well be diagramming a similar, subtle political crescendo. They might be doing it involuntarily by the process of elimination. There is a distinct disturbance with Obama-ism, a disgust with the Pelosi progressives and a general dissatisfaction with the DC powerbrokers.
The Tea Party has become a kind of sounding board for that angst as political sentiment, echoing a harmony that has the eerie ring of the American 80s, if not 1900s than the 1800s.
Don’t look now, but somewhere your boy Reagan is winking.