A good read:
The âTea Partyâ Smear
Posted by David Boaz
One sign of the tea party movementâs success is that the term âtea partyâ is becoming an all-purpose smear term for any more-or-less right-wing person or activity that the writer doesnât like. In fact, I think âTea Partyâ is replacing âneoconâ as an all-purpose word for âthe people I hate.â
Take a look at this article, teased on the cover of Newsweek as âFranceâs Tea Partyâ and online as âWhat a Tea Party Looks Like in Europe.â When I saw the cover on the newsstand, I thought, âA tax revolt in France? Cool! And about time!â But what is the article actually about? Itâs about the National Front party of Jean-Marie Le Pen, who
In another example, the Guardian newspaper of London wrote sensationally about âLobbyists behind the rightwing Tea Party group in the USâ arriving in London for âan event organised by the UKâs controversial Taxpayersâ Alliance.â (Why is it controversial? Apparently because it agitates for lower taxes.) These groups, it is said, have âclose links to the billionaire brothers David and Charles Kochâ and âhave lobbied . . . to maintain tax breaks for the richâ â and for everyone else, a point that author Phillip Inman inadvertently omitted. And, contrary to the article, Cato didnât sponsor a taxpayersâ conference in London; we cosponsored the venerable European Resource Bank, a networking conference for free-market think tanks across Europe.
Inman writes, âThe Cato Institute, which promotes its views on Fox News and other rightwing media, is one of the Tea Partyâs main backers.â Thatâs sort of true, except for the point that our scholars have appeared more often on CNBC than on Fox. And that we donât back any political or grass-roots movements, though many of our scholars have written generous â and sometimes more cautious â articles about the tea party movement.
My colleague Aaron Powell suggests that that many left-liberals, including many journalists, have a Manichean worldview that posits a fundamental conflict between corporations and government. And so if you dislike corporations, you perforce stand on the side of government. And when itâs energy corporations, like the Kochs, then anything they touch becomes The Enemy. And âTea Partyâ is now, to some people, the generic name for The Enemy.
The âTea Partyâ Smear
Posted by David Boaz
One sign of the tea party movementâs success is that the term âtea partyâ is becoming an all-purpose smear term for any more-or-less right-wing person or activity that the writer doesnât like. In fact, I think âTea Partyâ is replacing âneoconâ as an all-purpose word for âthe people I hate.â
Take a look at this article, teased on the cover of Newsweek as âFranceâs Tea Partyâ and online as âWhat a Tea Party Looks Like in Europe.â When I saw the cover on the newsstand, I thought, âA tax revolt in France? Cool! And about time!â But what is the article actually about? Itâs about the National Front party of Jean-Marie Le Pen, who
Is that Newsweekâs view of the âtea partyâ? The article went on to explain that at 82 Le Pen is yielding party leadership to his daughter, who is âa passionate advocate of its core message: strong French nationalism, relentless Euro-skepticism, and a lot of hard-nosed talk about fighting crime and immigration.â And lest that you think that such culturally conservative and unsavory attitudes simply go hand in hand with a belief in lower taxes and smaller government, the authors point out that
That combination of nativism and welfare statism seems very different from the mission of the tea party movement. The Tea Party Patriots website, the closest thing to a central focus for tea party activists, lists their values as âFiscal Responsibility, Limited Government, Free Market.â In fact, I note that writers Tracy McNicoll, Christopher Dickey, and Barbie Nadeau never use the term âtea partyâ in the body of the article. So maybe we should only blame Newsweekâs headline writers and front-page editor.
In another example, the Guardian newspaper of London wrote sensationally about âLobbyists behind the rightwing Tea Party group in the USâ arriving in London for âan event organised by the UKâs controversial Taxpayersâ Alliance.â (Why is it controversial? Apparently because it agitates for lower taxes.) These groups, it is said, have âclose links to the billionaire brothers David and Charles Kochâ and âhave lobbied . . . to maintain tax breaks for the richâ â and for everyone else, a point that author Phillip Inman inadvertently omitted. And, contrary to the article, Cato didnât sponsor a taxpayersâ conference in London; we cosponsored the venerable European Resource Bank, a networking conference for free-market think tanks across Europe.
Inman writes, âThe Cato Institute, which promotes its views on Fox News and other rightwing media, is one of the Tea Partyâs main backers.â Thatâs sort of true, except for the point that our scholars have appeared more often on CNBC than on Fox. And that we donât back any political or grass-roots movements, though many of our scholars have written generous â and sometimes more cautious â articles about the tea party movement.
My colleague Aaron Powell suggests that that many left-liberals, including many journalists, have a Manichean worldview that posits a fundamental conflict between corporations and government. And so if you dislike corporations, you perforce stand on the side of government. And when itâs energy corporations, like the Kochs, then anything they touch becomes The Enemy. And âTea Partyâ is now, to some people, the generic name for The Enemy.
