The demographic breakdowns: Tea Party activists are 60 percent male and 80 percent white, with 77 percent of them self-identifying as "conservatives" and 44 percent identifying as "Republicans." While 47 percent of Americans report making less than $50,000 a year, only 26 percent of Tea Party activists make that little, while 34 percent make $75,000 or more. The major way in which this movement differs from the Republican Party's makeup is in geography. Only 31 percent live in the South. Twenty-nine percent live in the Midwest, and 28 percent live in the West. Only in the Northeast, where 13 percent of activists live, are they relatively underrepresented (19 percent of all poll respondents live there).
I didn't expect the age breakdown:
18-29 20% (Tea Party Activists) 20% (All Respondents) 30-49 40% to 35% 50-64 29% to 27% 65+ 12% - 17%
Suggesting these yahoos are going to be around for a long, long, time.
The semi-good news is they appear to be spread-out across the country and are politically aligned within/to the Republican Party. Their numbers suggest, to me, they are numerous enough to 'throw' GOP primaries to their candidate. Their numbers are low enough that should their candidate win it is doubtful that candidate would win the general - as we saw in the NY-23 by-election.
Males 18 to 29 are the most violent demographic and they are easily manipulated into violence. I would not be surprised if a wave of violence following HCR passage, if it does pass, by this group a la Timothy McVeigh. The difference would - could - be these people lack his military training suggesting outbreaks would be more "lynch mob" than terrorist.
But I don't know that.
What is certain, to me, is the preconditions for a guerrilla terrorist campaign exist in the US. The Tea Bag demographic provides enough of a support group or base for a considerable number of operatives. What they don't have (I hope) is access to the logistics organization required to keep them in the field.
If they do and enough of them decide to go actively hostile ... things could get real ugly real fast here.
If real shooting starts, with real pain, you won't see them for dust.
A tiny, tiny proportion may graduate to blowing actual shit up, but they'll be the most psychotic ones, and not representative of the majority.
I lurk on some of the wacko boards just to see what the crazies are zeitgeisting, and they're not particularly unanimous about anything much - not even about HCR.
If they do escalate and if we go by history it will be more KKK than IRA.
Violent fantasies seem very much like a tea bagger hobby.
Individuals/organizations that threaten the use of violence to influence public opinion have no place in a democracy. And the trick with the Germans, is that they have a strong tradition of a civil service that defends democracy. The bureaucracy there isn't politicized, there's the idea of an independent public interest that supercedes that of any one party. And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg
Whereas Americans generally have a hard time telling the difference between nonpartisan and bipartisan. The brainless should not be in banking -- Willem Buiter
Whereas Americans generally have a hard time telling the difference between nonpartisan and bipartisan.
Jesus, ain't that the truth. Of course the recognition that there is an independent public interest implies that society does in fact exist.
And for the neo-liberals in charge (don't think that Democrats are exempt from this) society is like Santa Claus. It only exists if you believe in it. And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg
It is also true that waterboarding is torture. Truth got in the way of what Resident Bush's regime wanted to do?
And that's precisely why the Bush administration argued that a legal basis for this treatment existed because the individuals against whom it was used fell under the category of "unlawful combatants" and thus were not afforded the protections provided by the Geneva Conventions. Note that even where the Bush administration intended to break the spirit of the law, they were forced to find a basis for their actions in the word of the law. This shows how having a law that is independent of the political process it regulates constrains action.
The point being that if there was a constitutional provision to ban organizations that employ political violence or the threat of it, groups like the teabaggers wouldn't have Republican congressperson speaking at their rallies. They would be marginalized. And I'll give my consent to any government that does not deny a man a living wage-Billy Bragg
Tea bagger knuckle-draggers can persuade themselves that shooting the Pres is a patriotic thing to do.
It's really a constitutional issue - the constitution explicitly frames violence as a legitimate tool of policy.
This is one of the key differences between the US and Europe. I don't think Lisbon, for all of its flaws, suggests that armed overthrow of Brussels is in any way a good potential plan.
This shows how having a law that is independent of the political process it regulates constrains action.
How has the MCA to remove jurisdiction to military tribunal, circumscribe civil litigation, and define "enhanced interrogation techniques" constrained lawful treatment of persons ("alien unpriviledged belligerents") in US custody, actually? Diversity is the key to economic and political evolution.
Why would there be any doubt that if the hypothetical constitutional provision existed, they would have used it as an enemies list? Remember that they added, for example, green activists and advocates of non-violence on terrorist watchlists after 9-11. I've been accused of being a Marxist, yet while Harpo's my favourite, it's Groucho I'm always quoting. Odd, that.
"advocacy of violent overthrow of the government" is a good phrase to google.
From Yates:
"[T]hat indoctrination of a group in preparation for future violent action, as well as exhortation to immediate action, by advocacy found to be directed to "action for the accomplishment" of forcible overthrow, [directed] to violence "as a rule or principle of action," and employing "language of incitement," ... is not constitutionally protected when the group is of sufficient size and cohesiveness, is sufficiently oriented towards action, and other circumstances are such as reasonably to justify apprehension that action will occur. (p. 321)"
http://www.answers.com/topic/yates-v-united-states Align culture with our nature.
Parteien: Verfassungsschutz behält Linkspartei unter Beobachtung - Nachrichten - DerWesten
Der Präsident des Bundesamtes für Verfassungsschutz (BfV), Heinz Fromm, hält eine Beobachtung der Partei Die Linke weiterhin für erforderlich. Der Partei gehörten immer noch ,,offen extremistische Zusammenschlüsse wie die Kommunistische Plattform" an, sagte Fromm der Tageszeitung ,,Die Welt" vom Montag. In programmatischen Aussagen sei zudem nach wie vor von einer ,,Veränderung der Eigentums- und Herrschaftsverhältnisse" die Rede.
You will note that the Left is not accused of political violence but of planning to change the distribution of property. Wait this is important. Someone is wrong on the Internet.
What is certain, to me, is the preconditions for a guerrilla terrorist campaign exist in the US.
Pseudo-guerrillas, funded and protected by major corporations is another matter--and, yeah, I expect that.
Or drug wars, supported by drug cartels, as in Mexico, are also possible. A miniature drug war pursued by a drug dealing motorcycle gang in a remote part of California, may well be happening right now.
The Teabaggers are a publicity/propaganda stunt, directed by corporate interests--seemingly without the knowledge of the participants. In short, tools. They may cause effective disruption, but are not up to any real fighting. The Fates are kind.
Americans are taught to avoid political ANALYSIS at all costs. They recoil from it like it was a snake or scorpion. It's taught from kindergarten, using the desire to have fake harmony and group cohesion.
When that teaching goes awry, you get this type of intolerant ranting against the Other.
Thank you, liberal educationists. Every child a winner, all dissidents go sit in the corner. Align culture with our nature.
That is okay: There are folks to do your thinking for you. That is where the corporations come in.
I do not say this on my own surmise. The Exile has been following the Tea Party from the outset. The case they make is that it is astroturf. (Astroturf, which literally is artificial grass, refers to seemingly popular movements that are actually centrally organized or funded. In the US it is certainly the new way of doing politics, and cuts out the messiness of actual popular movements.)
I know of nothing that gainsays their analysis. The Fates are kind.
