HOME
Themen und Begriffe /
Subjects and Definitions
Tea Party
Two
things that have the name in common, but nothing else.
Left:
Boston Tea Party in 1774. In book: The History of North
America. London: E. Newberry, 1789.
Library
of Congress, Rare Book and Special Collections Division. This
image is Public domain. Source: http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/british/images/vc40.jpg
Right:
Typical slogan of the Tea Party, Albuquerque, 2009: The little
soldiers are fighting for their chiefs.
Foto:
Matthew Reichbach (nmfbihop). Dieses
Foto ist unter der Creative Commons-Lizenz Namensnennung
2.0 US-amerikanisch (nicht portiert) (CC BY 2.0) lizensiert.
Orig.-URL:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/28016916@N08/3445557099/
That
is a
special type of “freedom”[1] that
really is standing behind the slogans of the so-called “Tea
Party”: the “freedom of the pike”, or, as others
call it, the “freedom of the wolf”.
One
main point is the “freedom” from taxes as far as
possible. Who likes to pay taxes? Nobody likes. By such slogans
many can be lured and mobilized – and so it happens that
those, who prefer to pay 3.000 Dollar taxes a year to 4.000
Dollar or 6.000 Dollar to 8.000 Dollar fight for those who prefer
to pay 1 million instead of 10 millions or 10 millions instead of
100 millions. And the whole thing is called “Tea
Party”.
But
already this name is wrong. In this case, a positive moment of
American history which was important for the creation of the
American nation is misused for creating a connection to a
movement of our days which really does not have anything to do
with this historical event.
“No
taxation without representation”, that was the slogan of
the American colonists at the very beginning of America’s
fight for independence. That was the slogan which led to the
famous “Boston
Tea Party” in 1774. The slogan was NOT : ”No
taxation”.
What
had happened? The settlers in the British colonies in Northern
America did not accept that they should be charged with taxes by
a parliament they were not represented in. What they required was
adequate and equal representation in a state asking taxes from
them. That clearly is expressed by their slogan. As this
representation was refused to them, they refused to pay taxes to
such a state.
And
today? The slogan in reality has been shortened to “No
taxation!” – and so it is quite something different
compared to the goals of 1774. Off course, today there IS
representation, so the 1774 slogan would make no more sense at
all.
And
for those behind today’s “Tea Party”[2]
there exists even much more than just “representation”.
You are angry about “those in Washington”, who as you
think only care for their own advantage and don’t represent
you as they should do?
Well,
you should be aware that exactly those who want you to fight for
(their) “liberty” from taxes more or less have
“hijacked” exactly this “Washington”, that
they have much more “representation” than would be
adequate to their percentage of the total population.
Did
you ever hear the word “Lobbying”? It will need no
explanation. Who, do you think, has the connections, the money,
to influence politics and politicians, to channel and bring about
decisions? Who is able to direct this “Washington” to
act mostly for his own benefit? And who DOES it? Paul
Volcker, Chairman of the Federal Reserve from 1979 to 1987, in
2011 called Washington D.C. a “temple of lobbyists and
advocates”. Whose lobbyists and advocates will that be, what
do you think? Yes, the 1 % again.
Read
and hear what David Stockman, former budget director of President
Reagan, and Gretchen Morgenson from the New York Times have to
tell about that.[3]
And
if you look, did these 1 % do not even more than just
“lobbying”? Did they not already take over a great part
of this “Washington” directly? Do you know, how many
millionaires and multi-millionaires are sitting in Congress? Do
you know, how many of the present Republican candidates for
President are belonging to this 1 % of the population who have
hijacked all this?
How
can just these people tell everybody that exactly this
“Washington” should be the source of all evil? As it is
just THEY THEMSELVES who control it? This should not be a crazy
thing?
So,
what just is the main purpose of the “Tea Party”:
“No taxation” or “Less taxation” for the rich
1 %. The “liberty” they speak of, that in reality is
the liberty of the free wolf in the free chicken house with
it’s free chickens.
Well,
and you, you are the chickens. Might be once the “Tea
Party” activists will have been fighting successfully for
you that you pay 500 or 1.000 Dollars less taxes a year. In the
same time, the schools your kids go to become more and more
horrible, teachers are missing and not motivated, the
infrastructure you use and which makes your life agreeable is
rotting away, the public library and the public swimming pool
have been closed, you no more like to walk in the street because
there is no more money to pay the police to guarantee your safety
and so on.
Well,
these 1 % do not depend on that “public services” as
you do. They have their own private schools, their own swimming
pools, their own gated communities and security services. That is
you who got screwed with his 1.000 Dollar saved taxes.
And
also think of that: Is it really the taxes – that means the
money you spend for your nation and for the public services you
benefit from – that are the main problem when you see your
income being downsized all the time? Are you aware of the fact
that the vast majority of Americans have been left behind by the
economic growth of the past few decades? That means, that the
average income (in 2008 Dollars) has stayed all the same for 90 %
of all Americans, but has tripled for the top 1 %? That for the
lower 80 % it even has diminished, down to a loss of nearly 30 %
for the lower 40 % of Americans?
If
you compare the actual situation to the assumption of there would
not have been such a change in the relative growth rates for
various income groups after 1979, how much you could have earned
more (or less) today? That means, as you do not earn this
supposed surplus, what is the amount which you in fact really pay
just for the top 1 %?
In
2005, the top 1 % actually made $ billion 673 more as they should
have done compared to this assumption, and the bottom 80 % made $
billion 743 less. And that means, the average loss per income,
what they actually pay to the top 1 %, is 8.000 to 9.000 Dollar a
year for most of these 80 %, and even for the bottom 20 % it
still is 5.000 Dollar!
Why
the hell do you pay these “taxes” for the top rich,
wherefore, and for whose’s benefit? So, what is the sense of
the rebellion against the taxes for the state? Whatever your
political opinion might be, just look at a few charts, made up
from official figures. Let these charts just speak for
themselves.
Income-inequality-in-america
and One-percent-income-inequality.[4]
And
think: Whose game is this game which is calling itself “Tea
Party”?
To
enable the 1% for Making money – Making still more money
– Spending less money for the community – that is the
main goal of those behind the “Tea Party”.
Many
of them like to call themselves “patriots” – can
you imagine anybody who is less patriot than one of these who
deny to help their nation facing great problems (public dept;
rotting infrastructure; more and more people getting poor), who
just care for their own fortune to increase?
Think
of another time, think of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, who in
a similar critical situation heavily rose taxes, mostly for these
rich 1 %: Finally, the maximum income tax had risen up to 79 % in
1935. And when there came a still more critical situation for the
United States in 1941 when entering World War II, the maximum
income tax was risen once more up to more than 90 %.
And
that is how America could get over the crisis: Making the
“New Deal” in the 1930s and winning the war in the
1940s.
Be
aware, that America has been in war in the last decade and that
the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan up to now have been more
expansive for the US than had been World War II. Did any of these
selfish so-called “patriots”, as they are not ashamed
to call themselves, think of how all this mess should be paid?
On
the contrary, these “patriots” commit politicians to
swear by oath that they never will agree to rise any taxes.
Something like that never has happened before: Politicians
agreeing to castrate themselves and giving away one main right
politicians have, the right to decide on the budget and the means
how it should be financed. Giving this right away just to these 1
% and for the benefit of these 1 %. The 1% really have
“hijacked” this “Washington”, that means
politics.
[1]
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/dec/19/bastardised-libertarianism-makes-freedom-oppression
(Georges Monbiot, This bastardised libertarianism makes
‘freedom’ an instrument of oppression, The Guardian
Dec. 19, 2011).
[2]
The Koch brothers are just one – might be the most prominent
and best-known – case: See http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/oct/13/tea-party-billionaire-koch-brothers
(Suzanne Goldenberg, Tea Party movement: Billionaire Koch
brothers who helped it grow, The Guardian, Oct. 13, 2010) and http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/08/30/100830fa_fact_mayer
(Jane Mayer, Covert Operations, The New Yorker, Aug. 30, 2010).
Still more: See more: http://www.billionairesteaparty.com/
(The film: “The Billionaires’ Tea Party”); http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QePoDp9UtFE
and http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeHxX9d1Ms8&feature=related
(this film on Youtube); http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2011/08/19/of-the-tea-party-by-the-tea-party-for-the-tea-party/
(Blog of Maureen Tkacik, 2011); http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/29/opinion/29rich.html?pagewanted=all
(Frank Rich: The Billionaires bankrolling the Tea Party, New York
Times, Aug. 28, 2010); http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2010/oct/25/tea-party-koch-brothers
(George Monbiot, The Tea Party movement: deluded and inspired by
billionaires, The Guardian, Oct. 25, 2010); http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/aug/01/us-debt-deal-tea-party
(George Monbiot, Debt deal: anger and deceit has led the US into
a billionaires' coup; The Guardian, Aug. 1, 2011), full version http://www.monbiot.com/2011/08/01/how-the-billionaires-broke-the-system/.
http://www.alternet.org/story/153844/how_big_money_bought_our_democracy,_corrupted_both_parties,_and_set_us_up_for_another_financial_crisis_?page=entire
or http://www.protestation.org/blog/how-big-money-bought-our-democracy-corrupted-both-parties-and-set-us-up-for-another-financial-crisis/.
[4]
URL: http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/02/income-inequality-in-america-chart-graph
and http://motherjones.com/mojo/2011/10/one-percent-income-inequality-OWS.
And if you also are interested in how the average American has to
work harder for just the same or a shrinking income (that means
with a growing benefit for others than you) also look at http://motherjones.com/politics/2011/06/speedup-americans-working-harder-charts.
Who do you think grabs the surplus the average American should
have made for working harder? “Washington”? Taxes had
diminished in the last 30 years. If you have guessed “mostly
the 1 %”, you definitely will be right.
