• Fiscal Responsibility.
  • Constitutionally Limited Government,
  • Free Markets.

  • Beyond that, you're on your own!

    To what extent is it reasonable to judge a group of people by the actions of an individual member of that group? I don't think it's reasonable at all, but a lot of people -- especially activists -- seem to do it. And of course when it happens the activists on the other side have to retaliate in kind. I often think that most of the screaming which we call "politics" simply consists of activists on one side playing gotcha games with activists on the other side. It gets very tedious. But to them, it must be very exciting, so maybe I should try harder to be patient and tolerant of the screaming.

    A perfect example is an article in the Dayton Daily News about a supposed "Tea Party candidate" for an uncontested low level office who was caught Twittering a racially offensive statement:

    SPRINGBORO -- Racist comments, including a slur about Hispanics, posted on the Twitter page of the Springboro Tea Party were particularly hurtful to Alana Turner.

    "Illegals everywhere today! So many spics makes me feel like a speck. Grrr. Wheres my gun!?" said the March 21 posting on the site managed by the group's founder, Sonny Thomas.

    Turner said the comments upset her because she and Thomas have a 6-year-old son who is part Hispanic.

    "Basically, it's like he's saying he hates his son," Turner said.

    The Twitter posting triggered cancellations by several local and statewide candidates and elected officials scheduled to speak at a Springboro Tea Party rally scheduled for Saturday, April 17, at North Park. However, some officials say this doesn't tarnish the Tea Party movement as a whole.

    "I don't think it says anything about the movement per se," state Sen. Shannon Jones, R-Clearcreek Twp., said on the same day Tea Party officials from around the country formed a federation to counteract perceptions that the groups are racist, unsophisticated and disorganized. Jones was the first elected official to withdraw from the event.

    It goes without saying that a guy who puts out stuff like that on the Internet is a liability, but I had never heard of him or the Swingboro Tea Party before the above story went viral.

    While anyone can join or show up at these things, I have to say that the Swingboro Tea Party web site does not look especially representative of the Tea Party Movement. They heavily promote Alex Jones-style conspiracy theories, while Sonny Thomas (the guy who made the Twitter remark) is a big Birth Certificate Truther, and has a lot of ideas on other subjects (such as "freeing Scotland" and keeping the gay lifestyle "in the closet") which would be considered unconventional by many. As to whether he made the inflammatory Twitter statement, I don't know. I didn't see it on his Twitter account (although I got a chuckle out of the Bilderberger stuff), and while the leftie Think Progess says "the offensive tweet has been removed" but they have claim is a screenshot.) So assume he said it. If I lived in his area, I would not vote for him for whatever Republican local office he is running for. But to judge the Tea Party because of what this one man Twittered is simply absurd.

    Clearly, the man was drawn to the Tea Party Movement, as are a lot of people. But do their individual opinions become part and parcel of what the Tea Party movement stands for?

    I don't see how. It's like, for seven years I have been carrying on in this blog about countless topics. Does that mean that if I were to become a mover and a shaker in the Tea Party movement, that my more controversial ideas should be imputed to them?

    Why?

    From what I have seen of the Tea Partiers, I think that's the antithesis of what the movement is about. At the Lansing Tea Party over the weekend, I got into several discussions with people who didn't completely agree with me (nor I with them), but we could agree that the federal government is not the place to sort these things out.

    Correct me if I am wrong, but the Tea Party movement as I have known it is a coalition standing for three principles:

  • Fiscal Responsibility
  • Constitutionally Limited Government
  • Free Markets
  • There's no immigrant policy, no abortion policy, no gay policy (no word on gay marriage, and not even a position on Don't Ask Don't Tell), no education policy, no drug war policy, no foreign policy, no position on Obama's birth certificate, and nothing about the proper role of religion, how many gods there are or aren't, or which books or carved stones ought to dictate truth to us. Plus, the movement does not seem to have issued any statements in favor of banning pit bulls! (For that Coco and I thank whatever gods may be looking down on us with favor!)

    Nor should there be any Tea Party position on these things. But I guarantee that if you went around and asked individual Tea Partiers, you would get thousands of positions on all of the above issues. I am also quite confident, though, that the huge majority of them would also say that these were their own views and not those of the Tea Party movement.

    I realize that none of this will stop the activists from saying that the Tea Partiers want to use the S-word against Hispanics. Before shooting them, of course.

    This sort of argument is all so familiar as to be tired.


    Once again
    , the people who do these things are the ones who do them:

    By any standard, the conduct displayed by the bigoted gay demonstrators is outrageous, inexcusable, and indefensible. However, speaking as an individualist, I don't think it any more reflects on gays as a whole than it would reflect on blacks as a whole if some angry black demonstrators hurled epithets at gays or Jews. The people who do these things are the ones who do them. That they are in a crowd of demonstrators might reflect poorly on the other demonstrators, but the problem with extrapolating from angry demonstrators to the group they claim to "represent" is that they are rarely more than a small percentage of that population. So, if a half a dozen gay bigots use the N-word at a demonstration, it no more reflects on all gays than something shouted from a crowd at a McCain rally would reflect on all Republicans.
    This is not to say that Tea Partiers -- even at the individual level -- have displayed conduct anything like those angry gay demonstrators, but even if a small number did, it would be completely unfair to judge the group as a whole by the actions of a few.

    So this post is a retread of similar rants I have had in this blog over the years, and I almost feel that by forcing myself to address it, I am descending to the activist level. And while being an activist is something I abhor, OTOH, I support the central message of the Tea Parties, and while I'm not much of a sign waver (and I'm certainly not running for office), I do have this blog. Speaking up is the least I can do.

    Especially when I have to say what I don't think I should have to say.

    posted by Eric on 04.13.10 at 10:46 AM





    TrackBack

    TrackBack URL for this entry:
    http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/9577






    Comments

    Post a comment

    You may use basic HTML for formatting.





    Remember Me?

    (you may use HTML tags for style)


    April 2010
    Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1 2 3
    4 5 6 7 8 9 10
    11 12 13 14 15 16 17
    18 19 20 21 22 23 24
    25 26 27 28 29 30  

    ANCIENT (AND MODERN)
    WORLD-WIDE CALENDAR


    Search the Site


    E-mail



    Classics To Go

    Classical Values PDA Link



    Archives



    Recent Entries



    Links



    Site Credits