When I look for ideology in the TP, I see two variants: no-Gov, or no-Gov on the non-defense side. The more erudite among them I suspect are more principled about scaling down the national security state and associated foreign adventures. This does not lead intellectually or logically to any sort of organic/corporatist state thingy. I would argue that psychologically, it can. Insofar as the whole thing is driven by fear, misery, hatred, and alienation, it is ripe for a demagogue who proposes to direct a new sort of state. Note that at the recent CPAC conference, you had the non-intuitive result of Ron Paul winning their straw poll, and Dick Cheney being received enthusiastically by the gathering.
Of course rightys have always been with us, sometimes with greater manifest strength. To me the TP reflects a new mobilization, where people are willing to sacrifice personal time and resources to come to meetings, demonstrations, and to raise a ruckus at public meetings. We are well short of uniformed squadristi in the streets, but some mobilization on the left will inspire reactions on the right.
Rhetorically the movement is prone to say anything. Listen to Glenn Beck and it would appear that the implementation of national health insurance would justify armed uprising. What seems most worth watching is the extent and intensity of their actual organization (beyond just leaving their houses for demos, etc). Given circumstances of even mild progressive revival that we would welcome, these folks could be apt to do anything.
On Mon, Feb 22, 2010 at 8:45 AM, Ted Winslow <egwinslow at rogers.com> wrote:
> Carrol Cox wrote:
>
>> The DP leadership has cetain fundamental loyalties, and they serve those
>> loyalties with intelligence (savvy) and courage. Obama's statement that
>> he is willing to be a one-term president was seirous: he will maintain a
>> principled course regardless of consequences. The principles are those
>> of our enemy, but don't confuse serving those principles loyally with
>> being afraid to support "our" princpels.
>
> So it's true then that Obama is the Antichrist.
>
> Ted
>
>
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>