On 2010-09-01, at 10:19 AM, SA wrote:
> On 9/1/2010 9:34 AM, Marv Gandall wrote:
>
>> If you have hard data showing that this right-wing radicalization is largely occuring outside of and in opposition to the Republican party, I will take the tea party mobilization more seriously.
>
>
> Why would it be more serious if it were happening outside of and in opposition to the Republican Party?
=============================
It would indicate there was a larger right-wing constituency and potential for growth outside of the Republican party than inside it. And a growing movement outside of and in opposition to the conservative Republican party which remains wedded to the bourgeois democratic system would indicate to me that fascism was a clear and present danger.
At this stage there's no such evidence, and the absence of a large right-wing constituency beyond the RP is undoubtedly what keeps many impatient tea partiers from bolting a party they view as being led by "Republicans In Name Only". The choice of "RINO's" to describe their leaders is further indication of their continuing allegiance to the Republican party and its traditional values.
Though they are at opposite ends politically, the frustrations of the tea partiers are a mirror image of those of many Democrats to the left of the Obama administration and the DP establishment. Like the tea partiers, if these latter had good reason to believe there was a larger constituency with views similar to their own outside of the DP than within it, we'd be seeing some movement in that direction, as we previously would have when the the Nader campaign presented itself as a presumptive liberal third party in 2000 and, rather more weakly, in 2004.
So long as the system is able to contain dissident factions within the liberal and conservative parties who alternate in administering it, it is unlikely to come under serious threat. Its stability seems to be shaken only by catastrophic economic collapse or war.