Origins of the Tea Party Movement

On the website Political Chili there is a long series of articles entitled "Origins of the Tea Party Movement" by James Scaminaci III.

At the top is stated "Ron Paul: Your Revolution has officially ended" and "We now present 13 articles on why Ron Paul is a fraud."

I am not a Ron Paul supporter or detractor; I'm on the fence about him.

I think it's important to know as much about him as possible since it seems clear he will be running for President in 2012.

Additionally, reading a series of articles like this provides information about what is possibly going on with the Tea Party.

The following is my outline of what Scaminaci states in the Introduction to the series, where he maps out his rationale for stating that Ron Paul is a fraud.


Introduction

Two Tea Parties

One – David Koch
Two – Ron Paul/most dangerous

It Was Never About Wall Street

Koch’s Outside Game – blogosphere

Koch’s Inside Game – Sen Jim DeMint

The Ron Paul Network

Lew Rockwell, head of the Ludwig von Mises Institute and a leading neo-Confederate organization

Howard Phillips, a Christian Reconstructionist and head of the theocratic Constitution Party

John McManus, president of the John Birch Society

Thomas E. Woods, a former member of the racist League of the South

Paul’s Network Components

Neo-Confederate libertarianism (re-establish a Confederacy as a Bible-based republic)

Racist defense of states’ rights in order to usurp federal civil rights initiatives

Paul’s Neo-Confederate Connection

Ron Paul’s newsletters

Link to white nationalist organizations?

Texas Straight Talk writings

Paul’s White Nationalist Agenda

Ron Paul supports secession.

Has voted against all civil rights legislation using the 10th amendment.

Has proposed court stripping legislation so federal courts can’t hear cases of the Establishment Clause of the 1st Amendment, gay rights, and reproductive rights.

Paul’s Christian Nationalist Agenda

Campaign for Liberty = pushing through stealth a white Christian nationalist agenda

Libertarian economic philosophy is fused with Christian Reconstructionist theology.

White Nationalists Show Ron Paul the Love

He gets money from white nationalist organizations.

He has supported neo-Nazis.

Paul’s Own Tea Party Emerges

Informal advisor Gary North = use Tea Party to delegitimize the existing political system.

Paul’s “Revolution” Mobilized & Ready to Go

White nationalist groups such as Stormfront and neo-Nazis went to Tea Party protests to recruit for Campaign for Liberty.

Paul & the Tea Party: The Centrality of Race

Libertarian economic philosophy was born racist in the 30s in opposition to the New Deal.


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Is any of the above true?

reply to post by Mary Rose


libertarian economic philosophy is just another word for classical-liberal economic philosophy which is like 400 years old. the new deal was in opposition and a major change to america's already existing libertarian econoimc philosophy, look up "the switch in time that saved nine." also, it has nothing at all to do with racism. fun fact, some of the first anti-slavery peeps inamerica were classical-liberal economic thinkers who were against slavery because it was the taking of labor by force, that strand of abolitionist teamed up with the religious abolitionists to create the republican party capitalist/religion coalition that we still largely see today. and the new deal wasn't about race so even if everything i've said above is wrong (its not wrong, but if in a alternative universe it was) opposition to it wouldn't be racist.

reply to post by snusfanatic


Thanks for your input.

I've just gone to the article "Paul & the Tea Party: The Centrality of Race" and I see the heading "Twentieth Century Libertarianism—Born Racist."

It doesn't say "libertarian economic philosophy" it only says "libertarianism," preceded by "twentieth century."

Here is the full text of what Scaminaci said in his Introduction that I summarized in my notes as "Libertarian economic philosphy was born racist in the 30s in opposition to the New Deal." (Part IV - I corresponds to "Paul & the Tea Party: The Centrality of Race"):

Part IV-I examines the question of how central is the issue of race to Ron Paul’s organization specifically and the Tea Party movement in general. This section brings into greater focus the ideology and organizations of the neo-Confederate movement, its strong influence on conservative thought, and how conservatives have dealt with the issue of race since the 1950s. Based on the historical evidence and recent evidence, race is central to the Christian nationalist movement, Ron Paul’s organization, and the Tea Party movement.

This part asks and answers five questions:

Is it true, as Sara Robinson asserts, that the conservative movement has largely gotten over the issue of race?

No, it has never gotten past its racism and race-baiting.

Is it true, as Sara Robinson asserts, that the Tea Party movement is driving the political center-right of conservatives toward the ultra-right?

Yes, but only if the real driver is identified as Ron Paul’s Campaign for Liberty and his network of white nationalists.

To what degree has Ron Paul adopted the Southern Strategy of abandoning the N-word racism and adopting the abstract and race-neutral code words and public policies that still amount to a defense of states’ rights and a defense of white supremacy or white nationalism?

Completely.

To what degree is libertarian economic philosophy inherently racist?

It was born racist in the 1930s in opposition to President Roosevelt’s New Deal and has only changed its vocabulary and sheets for pinstripe suits.

And, finally, is this inherent racism the reason why libertarian writers such as but not limited to David Weigel and Glenn Greenwald still blandly refer to Ron Paul as a “libertarian” and a champion of “individual liberty” but prefer not to discuss his support for a white Christian nationalist agenda?

I do not honestly know. I have made clear his agenda. There are no “smears or distortions.” If they continue to defend Ron Paul and do not confront the inherent racism in the movement’s libertarian economic philosophy, well, I guess they agree with it.

Hmmmmm.

I've got some homework to do.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
Koch’s Inside Game – Sen Jim DeMint

This quote is disturbing:

DeMint is a member of The Family, a heretofore secret Christian nationalist group of political elites “that embraces elitism, disdains democracy, and pursues power for its members…to ‘advance the Kingdom’….Family leaders consider their political network to be Christ’s avant garde, an elite that transcends not just conventional morality but also earthly laws regulating lobbying,” according to Jeff Sharlet, author of The Family—The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power.[8]

Originally posted by Mary Rose
The Ron Paul Network

This is interesting:

. . . from the Constitution Party’s preamble: “‘This great nation was founded, not by religionists, but by Christians; not on religions but on the Gospel of Jesus Christ. For this very reason peoples of other faiths have been and are afforded asylum, prosperity, and freedom of worship here. The goal of the Constitution Party is to restore American jurisprudence to its Biblical foundations and to limit the federal government to its Constitutional boundaries’”

Hmmmm.

reply to post by Mary Rose


In the same article Scaminaci uses the term "mythical North American Union."

I wouldn't call it "mythical." It's what the globalists are working toward, and I understand there is already some integration in government bureaucracy, although I can't remember the specifics.

reply to post by Mary Rose


This post is disinfo. Ron Paul did not start the tea party. In fact, he had nothing to do with it.It was the result of on camera contents from Rick Santelli on the trading floor broadcast live on CNBC nearly two years ago. Nice try.
There is no leader. It's a grass roots movement. Net net......If you ain't a part of it, don't pretend to be an expert, because you don't understand it in the first place.

reply to post by astrogolf


Who are you talking to?

The author of this article mentions Rick Santelli, although his name doesn't show in my outline in the OP, which is just of the Intro to a 13-part article.

Santelli is in the part entitled "Koch's Outside Game":

The simplest explanation for the start of the Tea Party movement in mid-February 2009 is that when Rick Santelli complained about paying for “losers” mortgages and suggested a Tea Party in Chicago in July, Eric Odom, Top Conservatives on Twitter, Smart Girl Politics, and the American Spectator, exhibited entrepreneurial zeal in promoting Tea Party protests in 40 cities around the country. After a few days Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks entered the picture to provide assistance to engaged, mobilized conservatives deeply unhappy with the Obama administration.

That simple explanation is not fully accurate. It does not account for David Koch, chairman of the board of Americans for Prosperity, taking credit for having created the movement. It does not account for the resources and hardwork that Americans for Prosperity and the Sam Adams Alliance expended in 2008 and the force multiplier they achieved through their efforts. The actions taken and the effects achieved come directly from the Sam Adams Alliance. It does not account for Senator Jim DeMint in March 2008 calling for an aggressive grassroots movement to make Republicans in Congress listen to ordinary conservatives and make the party work for greater fiscal and social conservatism. And, it does not account for DeMint playing a crucial leading role at every strategic juncture at which he legitimized the Tea Party movement and criticized the Republican Party. Simply put, David Koch was playing a classic inside-outside game that is not accounted for by the simple explanation.

The Tea Party movement that emerged right after Santelli’s well-timed outburst . . .

Originally posted by Mary Rose
On the website Political Chili there is a long series of articles entitled "Origins of the Tea Party Movement" by James Scaminaci III.

I learned about this author by watching this interview of him by Max Keiser, in the 2nd half of the video:

Originally posted by Mary Rose
Paul’s Network Components

I've now gotten to the above part, which states:

This section is not intended to be exhaustive or comprehensive. The highlights presented here are drawn from scholarly studies and reporting on the movement by the Southern Poverty Law Center.

I've heard Alex Jones talk about the Southern Poverty Law Center.

I searched the term on Jones' site to refresh my memory. Here are some of the titles that came up:

"Southern Poverty Law Center Publishes Patriot Hit List"

"The Southern Poverty Law Center Lumps in WeAreChange with “Hate"

"Bill O’Reilly Teams Up with the SPLC to Demonize Oath Keepers"

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I don't think the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is a good source.

Originally posted by Mary Rose
On the website Political Chili there is a long series of articles entitled "Origins of the Tea Party Movement" by James Scaminaci III.

In one of the articles Scaminaci mentions that he is a professional sociologist and former intelligence analyst. I don't know what "professional sociologist" means. College professor?

The Political Chili website doesn't have a bio for him.

reply to post by astrogolf


To lump all tea partiers in as Ron Paul backers is nonsense. And I admire Ron Paul because he understands the constitution and is one of the only honest men in congress. But.....Ron Paul wasn't responsible for the legions that joined the fight. The mainstream media, who doesn't, and never will, understand what ordinary folks are pissed about, would like to portray Ron Paul followers as folks who live in the hills, own a still and are would be terrorists. This is a crock, by the way. Step two is to lump all tea partiers into that category,
Think of it like this. A guy unknowingly marries a serial adultress (ho). Day after day he comes home and finds used condoms and another mans socks in his bed. First, the wife says "that's crazy, your imagining the whole thing."
After a period of time, the husband doesn't buy it. The story then changes to "Your still crazy, and if I did it would be all your fault."
Next the dude lawyers up and files for divorce (kind of like we did November 2). The wife responds by claiming the husband is trying to murder her and the children and burn the house down. Also, that he's a drug addict, steals money from black people, and is president of the local Klan chapter.
So there you go.

Originally posted by Mary Rose

Originally posted by Mary Rose
Koch’s Inside Game – Sen Jim DeMint

This quote is disturbing:

DeMint is a member of The Family, a heretofore secret Christian nationalist group of political elites “that embraces elitism, disdains democracy, and pursues power for its members…to ‘advance the Kingdom’….Family leaders consider their political network to be Christ’s avant garde, an elite that transcends not just conventional morality but also earthly laws regulating lobbying,” according to Jeff Sharlet, author of The Family—The Secret Fundamentalism at the Heart of American Power.[8]

If you want to see the future of America; this article is more prophetic than you can ever imagine.
"The Family" has incredible power over the mechanizations in the Capital.
pjmiller.wordpress.com...

S&F

Originally posted by astrogolf
To lump all tea partiers in as Ron Paul backers is nonsense.

The author lists two Tea Parties - one associated with David Koch, and the other, Ron Paul.

He mentions that the Koch one was activated in mid-February 2009, and the Ron Paul one, which he describes as originating with Ron Paul's network, in April 2009.

Originally posted by astrogolf
The mainstream media, who doesn't, and never will, understand what ordinary folks are pissed about, would like to portray Ron Paul followers . . .

I ignore the mainstream media portrayals.

~~~~~~~~~

Focusing just on Ron Paul and not the Tea Party for a moment, is Ron Paul a 33rd degree mason, and, if he is, does it matter?

Originally posted by Mary Rose
I don't think the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) is a good source.

Does anyone have personal knowledge of the SPLC?

I've been looking at their website, and I get a good vibration from what I've seen so far.

It's hard to make sense of things sometimes, I think.

Here is their Board of Directors.

Here is their Senior Program Staff.

Look like nice people to me!

People like this demonized Oath Keepers? Equated WeAreChange with hate? Published a patriot hit list?