Anyone actively involved in the Tea Party movement today believes that government is the foremost biggest problem when it comes to America’s vast decline in wealth, prestige, and the perpetuation of its own values. Not only would all, yes all, actively involved members believe that government was the singular biggest problem; many would also agree the subsequent problems are far behind. Whether this is Wall Street, Islamofascism, or the Occupy Movement.
There are 537 members of the federal government; 1 President, 1 Vice-President, 100 Senators and 435 members of the House of Representatives. The population of the United States is well over 300 million. A rather pitiful consideration when one thinks of the huge amount of power vested in such the small population of politicians.
Of course, of the 300 million many sympathize with the 537. Somehow, they convince themselves that if only this handful of politicians were given enough power, whatever agenda they wish to push on others will be realized. Despite the naivety, this portion of the 300 million are mostly apathetic to present day events and content with simple validation; expelling only enough time to check a few boxes every few years in the voting booth.
Equally as evident, of the 300 million many are skeptical of the 537. Although these members of society are mostly part of the solution, many are also apathetic to present day events and content with simple validation; expelling only enough time to check a few boxes every few years in the voting booth.
Then, there are the rest of us.
We are the forces that recognize there is in fact a problem. We comprise the members of the Tea Party and the Occupy Movement.
Admittedly, there are fewer members of the Occupy Movement that believe the source of America’s problems rest mainly with the government. Yet their simple recognition of a problem and the desire to go out and do something about it make the movement a valuable resource.
A resource for
whom - this is the only question.
For this reason, so many of the 537 tried to stake claim to the Occupy Movement. As cited by ABC News, Nancy Pelosi stated "I support the message to the establishment,“ no doubt in an attempt to endear herself to the Occupy Movement.
The same article cites President Obama stating that, "The protesters are giving voice to a more broad-based frustration about how our financial system works." One can add to this list Elizabeth Warren, Joe Biden, Charlie Rangel, Kirsten Gillibrand and others, all in an attempt to usurp the Movement’s momentum and eventual votes. Such attempts were also made by the Republican establishment, most notably by the “Tea Party Express,†an opportunistic attempt which will either fail on its own or fail by killing its host, the genuine Tea Party.
Overtime though, sentiment has shifted for the Occupy Movement. One occupy protester took a shot at the White House. Prominent members of the Occupy Movement have noted they are not in the pocket of the Democratic Party, as is often the sentiment of the Tea Party Movement in relation to the Republican Party. In a Huffington Post Article, Marsha Spencer, an Occupy volunteer in New York and Tim Franzen, a spokesman for Occupy Atlanta, both show little regard for both parties. Franzen was quoted as saying, "The Occupy movement is rooted in the idea that the political system is broken to such a degree that we can no longer work through the Republican or Democratic parties."
It is hard to imagine that those of the 537 do not understand the threat the two movements are to their monopoly on power. Yet, of course, it is impossible to know what is in the hearts and minds of people, or what actions they may consider to maintain their power. Nevertheless, there is no question that when a threat exists to what one wants, it is better if those threats oppose each other than oneself.
Sun Tzu, author of The Art of War states, “By discovering the enemy's dispositions and remaining invisible ourselves, we can keep our forces concentrated, while the enemy's must be divided.†Dividing opposition and then giving cause for the two sides to oppose each other than to work cooperatively whenever possible is an age old tactic that works.
Are most of the members of the Occupy Movement young? Yes.
Are most of the members of the Occupy Movement naive? Yes.
Have they acted young and naïve? Yes.
Yet they see a problem and the care enough to do something about it, albeit at times in a childish and sometimes criminal fashion. Although the two movements may never see eye to eye, it would behoove both sides to focus on the real problem. Not doing so only empowers the real contributors to our society’s decline, a convenient distraction for those who need it most.
Â
Join my RSS feed by clicking here:
recommend
Facebook
Twitter
bookmark 
print
Comments: 19
And I think this is one of the things that we think because I know I have thought it. When we discuss big government we think of this power vested in these politicians, as you mentioned, however, we find out that it is not as much in their power as we might think. In his book, Alienated Nation, Dr. Brooks Agnew describes what he calls the shadow government.
He's actually a scientist, but he got involved writing this book because he was often in Washington to get funding for scientific projects and found himself in many meetings with Congressmen and Senators. The shadow government that he speaks of he defines as “a loose coalition of bureaucracies that operate like independent businesses†that actually compete with each other and each write hundreds of regulations a month. The regulations they write all have the force of law but we have no representation in the taxation, fees and other regulations they set, including military ones. He says that even Congress “is treated like pimps by these people.â€
He said he's been thrown right out of meetings along with these politicians because the agencies have a very big say in what gets done and what doesn't, though we don't hear about what goes on behind the scenes in meetings like this.
He says it probably started around the time of FDR's election in 1932. It established a series of agencies that didn’t go away when the needs changed, but they changed their names and grew. And this is your big government. Of course, we have millions employed this way too, but they don't have jobs that produce anything, only jobs that spend money with our taxes as well as providing them a paycheck. And now I'll leave it to Larry, one of the people who recommended this post, to take it away and tell us how this system needs to be changed. :)
This show was aired on June 13th, on Coast to Coast and you can hear him speak here.
Sue and I see "eye-to-eye" on issues of the Micro, but I've the feeling she would part ways with me here, as might you:
"Although the two movements may never see eye to eye, it would behoove both sides to focus on the real problem." - Niewicki
The concept of "the enemy of the enemy is my friend" is a useful one, certainly. However, I don't think it far-fetched to realise that one and the other are diametrically-opposed, and not one-in-the-same. "Coming together" is laughable, because their goals are diametrically-opposed.
"Occupy" loathes Capitalism and the producers in this Country; they cannot, even potentially, be congruent with the Tea Party.
Say it as much as many will, and I will continue to disagree...there is a vast difference in the Value Systems of not only these two groups...but in the two Parties. Whether they exemplify those Values when in Power is the question.
Therefore, it is up to the Electorate, unfortunately, to make changes where those changes are needed...and, as you've said, we are a woefully-ignorant rabble.
Part of Alienated Nation talks about the government's influence on corporations, how they can be made or broken by the government. As John points out, what is left of the OWSM now is comprised mostly of young people who often have very strong ideals, and the nature of ideals is that they suppress realism so they tend to look at a single bad cause which is the force to be eliminated that will effect an idealistic result, in this case, capitalism is the force to be eliminated to result in the end of oppression. That's, of course, not as simple as it appears as long as government has so much power over corporations.
The TEAPM is another movement that is now mostly concerned with the end of big government, that which they see as oppression, and their solution is to elect officials that will act in their interests to do that. However, as I just pointed out in the initial comment, one of the problems is that those elected officials don't have as much authority as we think they do to actually reduce the size of goverment and even if they did, it's questionable that most of them really want to do that. Although they go unheard by the shadow government, there is much done for them through these agencies administratively that would cause them to have to think of resourceful ways to get the same things done without them, and would increase their workload enough that they might actually earn their paychecks so that trade-off of not being heard has its perks for them too. But then we get back to how both movements have been so infiltrated with people who want to oppress and do not want to work in the interests of the populace for either group that if they don't come to realize this reality, nothing will change and the oppression will continue for everyone. What form that oppression takes is not much different from choosing your poison.
It's not to be forgotten that both groups have radical elements from the general populace too, but focusing on them is not an accurate analysis of the general population of either group's mission when they started out.
Sue - I have not read the book but I will buy it. Although I know quite a bit about the claims of a shadow government and it is true, to a degree. It is simply a mystical denotation of something that should be fairly obvious: We vest a huge amount of power in the 537 but they know the cannot use that power to the degree they wish to use it, so by extension they create departments and agencies in which they invest power (for some altruistic reason the naive believe) and they do their bidding. But the monster has a head that can be cut off (figuratively speaking of course), and that head is the 537.
People who claim a "shadow government" are implying it is the opposite, the agencies and committees are the head of the beast and the 537 are the rest. I don't buy it, but if it is true then no civil act will change our trajectory. The only solution in this case would be revolution/war because one cannot vote out commissions and bodies of this sort, and their numbers are huge. I am not convinced the 537 are not the ones in control, and I do believe there is still a political solution to the problem . . . for now.
Either way, I do agree as well the FDR really screwed up this country and I know for sure the huge bureaucracies of today were spawn by his presidency.
The Tea Party and Occupy Movements have come together in opposition to some policies. I support them completely and we are not diametrically-opposed, at least not yet. We came together in opposition to the NDAA and it was an awesome feeling. We need more of this, not less.
This is more than just the concept of "the enemy of the enemy is my friend," it is understanding that we are all Americans and we all believe in freedom. They are just wrong in their approach, but I can say the same thing about people in the Tea Party that see some value in getting establishment Republicans like Romney elected. I do not believe the Tea Party (as a movement, not in regard to individual actions) should be involved with any particular candidates at all. We must stand on principle and never compromise.
Ron Paul has declared getting rid of four of these agencies - so my question would be this... Is the President the only one who can achieve this goal? Am sure that is a very naive question... not sure only one person can do much of anything.
Dr. Paul has been in office for long enough to understand where the biggest problems lie, and spelled them out. I do feel also, he has other tricks up his sleeve if he were elected President! Now I understand exactly why that won't happen, regardless of what we do and how much we fight.
Yep, pick our poison and then just move along and wait for the same outcome.
Regarding your comment: I was thinking some of the same things, Mark-John. The 2 parties are opposites, as are the OWS folks and the TEA party. These groups may be dissatisfied, but one hates capitalism and one hates big government
I believe for the most part you are correct. But people, particularly young people, are not immune to the effect of reason. My tea party joined the Occupy movement in our city to protest the NDAA. I spoke to one young man and just said, "you can't seriously think that giving the government the power to force people to buy the products of a private company is a good precedent to set, do you?"
He thought for a second, raised an eyebrow, and said "no". They are just wrong, but they are not stupid and they are not the problem, which I believe you would agree!
Loquacious and Sue, what are your thoughts to what I said in this regard?
So you have the European Union style of government, unelected bureaucracies dominating elected assemblies operating there as well? The New World Order is on the way.
Somehow we have to wake people up to the fact that we are heading towards a totalitarian global government. When such a "scientific dictarorship" as it was dubbed when first talked about a hundred years ago, the biggest obstacle in the perception of its advocates was the U S Constitution.
Now it seems to be the world domination ambitions of Russia and China as western leaders fall into line like rats behind a pied piper.
See my comment on Jun 27, 2012, 6:43am EDT.
Take care,
John