Tea Party

I was excited about the prospect of defending individual rights at the Boston tea party on April 15^th, 2009. At the same time, I reserved my energies due to the fact that mixed messages have been coming from tea party advocates. The only common thread seems to be a common enemy, liberalism and the liberal White House. In my opinion, this is not a solid foundation for what is actually a philosophical and moral battle. The name calling and party bashing have distracted us from the fact that both parties have unleashed relentless attacks on individual rights for over a century.  It is time to step back from current political thought and investigate where we went wrong.  The original tea party was based on more than just taxation without representation. It was based on the idea that no man has a claim on the life or property of other men.  This new and powerful idea brought about the beginnings of capitalism and prosperity to mankind.

Something went wrong.  Our prosperity is fleeting and we have been in and out of war since WWII.  The liberals have placed blame on the supposedly capitalistic White house. The conservatives placed blame on the socialist White House. In fact they both caused much of the pain we experience. Bailouts, wars to spread democracy, manipulation of the money supply, expansion of public education, protective tariffs and the expansion civil service were all widely supported by both conservatives and liberals.  All of these policies have been implemented at the expense of liberty and have led towards central planning.

Unfortunately for capitalism, conservatives have created the widespread misconception that they support freedom. As a consequence, supporters of capitalism and individual rights are often discredited as neo-cons, or extreme right wing religious nuts.  Capitalism has taken the blame for the irrational and rights violating policies of conservatives for over century; since the Sherman Anti-Trust act of 1890.  In fact, the conservative’s misrepresentation of capitalism has nearly obliterated its meaning.

In my view, the contradictory actions of the conservatives were based primarily on their support for the morality of altruism, which states that man’s highest moral purpose is sacrifice to other men. Altruism and capitalism are incompatible. Conservatives try to advocate for both, making capitalism look foolish. Capitalism can only exist when men are free to pursue their own interests, which is selfish by definition.

While republicans claim to support altruism, on-lookers see the support as superficial. The republican is called selfish for his support of free markets. Since republicans generally regard selfishness as a sin, they are hurt by the intended insult and back off. They proceed to stumble into the murky waters of appeasement to demonstrate their selflessness. Then proceed to sanction and support anti-trust legislation, the welfare state, bailouts, the military draft, wars to spread democracy, manipulation of the money supply, expansion of public education, protective tariffs and the expansion civil service.

Liberals and conservatives alike want freedom over compulsive service, but they are both afraid of free men because free men naturally act in their own interest.  Until we can see that it is morally ideal to act in our own interest, the contradictory desires for freedom and controls will continue to plague us and dictators will always have a justification for making us serve the nation, society or others in general.

If one supports altruism, one cannot logically and consistently defend capitalism, let alone set up an infrastructure of individual rights to protect citizens from criminals and con men. The defense of liberty has to be founded on the defense of an individual’s selfish right to pursue his own happiness.  There is no other way to put it.

The original tea party represented a radical idea, the idea that man was free to pursue his happiness without interference from other men. This idea has been widely accepted, but not truly understood. Guilt hangs over many shoulders that pursue their own happiness. They denounce their selfish desires publicly and privately.

Ayn Rand saw the tension between the ethics of altruism and political system of capitalism as an irreconcilable problem. The problem was solved by her revolutionary theory of ethics. Ayn Rand provided selfishness with a proper definition and seat in the ethical debate. The idea of selfishness as a virtue has vast implications for the nature of political debate. This argument is a silent and powerful mover in the Tea Party movement.

Socialists can no longer find refuge in the unanimous moral high ground of selflessness. While it was easy the counter arguments for capitalism by denouncing proponents as selfish, socialists have great difficulty countering the arguments favoring selfishness as a virtue. The debate has changed and capitalism no longer sinks every time it is proved to be selfish by nature. Capitalism swims because it protects man’s right to pursue his own happiness.

In order to complete the revolution and obtain greater freedom than has ever existed, man must be proud of his success, prosperity and happiness. It is my hope that the Tea Party of 2009 will help to finish the revolution by shrugging the chains of altruism and embracing a moral code of rational self interest.

Political Landscape Predicted by Mark Dohle in September 2011

If the tea party revolution is to have any significant impact, it must understand and consistently support of individual rights. The Tea Party free market radicals must clearly separate themselves from the good old boys. If unchecked, republicans will infiltrate and undermine the tea party.

The Tea Party may provide clarity to to the political spectrum. In my view, the battle is between the polar opposites of altruism and self interest, central planning and freedom, and socialism and capitalism. The Tea Party may unify behind the promotion of self interest, freedom and capitalism. The Tea Party may slowly gain seats and eventually take over the Republican Party name.

Moderate republicans and democrats may join forces to propagate the mixed economy. They may remain inconsistent and continue to blend altruism and self interest, central planning and freedom, and capitalism and socialism. This group may be called the Republican Party at first but will be pushed by the Tea Party and pulled by the progressives towards the Democratic Party.

Liberals and progressives may attempt to unify behind altruism, central planning and socialism.  However, the best they can do is influence the mixed economy promoted by the republicans/democrats.  This is because modern progressives are pragmatists and are proud to sacrifice principle to get results. The liberals and progressives may be called the Democratic Party.

The wild card is religion. Where do the god fearing Americans go? How much religious influence will they have?