Get PJ Media on your Apple

PJM Lifestyle

6 Ways Activists Sabotage Their Cause

It takes more than rabble to change the world.

by
Walter Hudson

Bio

September 2, 2013 - 9:00 am

HolyGrail014

6) Guarding Fiefdoms

I began my activism within the Tea Party in 2009. I contributed to an effort to build a national publication of citizen journalists coordinated by Tea Party Patriots. My editor put me in touch with the then state coordinator of Tea Party Patriots, who we will call Mona.

Mona suggested we meet for dinner. I figured the meeting would be dense with information and planning, a detailed briefing regarding Tea Party groups in Minnesota, their level of organization, legislative priorities, issue advocacy, things of that nature.

What I got instead was two hours of griping about everything from the perceived encroachments of the Republican Party to the eccentricities of other activists throughout the state. Nothing resembling a plan was presented. My role as a journalist wasn’t even addressed. Instead, the machinations of Mona’s rivals within and outside the movement were related in conspiratorial detail.

Mona’s primary concern was protecting her position within the nascent movement, rather than effectively promoting its cause. Maintaining control over who used the name “Tea Party” and to what effect was her highest priority.

As a result, Mona actually worked against the formation of Tea Party groups in the state. When I found that no group existed in my area, I took it upon myself to start one. When Mona got wind of it, I received a call which was borderline threatening, warning me not to host Republican candidates or otherwise form associations with those she disapproved of. Had I the experience then that I have now, I’d have told her in no uncertain terms where she could stow her directives. She thought herself the big fish in a then small Tea Party pond, but was eventually humbled and forced to resign.

Unfortunately, the politics of personality remains a nagging hindrance to the movement in our state and beyond. People want to control the Tea Party brand, to take credit for achievements not their own, to prevent the success of any initiative which does not originate with them, and so on. Of course, none of that helps fulfill the movement mission of affecting public policy consistent with the principles of fiscal responsibility, constitutionally limited government, and free markets.

Comments are closed.

Top Rated Comments   
Progressives share much in common with social conservatives like opposition to gay marriage, anti drug legalization, antii control and opposition to abortion. That would surprise a lot of Progressives that I know. How about foreign policy? What fantasy world do you inhabit?
Libertarians agree with Progressives on social policies and foreign policies only differing on free markets.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
All Comments   (20)
All Comments   (20)
Sort: Newest Oldest Top Rated
Another way activists sabotage their cause is not replying to comments. They spam their own potential supporters with what to think and how to behave just like Dems and Reps and refuse to involve themselves in any sort of dialogue. Ahem.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Want to know why I couldn't be a Limousine Libera or progressivel? They found out my parents were married
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
A few people wonder why I am, and have always been an Independent. I'm a fiscal conservative and a social moderate. No party represents my views. Demonstrably both the Democrats and the main stream Republicans are fiscal liberals, they only differ on how they want to pork barrel spend the money they extort from the people in order to keep their special interest groups donating to their campaign funds.

My idea of social moderation is having the government stay out of people's private lives until absolutely necessary to prevent general social harm, or to remedy specific harm inflicted upon individuals. The government should assure the presence of opportunity, but not make any guarantee regarding outcome.

Life is risk. Some people manage their risks well, and other people induce unnecessary risk into their lives. The government can not successfully manage risks for individuals. It can only punitively punish individuals for success, or reward failure.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Your comments about Tea Partiers being cheapskates is interesting, but mostly an insider's view, I would guess. Most Tea Partiers are new to the political process and probably of more modest means, as you point out. In their defense, I would guess they bring their life experience to politics. In what other area of American life do you pay before something is done or there is concrete evidence of quality work and good faith? Politicians are not very good at keeping their word, you know....

Normal people don't get paid for promises. It seems only politicians do. And they seem to think it's their right and the only way to do things. I'd love to set something like that up for myself:

Mr. Hudson, give me 2 Grand and I'll fix your car in 9 months. I promise. If it only costs $200, I'll pocket the rest. It's mine. You gave it to me. ::12 months later:: Oh, I WILL get around to your car soon. I promise. You simply don't understand how busy I am and how complicated this job is. More money would certainly help the cause...

Perhaps, if politicians didn't get 'free money' to gain office, they wouldn't treat our tax dollars as 'free money' and piss it away on foolish things.

Changing the money angle might not be all that bad. Looks like the economy is doing that anyway.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
What is the point of any conservative supporting the current Republican party? Can you tell me, as a conservative, what I would have gained by supporting Bush (which I did by voting for him) rather than Gore or simply not voting? With Bush we got: No Child Left behind, food stamps for illegal, a Muslim state in Iraq and a failure in Afganistan.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
You got less damage than you would have gotten under Gore.

Yes, that's pathetic, but when you are in combat (we are), slowing down the enemy is valuable. Not as valuable as driving him back, sure, but given the choice between slowing him down and letting him go as fast as he wants to, I'll take slowing him down.

50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
Questions, didn't the Republican Party come out of such a split from other parties? Can you please tell me the fundamental, philosophical difference between then and now and why it won’t work again? And do not fudge, I will call Bull**** very quickly.
My question arises because we I have read a few articles that match you opinion and they seem to say that the ONLY course of action is to stay with the Republican Party, it is the only reasonable choice, it is the “Holy Grail” etc. I agree with much of what you wrote but have YOU ever considered that you could be wrong in any of it?
Consider what we have to deal with, an entrenched leadership that is happy to give in to the Democrats so that they would not have to use the “Nuclear” option, but is willing to bring the entire party down in a fight against its conservative base. Is the only option a long and possibly fruitless fight against them? Honestly, In the end, I would not even want to work with such people.
The Republican leadership has laid down the gauntlet, and told conservatives that they can sit down and shut up or go. They have the money and the high ground. It seems to me that an honest and fair evaluation would say that trying to win back control of the party would be an equally daunting task. Indeed, considering the lengths that they are willing to go to defeat the conservative base, it seems like a call to tilt at windmills.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Boy do you have this nailed. Especially the part about being cheapskates. I wasn't a big fan of Romney. But when he became our candidate I donated to his campaign. Not great big heaps of cash, small amounts, spaced for the duration. Because MONEY MAKES POLITICS SUCCESSFUL. Have a very dear friend who used to sit across from me at the kitchen table as I was donating on line and when I told her to donate (SHE HAS PILES OF MONEY) she just brushed it off. She shows up for the rallies (when she has nothing better to do) and then complains incessantly about Obama. I can't stand it. I wanted to reach across the table and punch her upside the head. Yeah. I wanted to get violent because I see these types of people all the time. The left raises money all over the place. Gives and gives because they know it makes the world go round, as the saying goes. But those on our side? Tight arsed to the point of exasperation. I give to the Tea Party groups, politicians, anyone who needs a chance to be heard. And it doesn't have to be tremendous. Five, ten, fifteen bucks. Anything! Perhaps the character that make us right wing includes the cheapskate strain of DNA. But I see it all the time and it is infuriating.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
The Libertarian Party strategy is to wreck the Republican Party as a viable opposition in the hope that they will be the inheritors of the opposition to the Democratic Party. This approach is flawed on many levels. Destroying the Republican Party will lead to complete domination of America's political infrastructure by Progressives. Progressives believe that republican institutions are street car to be taken to a destination at which point you get off. The final destination is the one party totalitarian state. Such a state doesn't need an opposition.

Another major flaw in Libertarian thinking is that they are somehow different than Progressives when in fact the differences are limited primarily to markets. Libertarianism is only attractive to a minority of the electorate. Why vote for what you already have, i.e, legalized drugs, an end to marriage, and a wide variety of sexual options but without the promise of free stuff that Progressive pony up?

In the modern political environment a separate Libertarian political party that can win elections is a mirage. Libertarians will do better to take over the Democratic Party. They have more in common with Progressives than conservatives.

51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Not surprisingly you have that completely bass akwards. Libertarians and Progressives have very little in common. In fact, Progressives share much in common with social conservatives, which isn't surprising when you consider their alliance at the turn of the last century. Both groups think that by passing the right laws people can be made "good." The only difference lies in how they define good.

Libertarian ideas are broadly attractive, most polls put the support for ending government influence in the markets and private affairs at around 60%. That level of support, however, drops dramatically when the word "libertarian" is attached, which indicates that the words itself has strong negative connotations. Given the kinds of people attracted to the Libertarian Party banner, that isn't terribly surprising.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Progressives share much in common with social conservatives like opposition to gay marriage, anti drug legalization, antii control and opposition to abortion. That would surprise a lot of Progressives that I know. How about foreign policy? What fantasy world do you inhabit?
Libertarians agree with Progressives on social policies and foreign policies only differing on free markets.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
What (I presume) Mr. Gauch means is that the Social Conservatives share with the Progressives the notion that there is a Right Way To Live and that it is in large part The Government's job to get people to do this in some fashion ranging from propaganda to violence.

The only difference between Nancy Pelosi and Newt Gingrinch, besides about 60 IQ points, is *which* things they want the government to force us to do.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
And Libertarians don't believe in "right way to live" Social Conservatives do believe there is a right way to live and believe for the most part that social coercion and not law is the way to enforce values. Denying homosexuals the right to marry is not the same thing as banning homosexual relationships. Opposing abortion is about sanctity of life which is a matter of law. Libertarians are the modern equivalent of the Russian Social Revolutions who helped Bolsheviks to power and through their support of Progressive social values are undermining American civil society. Libertarians are market oriented radical syndicalists who would undermine civil society as much as any Progressive would.
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Do you honestly think humanity will naturally not do right ways to live without law and order? I've done extensive research into the horrors of the French Revolution, and it truly did not matter whether you were with the left or against them during that time, you got killed and butchered anyways, as Commander Grignon put it when razing Vendee when ordering his troops to shoot anyone on sight. Worse still, its unlikely he even got any orders for that order during the massacre from Robespierre (and let me make clear that he was guilty for a lot of the horrors already). It was virtually pure anarchy, and the result of deposing Louis of France, yet was also the very predecessor to Marxism.

It's better to trust a Social Conservative than to trust a Progressive. Remember, Jesus himself explicitly told us to "spread the good news throughout the four corners of the world" (ie, conquer the world and ensure Christ's dominance over it.).
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
""spread the good news throughout the four corners of the world" (ie, conquer the world and ensure Christ's dominance over it.). "

Well, since that phrase doesn't appear in any decent translation, it's not surprising that your "in other words" is completely contradictory to what Christ actually did say.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
Okay, correction, it was in Book of Matthew, specifically Chapter 28, Verses 18-20.

"And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you; and behold, I am with you always, to the close of the age." And the bible used was the Ignatius Holy Bible Revised Standard Version: Second Catholic Edition. Even though the King James Bible is somewhat poor in translation, it effectively said the same thing there as well. And BTW, considering he was effectively telling them to have them submit to his will (the good news being the resurrection) instead of letting them have bygones be bygones at the expense of himself and his father, yes, that does in fact mean conquering them. Maybe it didn't involve weaponry, but its still conquering them.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
Exactly what else could "spread the good news throughout the four corners of the world" (which IS included in the Gospel of Luke, BTW) mean if not a demand to conquer the world to Christian teachings? If he didn't want us to conquer the world, he shouldn't have told us to spread the good news. Actually he would have told us the exact opposite, to keep our mouths shut about Jesus's sacrifice and just let bygones be bygones without imposing His will on people, since even mentioning it is automatically imposing His will on them. I know that's the case because that's EXACTLY what people have been saying about us. And I'll prove the phrase exists in the Bible as soon as I get home.
50 weeks ago
50 weeks ago Link To Comment
that's anti gun control
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
Gee! It sounds like an analysis of the factions in the Arab Spring! People! There's just so much human nature in 'em, it's down right discouraging!
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
What?! You don't say? You mean we can't ride herd on cats?

The situation isn't hopeless but to wrest control of the machine requires singular focus and dedication from a large group of "professional amateurs".

Where can we find such people?
51 weeks ago
51 weeks ago Link To Comment
View All