The election day flap in Bucks County, where a Tea Party candidate endorsement handout was banned by a local judge because it didn't conform to the state law on disclosures, brought negative attention to the movement itself. The problem wasn't really the details of the literature - it was easily cleaned up, and used. The bad taste came from the TP's response to the decision: attack the well-accepted law rather than admit their mistake. Their apparent philosophy: laws don't apply if you don't like them. Surely not what our Founding Fathers had in mind.
At well-publicized demonstrations around the country, the ultra-conservative Tea Party movement unfurls the patriotic "Don't Tread on Me" Gadsden Flag, which has long symbolized disagreement with authority. They lament big government, high taxes, and regulated markets.
It's hard to argue with those minimalist goals, but Libertarians have been promoting basically the same platform for years, without the patriotic gingerbread. And without much success at the polls. So what exactly is the philosophy behind the TP plan? History is replete with examples of people who espoused seemingly beneficial ideas, but with dangerous hidden consequences.
From the website of the Tea Party Patriots, which bills itself as the "Official Grassroots American Movement", comes this explanation of its philosophy:
"Tea Party Patriots, Inc. is a non-partisan grassroots organization of individuals united by our core values derived from the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution of the United States of America, the Bill Of Rights as explained in the Federalist Papers. We recognize and support the strength of grassroots organization powered by activism and civic responsibility at a local level. We hold that the United States is a republic conceived by its architects as a nation whose people were granted 'unalienable rights' by our Creator. Chiefly among these are the rights to 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.' The Tea Party Patriots stand with our founders, as heirs to the republic, to claim our rights and duties which preserve their legacy and our own. We hold, as did the founders, that there exists an inherent benefit to our country when private property and prosperity are secured by natural law and the rights of the individual."
Apparently, say they, we have lost touch with the "core values" of the architects of this nation. We need to "preserve their legacy". Noble words. But what exactly did those "architects", the good American folks of the late 18th century, value, as they were birthing our United States?
Into our Wayback machines we go, with the dial set for Colonial America, circa 1776 (Declaration of Independence) to 1789 (Constitution) and 1791 (Bill of Rights). The men who signed those hallowed documents, and served in our original government, are designated as "our founders" by the Tea Party movement, and it is their core values that the TPers seek to preserve.
Focus on that phrase, "the men who signed", because it is meant literally. Every one of the signers of every important document in our nascent nation was male. A white male. An educated, property-owning, upper-class, Protestant (save one) white male. Ah, it was a fine time to be amongst the landed gentry in a nation without royalty. Are those the Core Values the Tea Partiers cherish?
Women now represent about 52 percent of the American population. But it wasn't until 1920 that the 19th Amendment to the Constitution granted universal suffrage to Americans of the female persuasion. Our Founding Fathers didn't include any Founding Mothers. Most were at home, minimally educated, carrying out the domestic chores, leaving the men to the business of building and running the country. Perhaps the most famous woman of that period was Betsy Ross - who sewed. Are those the Core Values the Tea Partiers cherish?
How about the early presidents, those elected to lead our fledgling country? (Let's skip past the fact that only white males voted in those days.) George Washington, our revered Father of His Country, was a slave owner. At one point he had 216. In fact, for most of our first hundred years, our Commanders-in-Chief were Ol' Massas.
Four of our first five presidents, including Jefferson, Madison, and Monroe, owned slaves, all while they were president. In fact, 12 of our presidents were slave owners, eight of them while in our highest office. Andrew Jackson had 160, and did not free any in his will. Zachary Taylor had more than 100, and, being from Virginia, said in 1847 "So far as slavery is concerned, we of the south must throw ourselves on the constitution and defend our rights under it to the last, and when arguments will no longer suffice, we will appeal to the sword, if necessary." The last president to own slaves while in office was Zachary Taylor (1849-1850). The last president to own slaves at all was the 18th, Ulysses S. Grant (1869-1877), a full century after the first Tea Party - Boston style - declared "No taxation without representation".
No president bothered with emancipation until Lincoln in 1862-3. And despite that proclamation, non-whites weren't guaranteed voting rights until 1964. And let's not even get started about how we treated the real owners of this land, the Native Americans. Are those the Core Values the Tea Partiers cherish?
And there are those persistent stories about the dalliances of Washington, Jefferson, Ben Franklin, Alexander Hamilton, and other early American heroes, including children out of wedlock, particularly with their slaves. Are those the Core Values the Tea Partiers cherish?
Well, maybe the Tea Party gang values the hard work carried out through our 2+ centuries by the good old American working stiff (again, mostly male until World War II, or even later). The Working Class Hero. The backbone of this country. Or not...
It took almost two centuries to get our lower class on equal political footing. While the Voting Rights Act of 1965 is generally thought of as opening the nation's polls to people of color, its actual purpose was to prevent a range of discriminatory practices that states and political subdivisions had used to limit voting. In 1964, less than half of this country's population was registered to vote, in large part because of locally-imposed literacy tests, poll taxes, and grandfather clauses, which applied equally to whites and blacks. Are those the Core Values the Tea Partiers cherish?
Religious freedom is a cornerstone of our country. Discrimination based on faith was, allegedly, verboten from Day 1. So surely our Founding Fathers embraced, and represented, a cross-section of society, and presented an excellent model for the Core Values our Tea Partiers yearn for. Not.
There are 204 individuals who might be labeled as "Founding Fathers", men (no women of course) who did one or more of the following: signed the Declaration of Independence; signed the Articles of Confederation; attended the Constitutional Convention of 1787; signed the Constitution; served as Senators in the First Federal Congress (1789-1791); or served as U.S. Representatives in the First Federal Congress.
And aside from patriotism, (and race, and economic stature), those 204 men had one other thing in common - they were all Protestants. Ninety percent were either Episcopalian/Anglican, Presbyterian, or Congregationalist. Charles Carroll of Maryland was the only Catholic. Needless to say, there were no Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, or Taoists. Are those the Core Values the Tea Partiers cherish?
But despite the fact that the Tea Party's philosophy totally lacks the historical underpinnings they embrace, their basic goals remain admirable, though hardly innovative. Cut my taxes, reduce government, and I'm happy. So let's call the movement what it really is, or might become - the future of this country, not the past.