One of the best aspects about the SoCal Tax Revolt Coalition is that we are a true mixture of Republicans, Libertarians, Independent Conservatives…and Democrats!
The nature of the 2009 movement is complex, and as 40% of our group is NOT Republican, we reject any assertion that we are a “Rebranded GOP“. Furthermore, the evolution of our group and other citizen activism organizations clearly demonstrates the power and flexibility in leaderless organizations (see , “The Starfish and the Spider”: The Unstoppable Power of Leaderless Organizations.)
As an example of how policy ideas are maturely discussed among informed citizens, and our goals are not derived from top-down dictates, I wanted to share some dialog between three of our San Diego pundits: A Catholic conservative, a Randian objectivist, and a vegan Libertarian discuss the role of social conservatism in fiscally oriented agendas.
The Scratching Post’s Catholic conservative does some data point analysis:
Data Point 1: The Washington Times has this bit about the ongoing destruction of the traditional family. It’s worth reading the whole thing, but this statistic in particular is important.
Married couples with children have an average income of $80,000, compared with $24,000 for single mothers.
Data Point 2: ABC had a 20/20 segment on polyamory wherein they look at it in an open-minded fashion. (H/T: Ann Althouse)
…If you want a smaller government and lower taxes, you’re going to need more people earning $80K and fewer people earning $24K. ABC News is fighting you tooth and nail on that one, even if they’re too indoctrinated in progressive, open-minded conventional wisdom to get it. The 20/20 piece relies entirely on interviewing couples who are two or more standard deviations off the mean for their behavior. It’s a conversation held entirely within the white, highly-educated, upper-class, progressive bubble. The entire piece is an act of non-judgmentalist fantasy….
Sixteen trillion dollars later, we’re all doing our own thing on the edge of a volcano that is about to erupt. More people earning $24K and fewer people earning $80K has been the result and it’s a recipe for fiscal disaster.
As you hope and wish and work for a smaller government, rewatch that 20/20 piece and try to work out how you’re going to get it with morals like that.
Shane Atwell, the Randian Objectivist, chimes in with an observation:
..you’ve bought into collectivist class warfare ideas. Whether or not Americans will agree with limited government has little to do with their wealth. It has to do with their ideas. We have to change them. And if they are irrational as you say they weren’t always so. They aren’t by nature. They were taught to be by the collectivist who control the schools and universities.
W.C. Varones, Vegan Libertarian, responds: We’ve had the better argument for the last century but continually lost ground to the free lunch crowd. You can’t reason with slackers on the take.
The Fed isn’t printing $1T+ per year and handing it over to President Obama to spend in support of married, $80K-earning families. Without growing centralized authority and reduced political freedom, there’d be fewer expensive, government solutions proposed and enacted. The fiscal crisis has been fed by the breakdown in traditional morality and the loss of political freedom.
If the Tea Party stands for personal freedom and financial responsibility, I’d suggest that it firmly support all three things – traditional morality, political freedom and fiscal sanity. None of them will succeed on their own.
Ultimately, I think the Tea Party is best served by emphasizing personal actions and working toward maximum local impact. Additionally, as the GOP loses in the 2012 Senate races in Missouri and Indiana show, conservative candidates are better off highlighting fiscal matters instead of being manipulated into offering opinions about socially personal subjects. Economic freedom leads to personal liberty. And I say that as a Catholic.