The Atlantic | Michael Kinsley WRITES:
Their [the 60s protesters] essence was selfless and idealistic: stopping the war; ending racism; eradicating poverty. These goals and some of the methods for achieving them may have been childishly romantic or even entirely wrongheaded, but they were about making the world a better place. The Tea Party movement’s goals, when stated specifically, are mostly self-interested. And they lack poetry: cut my taxes; don’t let the government mess with my Medicare; and so on. I say “self-interested” and not “selfish” because pursuing your own self-interest is not illegitimate in a capitalist democracy. (Nor is poetry an essential requirement.) But the Tea Party’s atmospherics, all about personal grievance and taking umbrage and feeling put-upon, are a far cry from flower power. There is a nasty, sour, vindictive tone to the Tea Party that certainly existed in the antiwar movement and its offspring, but never dominated the atmosphere created by these groups.
Monday, May 17, 2010
Mr. Kinsley gets Tea Partiers completely wrong. He portrays them as selfish. Since when is freedom selfish? Freedom is the highest ideal and truly makes the world a better place. This cannot be said of the creeping socialism the sixties generation set in motion. The Tea Partiers, in my opinion, want freedom, at least that is what I want, and I think I might be a Tea Partier. I can't be sure, because Tea Partiers just "are".