My thoughts on the "Tea Party Protests" - Guilty by Association

If I understand correctly, the idea for these protests really originated with the Campaign for Liberty. However, Fox news jumped on board and started strongly supporting them, apparently even letting viewers know they could attend these 'virtual' tea parties at some fox news site.

Let's be clear, what Fox wants and what the Campaign for Liberty wants are two vastly different things. Fox wants the ever-harder-to-maintain status quo, while the Campaign for Liberty seeks radical economic and policy change. The tea parties were not conceived to protest Obama directly, or raising taxes from 32 to 35% for the upper class or whatever it is. It's about an economic policy that doesn't imprison those within the system.

It's sort of a stretch for a metaphor, but a debt-based capitalistic society is essentially slavery. It's not hard to understand, really; there is always more debt owed in society than there is money to pay that debt, always. If that is hard to understand, there are two places to look. The more benign, easy to grasp place is fractional reserve banking.

Start with an island that has 10 people with 100 dollar bills each, have them all deposit that money into a bank, then each take out loans from that bank after they have each deposited their 100 dollars. It doesn't take long until the total debt is higher than the total money supply. Because of this, people are scientifically bound to become indebted. When someone is indebted they 'owe' to their debtors money or capital, which is nearly always gained with labor. What this adds up to is a mathematical guarantee that some percentage of the population will always be in debt and therefore having the fruits of their labor be reaped by someone else. Who that someone else is might be a bit fuzzy at first glance.

The other is the federal reserve, which is basically the same problem. The Fed prints money for the US, and the US in turn pays interest on the money that the Fed "lets us use", therefore we always owe the fed more money than there is, but the economy doesn't collapse right away because we only have to pay a small bit of that at any time; however the flow of resources in inevitable.. whoever creates money and charges for the privilege of using that money eventually gets it all. Not all, but always closer, sort of like the tortoise who every day gets halfway to his destination.

In any case, there is real economical tyranny happening not just in the US, but globally, and that is what the tea parties were intended to be about. I wouldn't exactly call it the Achilles heel, but the money supply and economic system are certainly pillars on which the "they" rest their control.

But I digress. Really what I am trying to get at is these people are not idiots, they know how much radical-liberals hate Fox. The radical-conservatives, (and when I say radical I mean someone who believes something is f'd and it needs to be fixed), the ones who organized this probably didn't think twice about what it meant to have Fox endorse them (not that they could have stopped it anyway) and were only delighted at the press coverage.

But what happened was actually a very dirty, incredibly brilliant trick. They managed to take what was intended to be a means of informing people about the the flaws of the economic system and turn it into (at least in the eyes of liberal leaning media) an anti-obama pro-rich fuck-the-poor rally. Fox News was really a one-two punch. On the one hand you get all the naive Fox news watching boob-toobed people out that wouldn't have been if all the organizing were forced to be done in a thrifty, grass-roots fashion, and, there is an immediate association for the whole movement with neo-con bullshit propaganda in the statistically liberal population who sees Fox News for the Freudian fertilizer it is.

It's unfortunate because they both want the same thing. Any compassionate human wants the same thing as every other compassionate human: a safe, peaceful, fair world without limits on the growth of human potential and quality living conditions for everyone.

Why do otherwise compassionate humans disagree then on so many things? Hate each other, join the democrats and hate the republicans and vice versa? Because, we have been led to be believe that those things are not possible, that they are mutually exclusive. This of course is completely without any merit or logical reason, but it's probably not an accident either. But, if you look at nearly every division between republicans and democrats you will see a conflict between one person's ability to grow, develop, become rich, and another person's right and/or access to quality living conditions.