Note: This article was originally published on April 21st, however given the recent town hall explosions (and subsequent accusations of “astroturfing”), it’s once again relevant.

Last week, we saw the culmination of a few months of planning on the part of “grassroots” organizers in the form of the Tax Day Tea Parties (which could have been given a better name, in my opinion) - a self-described “non-partisan” activist movement aimed at shrinking the federal government, reducing spending, and cutting taxes. While the resulting tone of the protests was questionable, there were some commendable moments, even if what was arguably a populist movement was hijacked by corporate news networks and a somewhat clouded message offering no tangible solution.

So what was the result of the protests? Well, these sorts of demonstrations predictably never encourage anyone within the establishment actually listen to the people and alter course - but did they at least achieve the bare minimum that such protests always claim to want to achieve? Did they “raise awareness” or “garner support?”

You be the judge: Five days after the protest, a Rasmussen poll reports that only 51% of Americans polled had “a favorable view” of the demonstrations - perhaps an almost identical percentage of the population that actually felt inclined to attend. To give you some perspective, 53% was the amount of Americans who elected Barack Obama.

So, the Tea Parties remain a left-wing vs. right-wing, Republican vs. Democrat, conservative vs. liberal issue, which brings me to the point of this column.

Let’s just say there was a truly non-partisan “grassroots” effort to get the nation’s budget and monetary system under control. If we assume that “the establishment,” the “power structure” (or whatever we’re calling it today) wants things the way they are, we can conclude that there is a vested interest in preventing any mass movements of the people from inciting any real change. This is at the very least, my opinion.

Let’s use the example of the Tea Parties. In the months leading up to April 15th, the Tea Parties received virtually no media attention outside of alternative internet media and bloggers - hence a “grassroots” movement. Then the big day came, and hundreds of thousands of Americans took to the streets to protest big government, big spending, and big taxes. But almost suddenly it seemed, the “grassroots” were no longer as deeply rooted in the unbridled and unfiltered will of the people.

Yes, Fox News had entered the scene, with personalities like Neal Cavuto and Sean Hannity making appearances and broadcasting from the protests. In fact, Fox had been trumpeting the demonstrations in the days leading up to April 15th, arguably endorsing the movement. Why does this matter? Because organizers of self-avowed “non-partisan grassroots” demonstrations dedicated to principles that a vast majority of Americans support (i.e. fiscal responsibility, sensible taxation) now found their movement was given an unsolicited stamp-of-approval by one of the most politically polarizing cable news networks in the country.

What started as a “We the People” movement, in which even Republicans who had voted for huge spending bills were booed mercilessly, had evolved into a “Fox News vs. Barack Obama” gathering of “hateful right-wingers.”

But as politically polarizing news networks go, let us not forget CNN. Though Rupert Murdoch’s Fox played their part to make the Tea Parties a Left vs. Right issue (perhaps intentionally), Ted Turner’s CNN stepped in as well, and reinforced the paradigm of liberal vs. conservative to an entirely separate demographic. MSNBC’s Keith Olbermann served up a predictable song and dance as well. With segment after segment rife with accusations of racism and deceptively one-sided coverage, as well as the uninvited party-crashing by the Fox News crowd, the tea parties had officially lost any “grassroots” credibility. They were now without question an issue of angry, racist Republicans not able to cope with losing an election (to a black man no less) - hence the 51% figure. And remember Obama-supporters, those in powerful posititions (including the media) can carry out the same partisan neutralization of your movements (as they did for the last 8 years).

When you think about it from the establishment’s perspective, it’s really quite an ingenious system they’ve got worked out. Can you think of a more effective way to control a government without that messy democracy getting in the way? If popular support against an administration-spanning agenda is feared to be reaching a breaking point, just divide and conquer, and the momentum for reform and/or revolution will never be sufficient to ignite any real change.

This is why no matter how truly American, truly universally populist, truly Constitutional, or truly common sense your “grassroots” ideas are, you may never be able to get more than roughly half the country to support you if the corporate-controlled media and/or the ruling class see you as a threat to their political power. If everything is made into a left vs. right issue, and you’re sitting atop the platform supported by those two columns leaning against one another, you can get away with murder.

As long as you keep playing both sides against each other, the small faction of truly concerned citizens on both sides will be too busy arguing with each other, they’ll never be able to stop corruption on any meaningful scale, much less be able to assemble the underlying principles that unite them long enough to preserve the very liberties that even allow them to take part in such a political process.

Browse Timeline

• « Persiapocalypse Update: A Nation in Disarray
• » Changes You Can Believe In

10

Add a Comment