Race and the Tea Party

Dylan Ratigan can frequently become unhinged, but he's remarkably reasonable (if still a bit misguided) in this clip. Unfortunately, he fundamentally misunderstands the nature of the Tea Party movement.

While people like Andrew Breitbart and Sarah Palin are very involved with the Tea Party, they are not "leaders" of it and have no power to bind it to any sort of organizational statement of purpose. This really illustrates how the Left has trouble thinking in individual, rather than collective terms. There is no central leadership of the Tea Party. There is no institutional charter or mission statement. It's simply a loose affiliation of individuals and regional groups that favor limited government.

A collective commitment to reject any sort of racist rhetoric among Tea Party attendees is a wonderful but impractical goal - to say nothing of it being totally unnecessary. Such a statement would be wholly inconsistent with the nature of the movement. Let me be extra clear about that: An organized, top-down statement of opposition to racist rhetoric would be antithetical to the structure of the Tea Party movement, even though entirely consistent with the movement's purpose.

It's sort of like asking the Anti-War movement to renounce any direct criticisms of American troops - it would be a commendable statement, but meaningless since no central body has the ability to enforce it in any way. It would be a presumptuous and purely symbolic statement from someone not authorized to make it.

It is interesting that Ratigan recognizes his own inability to commit MSNBC (a small, structured organization) to any kind of civility pledge, but expects Breitbart and other Tea Party "leaders" to be able to do so with their own massive and diffuse group. Huh?

The organizers and attendees at individual Tea Party rallies have an incentive to police their events for violations of civility, not only because they reject racism and loony conspiracy theories, but also to avoid providing fodder for ideological opponents who are constantly seeking to marginalize the movement. That's really all that they can do, and (anecdotally) they do an excellent job. That's why it's so frustrating to see all the dishonest reporting about the movement, and why Breitbart is right to keep pointing it out. The attendees and organizers have no control over unsubstantiated claims and unfair coverage.