An Occupied Kind of Tea Party

The Occupy movement has done much to change the conversation in our country around issues of commerce, the worker’s plight, and the inequity that exists between the very rich and the rest of us. I am thankful that they’ve done it because the status quo discourse around those matters was painfully apathetic. There is one unfortunate aspect to what has happened in the Occupy movement that provides a chink in their armor, it’s a path that creates further division – not unity – for their cause.

I would have hoped that early on the Occupy movement would have recognized the similarities between themselves and the Tea Partiers that demonstrated a season before them. You can point out many differences but the power comes from pointing out the similarities. The Tea Party started as a rejection of the bail out of the banks – little guys vs. big guys, the workers vs. the monied classes.  They were hostile to Wall Street and the preferences showed them over Main St. It was said that they despised all things big, Big Government, Big Banks, Big Business and Big Taxes – hey, I see a solid half of values matching up. Even Big Government and Big Taxes are contested concepts and relative terms; I don’t know many people that want bigger taxes and government just for the sake of being big. Since the start of the Occupy movement – and since it is commonplace to pit folks against each other – comparisons have been made between the Occupy and Tea Party Movement.

It is time for those of us with respect for our fellow humans to try and recognize our similarities and affinities and draw from them rather than point and laugh at our differences. Originally Tea Partiers were grassroots, organically organized, and rightfully upset at a system that had discounted their opinion. These very basic and authentic roots resonate with most of us, especially the Occupy sympathizers. I for one, as a sympathizer, want to reach out to my fellow citizens and human beings. I can respectfully disagree with some points and then wholeheartedly agree with many others. We agree that our system is dysfunctional. We agree that opportunity should be fair and that favoritism is fundamentally unfair. We don’t like our tax dollars or reputations to be squandered doing wasteful or hurtful things to others. There are a host of values that we align with that could be emphasized instead of taking cheap shots and trying to “gotcha!” each other.

I come from a family and area in the Midwest where it is common that find myself in a room of loved ones that do not politically agree with me, it does not make me love them less. It used to make me like them less, but now I understand where they are coming from and the values that they hold dear. Because I also hold my values dear and would fight to uphold them, it gives me respect for my debate partner to hear their well reasoned points ring with passion and integrity. When I hear rigorous debate that ditches the sophomoric name calling and embraces ethical rules of engagement, I have hope for the future. A glorious, wonderful thing happens when we give each other the time and space to express themselves in a respectable manner: our guard relaxes, we feel safer and we open our minds to begin learning from each other. We will never all agree with each other, but we can remind each other that we are human and at least in that, we have some common values. If we are to continuing to exist, we might as well try to bring out the best in each other.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

5 thoughts on “An Occupied Kind of Tea Party

  1. jonolan says:

    You really can’t compare the rabble of OWS with the Americans of the TEA Party. They’re fundamentally night and day opposites.

    The Americans of the TEA Parties want the government to stop taking.

    The OWS rabble want to the government to give them more.

    And that’s not even going into the wildly disparate methodologies employed by the two groups…

    • Amy Meier says:

      In the future, please refrain from any name calling. “Rabble” is mild but still disparaging. Thanks for sharing your feelings. I did compare the two movements and choose to focus on the half of their agendas that overlap – the portion that asks the government to stop favoring Big Banks because they are “too big to fail”, and using public funds to bail them out. It is a huge issue impacting our country and “strange bedfellows” are often the most effective teams to accomplish something that is otherwise a hard sell. It takes all kinds to get things changed. Stop in in the future.

  2. David says:

    Good luck.. maybe the teabaggers were hi-jacked by the Palins of the world, but I still think deep down they are haters, and that is not what the 99% stand for

    • Amy Meier says:

      Someone from a conservative camp could see a snapshot of an Occupier screaming at a cop and reach the same conclusion. Our media packages snippets that elicit emotional responses because it gets ratings. I know for a fact that there are many issues that Occupiers and Tea Partiers would never agree on, but that does not mean we should “throw out the baby with the bathwater”. A recent case in point is I found myself agreeing with Rupert Murdoch about SOPA PIPA – what the…? However, “the people” are most powerful when the numbers are united for/against one force. I have many Catholic friends but I have lots of issues with the Catholic church. I can tolerate our differences and may even ignore them occasionally for the sake of making getting along or getting something done. I also recognize that we align on a lot of beliefs such as helping the hungry, feeding the poor, etc. I am part of the 99% and grateful for the attention they’ve brought, but even in the case of our local group, much infighting on methods and philosophies ripped it apart. Such a pity. We have to learn to work together with what we have or the corporate powers that be will continue making a buck at our expense while we bicker.

    • Amy Meier says:

      Also, please, no “teabaggers” here. I know emotions run high and it is hard not to jab, but the name calling stuff just discredits valid points being made.

What do you think?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: