TEA Patriots are Individualists and incapable of terrorism

The "Violent Right." The Violent Right? Hold that thought for a minute. Right of what? What are the Right, Center and Left? Is it liberals versus conservatives and the bland uninspired in the middle? Is that what we are talking about? What is a Liberal and what is a Conservative? Are your definitions the same as the person next to you? What are you liberal about? The amount of salt you put on your french fries? What are you conservative about? The amount of gasoline you want your car to use on the highway?

I have found that the labels of liberal and conservative (and the non-label of moderate... what are you moderating? your consumption of alcohol?) to be less and less meaningful... less and less useful. I look to the tea party and I have no idea how many of it's "members" (did you get your 2011 membership card in the mail yet?) are liberals or conservatives or even moderate. What I see are INDIVIDUALS who seek a reduction of government interference in their lives. People who say "I can do that... now just let me do it!" And so I have come to a revelation about how to think about all of the names floating around.

First of all, I'd like to suggest that we stop talking about the TEA party. The historical Tea Party was an event, not a group, that took place in Boston. I propose that we refer to the Taxed Enough Already citizens of this country as "TEA Patriots." And I am also a fan of throwing negative labels back at the people who use them. The label for the people who disagree with the TEA Patriots?.. the label for those who think we are not nearly taxed enough? They are "TEA Baggers."

So I believe that the TEA Patriots are INDIVIDUALISTS. They fight against COLLECTIVISM. Perhaps right now, they don't realize that is the nature of the battle, but with a little explanation, perhaps we can start framing the argument with accurate and descriptive language. What is a collectivist? A Collectivist is a person who believes that others should follow a certain plan and that if they refuse to do so, they must be coerced.

Most Socialists are Collectivists because they believe in compelling other people to surrender their possessions for the good of the collective. The idea of "spreading the wealth around" is generally uttered with the idea that someone in power will force the wealthy to surrender their wealth. But Socialism could be entered into by mutually willing parties, with each person providing what they have to other people who have various needs. We see this kind of individualistic, willing socialism all the time. It is called "the family." One parent (let's arbitrarily call this parent "Dad") works to earn money, or to plant and harvest crops, or to hunt and kill animals because he is able to do so. He contributes his ability to the better goals of his social unit - his family. Another parent (let's call this one "Mom") sacrifices time and attention to the feeding, care, safety and comfort of the children. She contributes her abilities to the needs of her children, who cannot reciprocate equally. Each member of the family willingly participates in this constant exchange of their means and the other's needs and no government official or politician has to stand over them forcing this free and willing exchange. Collective Socialism says that these same exchanges within the family must be made between people who do not know each other.

Any philosophy or belief can be adhered to either collectively or individually. Individual Christians emphasize that the salvation provided by Christ's sacrifice and God's grace is an individual choice. The Spanish Inquisition put a collectivistic spin on this by believing that people could be coerced into adopting Christian faith. Collective Salvation suggests that all people must be coerced into doing the right things in order to save everyone. Collective Islam compels people to convert and punishes deviation from the behaviors that are set as appropriate for the collective. Individual Islamic Jihad is an individual battle of believers against their own personal sins while Collectivist Jihad pits the Jihadist against all others who sin.

The labels of left, right, and middle are truly best applied to collectivists. In the past, this has been true, and it is time for individualists to reject these labels. The left are Communist Collectivists. The right are Fascist Collectivists. The middle are Socialist Collectivists. If you are not one of theses, then perhaps you are above them all in the most extreme distance from individualism - a Collectivist Anarchist. Collectivist Anarchists believe that they are not subject to any government, only their own individual desire.. but their individual desires must be imposed upon all others. In contrast is the Individualist Anarchist, such as Henry David Thoreau, who believed that no one needs a government to survive but that each individual has responsibility to his or her neighbors and that together, without government intrusion, they can accomplish everything of real value and meaning that they need in their lives.

This is the heart of the true battle in American Politics right now. The battle between the Collectivists and the Individualists. The Collectivists believe that the government is the only way to peace and tranquility and that it must coerce others by laws and restrictions on behavior. Individualists believe that it is up to the individual to pursue peace and tranquility and that coercion only results in oppression and resistance; anger and frustration; rebellion and revolution. I believe the TEA Patriots are individualists and thus the notion that they would ever be involved in terrorism is anathema to them. Terrorism is only applied by collectivists who wish to impose their views on others. Left-Communists, Right-Fascists, and Middle-Socialists are likely candidates to employ terrorism, or to threaten government officials, because they are already collectivists and embrace the notion of compelling others to think as they do. Individualists would never resort to terrorism or threats because it is contradictory to their beliefs - that people must find their own paths to truth and peace.

This is why it will never be the case that a true TEA Patriot ever threatens or pursues terrorism. And it is why collectivists will mistakenly assume that their philosophical opponents would resort to such measures, because they are perfectly comfortable with contemplating the use of coercion to achieve their goals. THERE is the true distinction of the differences. THERE is the focus of the battle of ideas. It comes down to this - and there are only two sides - so now is the time to decide how you will answer: Are you a Collectivist or are you an Individualist?