Mediaboss Marketing

Donald Trump once said that we would no longer surrender this country or its people to the false song of globalism. Globalism, free trade, internationalismthey are nothing and everything, shapeshifting boogeymen that have helped us in many ways and ruined us in so many others. For the time being, they are a lost cause. We liberals must reject the false song of globalism. Our path is simple: adopt economic populism.

Starting symbolically with NAFTA in the 1990s, governments began signing massive trade deals at an astonishing rate. These deals promised to raise up every American and person on earth; we wrapped the narrative of free trade in luxurious promises of growth and progress. But then the factories closed. Never mind that it was technology and automation, the new boogeymen, that were truly the cause. Small towns that once supported themselves were now stagnant. Their economic livelihood was pulled out from beneath them like tablecloth under silverware. When the first signs of cracksin the armor appeared, our leaders ignored them. We melded into the world, becoming ever more interdependent and globalized.

Instead of slamming the brakes on this false song, governments pushed the globalist agenda even harder. NAFTA, TPP, KORUS, all backed with false promises. China joined the WTO with our prodding and promptly took advantage of us. We relinquished our status as a manufacturing Mecca to be the gluttonous, debt-ridden consumers of today. Forget the fact that these deals meant cheaper products; does anyone care how cheap their goods are when they have no jobs? When their towns, once buzzing, now were empty blocks of small businesses with For Sale signs on them? Is it so wrong for middle America to be resentful of the fact that they no longer produce? Their lives have shifted (seemingly) overnight, and their work now is a phantasm that lives, if not in another country with someone making 1/10th of their salary, then in the moving gears of a machine.

We never heeded their warnings or reacted to their concerns. We focused on foreign wars, education reform, and bank bailouts, while our inability to see the domestic, micro effects of economic interdependence became our undoing. We never once considered the fallout, economic and political, of progress. Labor unions, once our only chance to slow down the disastrous effects of such economic interdependence, are in ruin; our side of the aisle did nothing. We gutted our safety nets just when we would need them mostit was, after all, a certain Democratic president in the 1990s that said the era of big government is over.

Now, with smug looks, all I hear are academics and the elites saying This was going to happen anyway, or You cant stop globalization and technological progress. It is all structural, a necessity of economic progress. Are we so blind and elitist that we delude ourselves to the political consequences of these policies? Do we really think that telling millions of families in flyover country that their jobs were going to disappear no matter what is an adequate response? That is one of the fundamental splits in todays America: a discord between our elites and the mass public. The former stands to gain immensely from globalization, and the latter gains only in that what they buy is cheaper. Cheaper goods are not economic livelihood. They are not all that mattersjobs do. Economic security matters. A decent life, not subject to the ebb and flow of a global economy, matters.

The failure of the American Left in 2016 was not due to the American people rejecting liberal policiesit wasthe consequence of continuing to preach the false song of globalism. We went full speed into an interdependent world without policies to help those who would feel the unequal effects of globalization. People began to resent globalism, slowly and gradually. It is too late now. We cannot carry the flag of globalism anymore. The idea is toxicit is combined with feelings of lost sovereignty, political correctness, and economic stagnation. The longer we rally around that damned idea, the longer we lose.

The fight in todays world is not between right-wing and left-wing policies. It is between populism and elitist globalism. The former benefits the many at the expense of the few; the latter, the few at the expense of the many. Brexit, Donald Trump, and Marine Le Pen are the first things people name when thinking of the rise of populism. This could easily make one think that populism is a right-wing phenomenon, but one can also think of examples on the left. Syriza in Greece and Podemos and Ciudadanos in Spain are center-left/far left populist parties. They have seized millions of votes because they are responding to the new reality of our world.

Bernie Sanders and his insurgent campaign nearly rid our Democratic Party of the globalist agenda that stains it, inspiring millions of young people and Americans all over the country to join the political revolution. Populism on both sides of the aisle has returned.When we, the left, adopt ithope, American pride, and economic populismwe will win again. The left and Democrats can do it without the disgrace of racism, misogyny, and xenophobia so commonplace in right-wing populism. We must shed our corporatist, globalist skin and emerge a leaner, grassroots-oriented party. Do not fear populismadopt it.

Adopting economic populism means slamming the brakes on globalization for now, until we have quelled the anger that surges through our citizenry. We must bite the bullet and do things that hurt temporarily, because it is the only way you show your peoplenow suspicious of your every move, concerned, rightfully, with their well-beingthat you are on their side. The transition to an interdependent world is chaotic and painful, and we have done nothing to minimize it. Why else did Donald Trump win? Wasnt he the only Republican that saw the growing anger? Meanwhile, on our side a corrupt, globalist, corporatist party leadership shut down our best chance to win the last election. Democratic leaders conspired against our chance to champion populism and once again picked up the flags that would lead to our ruin. We now know the result of thata rotting carcass of a party without control of almost any governorships, almost any state legislatures, and the White House or Congress. If we win in 2018 and 2020, it is because Donald Trump was an incompetent champion of populismnot because people rejected populism. It is here to stay.

Once we have joined the populist movement and shown the people that we are truly on their side, we can begin again with a reformed view of globalization, scaled back, better marketed and better equipped to deal with the inevitable disruptions it will cause to the way of life of millions of people. Until that can happen, however, I urge us to embrace populism. We must reject massive trade deals and listen to concerns about our loss of sovereignty to massive governmental organizations. We should become a party that is for the peopleall people.

There is nothing wrong with saying that your country comes first. Say it with me: America First. America the diverse, America the tolerant, America the free, America the compassionatebut America First. America must produce and America must provide for its own. Thats how we will win again as a new, populist left.

Podemos in Spain is an insurgent populist party. Podemos in Spanish means we can. But there is one word that better describes the choice of winning with populism or losing with globalism. I warn us all, if we want to win again, with debemossimply, we should.

Figure 1 source: http://www.epi.org/publication/briefingpapers_bp147/

Featured image courtesy of Getty Images.

Did you like this article? Consider joining the DG! Open staff meetings are every Monday at 6:30 p.m. in Kohlberg; or email us at editors@daily.swarthmore.edu.

More:
Neither Fascism, nor Liberalism, nor Socialism. Populism! - The Daily Gazette

In this Thursday, Feb. 9, 2017 photo, people react as U.S. Rep. Jason Chaffetz speaks during a town hall meeting at Brighton High School in Cottonwood Heights, Utah. Some attendees of the contentious town hall hosted by Chaffetz have sent the congressman fake invoices after he claimed some people there were paid protesters. Rick BowmerAP

Ideas

Ferguson was Deputy National Press Secretary and Senior Spokesperson for Hillary Clintons 2016 campaign for President.

On August 25, 2009, Democratic Congressman Bart Gordon held a town hall meeting in Murfreesboro, Tennessee. A local news report called it a discussion about the nation's health care that led to loud boos and heckling from the crowd. On February 9, 2017, Republican Congresswoman Diane Black elected to Gordons seat in the fall of 2010 held a town hall meeting in the same city. A local news report headline proclaimed, Diane Black, GOP lawmakers faced defenders of Obamacare at lively town hall . Sounds similar, right?

The zeitgeist is quickly setting in: Republicans right now face a backlash akin to what Democrats faced from the Tea Party in 2009 and 2010. Some have gone so far as to call this resistance the Democratic Tea Party. Its a convenient comparison: Democrats like it because the Republican Tea Party was successful in 2010, and the media appreciates it as a simple and straightforward story. I've been guilty of leaning on it myself.

But the Democratic resistance and the Tea Party actually differ in a number of important ways, each of which tells a different story about where our country is and where our politics may be headed.

For starters, the Tea Party was forged as an opposition to a societal reality in our country, while todays resistance is opposed to a political reality. The Tea Party began before the election of President Obama, as a reaction to President Bush and the bank bailouts of 2008. Tea Partiers believed that society and the economy had all left them behind. The movements anger was stoked by the realization that the country had changed to the extent that it would elect someone like Barack Obama and support his liberal policies like the Economic Recovery Act (the so-called stimulus) and the Affordable Care Act (scornfully dubbed Obamacare). These members wanted the entire country to revert to a set of values that more closely resembled what they saw on Leave It to Beaver .

On the other hand, the current resistance isn't based on a belief that our country has gone astray from some former golden age. It's a political backlash, borne out of Donald Trumps policies and his presidency. Its participants arent rejecting the social structures of American society. They are embracing and defending our evolving structures of diversity and inclusiveness. The people stepping forward to resist the Trump Administration are standing against an Administration that doesnt respect the core values that this nation holds: that we are all equal and that we can all achieve our own dreams.

Second, these movements were forged in entirely different political situations. Members of the Tea Party believed they had been marginalized and had to fight back against this new oppression. They represented a minority, losing the 2008 elections by almost 200 electoral votes and 10 million people, while Democrats gained a more significant majority in the House and a filibuster-proof 60-vote majority in the Senate. Headlines announced a permanent progressive majority. The Tea Party disapproved of their country going in this new direction, which bred their movements anger.

Todays resistance is almost the complete opposite. While Trump is indeed president winning the Electoral College by approximately 75 votes he lost the popular vote by nearly 3 million. While Republicans maintained their control of the House and the Senate, they lost seats in both. The current resistance isnt reacting to its lost status as the majority in American politics, as the Tea Party was. It is speaking out for the majority of Americans who feel inadequately represented in Washington. This resistance is giving political voice to those the political system has deprived of a voice. They are speaking for the silenced majority.

The third major difference is in how these movements act. There are certainly some tactical similarities both use rallies and town hall meetings to attract attention to their causes but the undercurrents are very different. The Tea Party was truly a movement of anger at the system, at the country and at the movements members declining station in life. This best manifested in their slogan, from the American Revolutions Gadsen flag, Dont Tread on Me demanding that people and government just leave them alone to their familiar ways.

While todays resistance certainly has some anger, the basic emotions fueling it are alarm and fear. We are alarmed by what the current political system, and its leadership, will do to us, our friends and our country. We are fearful that our family and neighbors might be barred from entering the U.S. by a Muslim ban or might lose their access to health care if the Affordable Care Act is recklessly repealed. We are worried that the political system now serves corporate interests and the Presidents far-flung (but undisclosed) business interests, not the interests of the people or their nation. We are alarmed that people we know and love wont be treated equally or fairly under the new Administration. The Tea Party consisted of people angry about their own perceived situation; the resistance is people alarmed and fearful about what might happen to others.

The best distinction between the two movements, though, is the one that is most important to our President: crowd size. The largest Tea Party rallies reported were between 150,000 and 250,000 people, depending on the source. The Womens March last month irrefutably included over 4 million people nationwide a 16-fold difference. Washington, D.C., alone likely doubled the largest Tea Party totals.

While it would be easy and convenient to pronounce that 2017 is merely 2009 redux, the simplicity of that comparison belies the underlying and important reality. The Tea Party sought to fix our country and align it with Tea Party politics; the democratic resistance seeks to fix our politics and align them with our countrys values. The movements may share some tactics, but the spirit that drives them are, and the consequences of them will be, very different.

Ferguson was Deputy National Press Secretary and Senior Spokesperson for Hillary Clintons 2016 campaign for President; before, he was Executive Director of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee Independent Expenditure.

Read more:
The Resistance Is the Majority of Americans Not a New Tea Party - TIME

Three times every day, now and for the foreseeable future, Brina Bujkovsky is placingcalls to Washington D.C. one to her representative in Congress and one to each of her U.S. senators.

So do thousands of other members of Together We Will, one of a number of activist groups that sprouted up in recent weeks to target President Donald Trump and representatives who support him.

The phone calls, which have overwhelmed switchboard operators at the House of Representatives more than once, are one of the tools activists are using to try to regain a foothold in turbulent political times.

They are demanding town-hall meetings, they picket outside congressional offices and they write letters to editors. Their efforts bring to mind many of the same tactics used by the conservative tea party eight years ago.

In recent days, they bought a full-page newspaper ad to try to dragoon Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Vista, to a town hall in his district Tuesday night even though it was likely to be packed with critics.

Instead, Issa made an impromptu appearance as protesters and supporters clashed outside his Vista office Tuesday morning, taking questions from both sides.

The call for town halls has also arisen in East County, where thegroup circulated a mock wanted poster of Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Alpine, accusing him of going AWOL onconstituents.

Were trying to shed light on the fact that our Congress members are not making themselves available to speak with their constituents, said Bujkovsky, a San Marcos business owner who is coordinating Together We Wills activities in Hunters 50th Congressional District. A lot of people feel like its an emergency situation.

Hunter has said he will host a community meeting next month.

The wave of activism washing across San Diego County and elsewhere largely centers on the Trump campaign pledge to repeal the Affordable Care Act, the 2010 legislation known as Obamacare.

The resistance movement also focuses on other initiatives pushed by the new president since he was sworn in last month, including immigration policy, climate change regulations and controversial Cabinet nominations.

Many of their strategies come from Indivisible, a playbook for political activism developed by former congressional staffers who watched the tea party movement take root soon after Barack Obama moved into the White House.

The current political landscape is similar to the atmosphere that ignited the tea party after the 2008 election. Eight years ago there was a Democrat in the White House and Democrats running the House and Senate. There is still one party rule, but Republicans are the ones in charge this time.

Like us, you probably deeply disagree with the principles and positions of the tea party, Indivisibles handbook for grassroots activism says. But we can all learn from their success in influencing the national debate and the behavior of national policymakers. To their credit, they thought thoroughly about advocacy tactics.

The handbook gives activists advice on where to sit at town hall meetings (spread out through the room to give the impression of broad support),how to hold a microphone when asking a hostile question (tightly, so that a staffer cant cut the interrogation short without appearing physically aggressive) and to how to get called on to ask a question (look neutral).

Both movements developed their own vernacular, with tea party members labeling Obama a socialist and Trump supporters being called fascists.

The Indivisible guide, which takes its name from a key word in the Pledge of Allegiance, has been downloaded more than 1.7 million times in recent weeks. Almost 5,000 community groups have been set up under its direction.

We want to take something thats really dark right now, with a lot of looming threats all over the place, and turn it into some positive progress, said Kathy Stadler of Indivisible San Diego, one of the local chapters that emerged from the nationwide model.

Iman Salehian is a graphic designer from San Diego who works with Swing Left, an organization focused on electing more progressive candidates to Congress in 2018 and beyond. She said she became involved with Indivisible after attending the Womens March in January.

I did read an Indivisible guide, Salehian said. I think that has formed a lot of people's strategies going forward.

The various resistance efforts are generating a lot of attention locally and nationally, which may contribute to outcomes such as Issa coming out to hear the people outside his office Tuesday for more than an hour.

No matter what side of the political spectrum youre on, people are worried about what the future holds for their health care, Issa told the crowd.

The hubbub outside Issas office was part of a broader effort targeting members of Congress across the nation.

So-called Resist Trump Tuesday protests have been staged in scores of communities every week since the inauguration. Some meetings hosted by Republican members of Congress have showcased angry voters and pushed some lawmakers to cancel or leave early.

Longtime political strategist Bob Shrum said he has not seen the Democratic Party so energized since the Vietnam War. He said that if the momentum keeps up, turnout for the midterm election will soar.

People really care, and they are reacting to events, said Shrum, who teaches political science at the University of Southern California. Republican members of Congress, especially in districts that are reasonably competitive, ignore this at their own peril.

Shrum said the Trump resistance is similar to the tea party not only because participants employ many of the same strategies but because they each grew out of public concern over access to health care. But this latest movement, he said, is more organic.

This is spontaneous, he said. Its like the womens march. This is coming from grass roots. Its coming from the bottom up. The tea party was a mix. It was somewhat from the bottom up but there was a lot corporate money spent too.

Former tea party leader Mason Weaver does not see many similarities between the two efforts. He said the Trump resistance is fueled by an orchestrated drive to de-legitimize a change-agent president and noted the violence that has erupted at some recent protests.

We didnt get paid to demonstrate. We didnt break windows. We didnt start fires, said Weaver, who is an author and keynote speaker. I dont see a groundswell. I see liberal-trained people who are generally dissatisfied.

Weaver said the town-hall meetings his teams attended were always respectful.

Disallowing people to talk was never part of the tea party, he said. Many of these folks are just organized as a mob.

Hundreds of people are expected to attend upcoming events by Hunter and Rep. Susan Davis, D-San Diego.

And Rep. Scott Peters, D-San Diego, held a town hall at constituents urging on Monday night. He said it used to be difficult to get people interested in attending such gatherings.

Unfortunately, it took the election of Donald Trump to remind people that we are fighting for democracy, Peters said.

At the town hall without Issa Tuesday night,Vista resident Minna Riber, 75, said she has not been political since the civil rights movement in the 1960s but she is now.

If I drop dead right now, I know I would have done something I had to do, she said standing outside theoverflow event in Vista. We are a participatory democracy. This is what democracy looks like.

Staff writers Teri Figueroa and J. Harry Jones contributed to this report

jeff.mcdonald@sduniontribune.com(619)293-1708@sdutMcDonald

Go here to see the original:
Resistance to Trump takes some cues from the tea party - The San Diego Union-Tribune

Fran Foster, The Newsweekly 12:03 a.m. ET Feb. 22, 2017

Autoplay

Show Thumbnails

Show Captions

Food items were all princess-themed, as well, including these Cinderella pumpkins and red licorice representing Meridas hair from "Brave."(Photo: FRAN FOSTER/THE NEWSWEEKLY)

Ladies dressed in gowns, tiaras and jewels partook of the regal tradition of the afternoon tea at the City of Vero Beach Recreation Departments 14th annual Mother-Daughter Tea Party at the Vero Beach Community Center on Feb. 11.

In addition to tea cups and dainty morsels, the event was an afternoon filled with crafts, dancing, food and tea, games and prizes. Both mothers and daughters were encouraged to dress as their favorite princess character or in formal tea party attire. They posed for many pictures in the photo booth to capture the moment.

The best part about putting on such a big event like the Mother-Daughter Tea Party is seeing all of the smiles from the little girls and their parents, and knowing that you were the reason behind that smile, said Angela Holshouser, City of Vero Beach recreation supervisor.

The 104 participants had a wonderful time and the memories of dancing with princesses, taking funny photos in the photo booth and winning prizes are priceless.

A special thank you went to Tea and Chi, which sponsored all of the teas for the events as well as volunteers, such as Liz Hancock, who supplied cupcakes. Hancock has been part of the event for nearly 15 years and says she loves being involved.

Other volunteers entertained guests by dressing up as princesses and leading activities.

The best part of the afternoon had to be the presence of multiple generations of ladies great-grandmothers and aunts, as well as first-time mothers embracing their little princesses and their own princesses within.

I would not change a thing, Holshouser said. The hard work definitely pays off. I cannot wait until next year to do it all over again.

For more information, please contact Holshouser at772-770-3775 or visit the recreation page at http://www.covb.org.

Read or Share this story: http://www.tcpalm.com/story/specialty-publications/vero-beach/2017/02/22/tea-party-generations/97958154/

Read this article:
A tea party for the generations - TCPalm

The protests began immediately upon the election of Donald J. Trump to the presidency. Stunned by an election defeat they did not see coming; the far reaches of the Left reacted by taking to the streets in a brat fit seldom seen in American politics.

The temper tantrum has not subsided.

In the weeks and months since the 2016 presidential election celebrities have vented on award shows, the aggrieved (even those who dont know why they are aggrieved) have taken to the streets, to airports and even to the gates of President Trumps Mar-a-Lago resort. Lacking any discernible set of principles let alone a strategy for implementing them, it seems the only tactic remaining is for powerless Left wingers to complain and to do so loudly.

The pending repeal and replacement of the Affordable Care Act which turned out to be not so affordable has sent protesters scurrying to town hall meetings held by various Republican members of congress. This has given rise to comparisons to the grassroots TEA party movement that gained considerable influence early in the Obama presidency.

Advertisement

But this is not your fathers TEA party. The differences between the TEA party movement of the Right and what we see happening today transcend mere ideology. The TEA party movement is reviled by the Left precisely because it occupies that sweet spot in American politics that brings together conservatives and much of the center. Its goals are clear; its principles are strongly rooted in the nations history and culture; and at its core it presents an optimistic vision for the future.

The effectiveness of the TEA party scared the bejesus out of the Obama Administration to the point it began using government power, namely the Internal Revenue Service, to hinder and harass development of the movement. Efforts at countering the TEA party surge with a hapless group loosely known as the Occupy movement ended up being nothing more than an opportunity for frustrated campers to spend a few weeks in public parks.

The week after the Presidential inauguration and the so-called womens march protests that followed I was in Washington, D.C. As I sat at a downtown restaurant awaiting a breakfast meeting I struck up a conversation with the server and commented that the previous week must have been exciting. The expression on his face changed to one of anger as he recounted how protesters had smashed out the windows of the restaurant causing it to have to close for a day. For him that meant a day of lost wages.

This illustrates a key difference between the TEA party movement and what is happening today on the American Left. TEA partiers did not vandalize buildings and set fire to cars. Protesters opposed to the Dakota Access pipeline, apparently lacking in employment, spent weeks in an encampment. When they left litter and debris was strewn across acres of formerly pristine land. TEA party activists are respectful of public places, value private property and channeled their anger into policy reform.

And the TEA party movement is about free speech and helping average Americans make their voices heard in the halls of government. The current blob of Left wing protesters seeks to stifle free speech. They have kept conservatives from speaking at college campuses and even blocked Education Secretary Betsy DeVos from entering a public school. This is a favorite tactic of the Left: when you cant win the argument, prevent the other side from arguing.

Then there are the optics. When the TEA party rallies you see American and Gadsden flags, not women parading about town wearing hats replicating their private parts. Americans in the persuadable middle of the political spectrum are not going to be swayed on policy matters by violence and pornographic headwear. If a rally or protest looks like a Barnum & Bailey sideshow, then it wont be taken seriously by average Americans who are looking only for family sustaining jobs for themselves and better educational opportunities for their children.

No, the endless protests are not going to morph into a TEA party of the Left. Rather what you have is a pity party thrown by a group of people with nothing to offer but footage to fill the screens of the mainstream news media.

Lowman S. Henry is chairman & CEO of the Lincoln Institute of Public Opinion Research and host of the weekly Lincoln Radio Journal. His email address is lhenry@lincolninstitute.org

Read more:
LOWMAN S. HENRY: Democrats forming a pity party, not a TEA Party - The Mercury