*Another* faux-populist Lefty group for potlatching money?

Is ‘potlatching’ even a word?

(Via Big Government) It’s interesting to see the difference between intent and result in this Washington Post article on a quote-unquote ‘Coffee Party’ that’s ready to take to the streets on behalf of the Left.  It’s not really quotable, but the gist of the article is that there’s this movement that showed up in reaction to the Tea Party folks and is trying to duplicate their success.  Slow going, but it’s early days – and besides, aren’t both groups looking for the same thing, really?

That’s intent.  The result is a tacit admission that the Tea Parties have pretty much brushed aside the existing, decades-old infrastructure of Lefty activist groups to become the standard by which community activism is judged.  I imagine that this would probably upset, say, somebody who’s been throwing money at groups like Moveon.org or CAP or the undead, unlamented ACORN; it must purely grate to know that all the funding in the world won’t create a genuine populist movement when there’s no true popular will behind it.  Not that these Coffee Party people are the answer, either: they’re just a bunch of reactionary defenders of the existing self-defined privileged class who are attempting to create a false revolutionary consciousness.

…You know, I wrote that out first as a joke; but that really is what they are, isn’t it?

Moe Lane

Crossposted to RedState.

6 thoughts on “*Another* faux-populist Lefty group for potlatching money?”

  1. And, on the very same day, the LA Times puts out it’s take on the Tea Parties and the people who populate them:


    Wanna bet the attitude taken is just as fuzzy, soft-focus, and respectful? I didn’t think so.

    But seriously, the Post was on a roll yesterday. This article, the Dana Millbank cheerleading, and this: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/02/25/AR2010022505767_pf.html. Really, WaPo, “meets need”? It’s like you’re the daily Newsweek.

  2. I don’t know whether to be amused or depressed at the fact that Communist-bloc quackspeak is the best and most appropriate way to criticize Democratic Party fail. So I think I’ll go with “amused” for now.

  3. Did you think the elite government class would go down without a huge fight?

    They’re going to do everything in the Alinsky playbook to keep their $170,000/year jobs and million-dollar benefit/pension packages.

    There’s some real money at stake, bloke. They’re going to fight us for it.

  4. Two things:

    First, Imitation is the sincerest form of flatery. But remember, an imitation is just that…an imitation.

    Second, is The Coffee Party opposed to “Don’t Tread On Me”? To “Taxed Enough Already”? If the Left rolls out their “coffee party” movement they will be a laughing stock. This is the nothing but a rebranding of the yahoos that we see throwing concrete blocks through storefronts at G8 summits. Party on, Dudes.

  5. Didn’t the Left try something similar to oppose conservative talk radio? Air America was not exactly a roaring success…..

  6. Worth mentioning about the “coffee party” is that I do wonder how many of the people who would proclaim affinity with it even know what the term “Tea Party” refers to.

    I have been stunned and sickened to find numbers of my fellow Americans who have no idea. (“Ummmm…. taxed enough already…. I think…. something like that??”)

    Even John Kerry (whom I have no doubt does know) said something really stupid (shocker, I know) lately, when he said something like (I’m paraphrasing from memory) — “We don’t really want to see these Tea Party types doing what they do…. in Boston of all places!”


    I just seems to me that people who are against the Tea Parties, but at least understand where the name comes from, would try to avoid essentially taking King George’s side in these matters.

Comments are closed.