Tea Party: Why are libertarians and evangelicals so inseparable?

I've been scratching my head of late when looking at the Tea Party. Their rhetoric seems to be an inextricable combination of Evangelical Christianity and libertarianism. The question is, just how are the two even remotely compatible? Why are the same people who say "shrink our government and stop the war on drugs" the same people who say "life begins at birth and gays need to be cured with the power of Jesus Christ?" Why are the same people who support states' rights also speaking in favor of federal marriage regulation?

Does anyone here know how this is compatible? I'd especially like to hear from any Tea Partiers we have on here.

On a side note, where did all the libertarians go? The last guy to say "government out of the bedroom and the boardroom" was Ross Perot. Now, the Closest Thing We Got is Ron Paul, and he was the one to sponsor the Sanctity of Life Act and is a DOMA supporter.

They're both opposed to the Democrats. Ergo, they can either side together or get ignored.

Fight smart, not fair.

^

That. Same reason the repuiblicans devote at least some of their time to appeasing the Religious Right. You either court the crazies who almost always go to the polls, or dont get their votes.

They're not both, if they're true libertarians. (No True Scotsman ftw!) My father is a staunch Libertarian, but also an atheist. He doesn't believe the government should be involved in any fashion other than the bare minimum. Unfortunatly the Tea Party has been changing the meaning of libertarian, so when people say they are one they don't just think "nutjob", they think "religious nutjob".

"Delenda est." "Furthermore, Carthage must be destroyed." -Common Roman saying at the end of speeches.

They are both are unhappy with the state pushing liberal ideology in (taxpayer-funded) universities and laws (gay marriage, environmentalist regulation, discrimination lawsuits etc). The libertarians don't think it's the state's business to push any ideology, especially at the taxpayer's expense, and the evangelicals just think it's an ideology too different from theirs (they'd probably be fine with a taxpayer-funded push of their ideology).

Or it could be that their interests align, that they appeal to the same demographics (well-off but not super educated whites?), that they both have reasons to be unhappy with the mainstream Republican party, that they both like the symbolism of the founding fathers and all that, or that they're all nostalgic for a somewhat imaginary "early America" where people had faith and the government was small.

(I also think there was a bit of a shift; the Tea Party started off much more libertarian that it is now)

edited 14th Jul '11 2:54:56 AM by SlightlyEvilDoctor

Point that somewhere else, or I'll reengage the harmonic tachyon modulator.

hashtagsarestupid

Libertarianism and Evangelical Christianity go together perfectly. Libertarians are fanatically corporatist and are against any workers' rights. This has obvious appeal to hard-right Social Darwinist evangelicals.

"Had Mother Nature been a real parent, she would have been in jail for child abuse and murder." -Nick Bostrom

They don't. Libertarians are fanatically opposed to government intervention on people's private lives.

The Religious Right does not want small government. A government that criminalizes vice and pushes for traditional Protestant values ain't small: It's a nosy monstrosity.

You exist because we allow it and you will end because we demand it.

Most don't. But fundamentalist libertarians do exist, with all the traditional extremist reactionary beliefs.

"Had Mother Nature been a real parent, she would have been in jail for child abuse and murder." -Nick Bostrom

Small Government X= Weak or Powerless. It literally means "small", as in doesnt collect much taxes or spend much money.

They're united by hate*

. Which blinds themselves to the true divisions between them and causes more than a few of their statements to be hypocritical, such as the insistence that they're defending liberty and life even while doing other things to contradict it.

Add in the bankrolling by corporate sponsors who see an advantage to be exploited in giving this group the things they want, and it's really not at all pleasant.

I wish it were accurate that they're genuine people concerned about America, but even accepting that some do believe that rhetoric, it's really not entirely true that for the group as a whole the problem is simply with being Taxed Enough Already. There's a whole slew of things that have been added to the agenda, some of which they present as being a problem with taxes, but even that is doubtful.

It's not too surprising, really. Libertarianism is basically Calvinism without God, and Christian fundamentalism has a distinctly Calvinist streak. Neither group can stand it when those they deem unworthy are given a helping hand up instead of being hung out to dry. And both groups see material wealth as a sign that someone is doing everything right in this world and should not be expected to share with those whose lack of wealth demonstrates that they are not doing everything right.

edited 14th Jul '11 6:44:40 AM by Karalora

Basically what Kara said. Right-wing "Libertarianism" is a bit of an oxymoron, as it actively promotes the idea that one citizen should be able to dominate over another citizen. (While they often say otherwise, when you don't have any recourse or rules balancing private freedoms, this is what you get) This is a place where Evangelicals want to be. They want the (increased) ability to dominate undesirables and get them out of their community.

Democracy is the process in which we determine the government that we deserve

I wish the original sense of libertarian was still in use here.

"Had Mother Nature been a real parent, she would have been in jail for child abuse and murder." -Nick Bostrom

American Evangelicalism, as far as I see it, tends to follow Biblical statements about respect for private property and the need for charity to be voluntary and so on, which does lend itself to aspects of Libertarianism.

Of course, a lot of Evangelical/Libertarian leaders tend, in my view, to be hypocrites with a "more money for me, more Jesus for you!" approach which ultimatley boils down to exploiting religious beliefs for personal gain.

edited 14th Jul '11 7:48:02 AM by TheBatPencil

And let us pray that come it may (As come it will for a' that)

They have the same economic policy, which is all the Tea Party really focuses on. It's called a coalition. Happens all the time in the UK.

Hail Martin Septim!

Aside from what Karalora said there's the fact that the US political parties act more as big-tent coalitions than traditional political parties, so even those without closely related ideologies may be brought together by opposition against the other.

INT is knowing a tomato is a fruit. WIS is knowing it doesn't belong in a fruit salad. CHA is convincing people that it does.

Are they exploiting religious beliefs for economic gains, or are they exploiting economic beliefs for religious gains?

Depends on who the "they" doing the exploiting is.

The real "they" may be the ones exploiting both.

People! The Tea Party doesn't deal with drugs or gay marriage! It's about cutting spending, giving states more power than they have, and the occasional thing both factions can agree on, like guns.

Hail Martin Septim!

It depends on the local group. Some want it more social than economic, others the other way around. I know that one guy who dresses up to make speeches in "Founding Fathers" outfits made a demand that women be restricted from active service and to reinstate DADT before he would "forgive" John Boehner.

Very big Daydream Believer. "That's not knowledge, that's a crapshoot!" -Al Murray "Welcome to QI" -Stephen Fry

Sure, a combination of members of both sides being exploited, and members of both sides genuinely knowing what they're doing.

Libertarians may be guilty of greasing the wheels for the Baggers, since they're calling openly for the collapse of the gov't at any price. That's not quite the same thing as collusion with the TP.

Most libertarians you read about and see on TV are actually statists. They want a large, violent state to protect their money. T

I'm a skeptical squirrel

All the libertarians I know want big-ass guns to protect their money and a competent, honest police force as a fall-back plan. As for Media Libertarians... the only one I know is Ron Paul, and I feel as though he'd like to skip the second part of that proposition.

Hail Martin Septim!