David Paul Kuhn has a somewhat hyperbolic post up on Real Clear Politics today that is well worth reading. Titled “R.I.P. Political Establishment,” the post argues that the rise of the Tea Party movement–epitomized by the defeat of eight Senate primary candidates backed by the National Republican Senatorial Committee–is part of a larger “bottom up” revolution that encompasses the netroots, Howard Dean and Barack Obama as well. Kuhn writes:
Politics has moved from top-down to bottom-up. The liberal netroots of 2006 was a harbinger of the far larger and far more influential tea party movement. Both capture our new politics: where power is more fleeting, where politics is increasingly de-centralized and influence more democratized. The tail easily wags the dog in modern politics.
Well, not completely. Perhaps the campaign side of politics has gotten more decentralized and democratized; I hardly see either the White House or Congress–whomever has the majority in both Houses–as on the verge of bottom up upheaval. When top congressional leaders in Congress start rejecting contributions from lobbyists and wealthy interests, then we can talk about bottom up politics coming to the fore. Until then, I suspect the people with the pitchforks are in for a rude shock come November.
Kuhn actually acknowledges that he’s overstating his case:
…it remains a far stretch to argue the people, or even the activists, have supplanted the powerful. The establishment no longer reigns, but it remains an influential force. Many tea party movement candidates will rely on the conventional Republican apparatus for assistance in fundraising, tactics and strategy in the general election. Some of the tea parties favorite sons and daughters are not outsiders. Florida Senate candidate Marco Rubio was a former speaker of the state’s House. Nevada Senate candidate Sharron Angle was the state Republican Party chairwoman.
Not to mention the million-dollar contributions from fatcats named and unnamed that are helping prop up the supposedly grassroots Tea Party movement.
Still, it’s hard to argue with his overarching point, stated nicely if also a bit too hyperbolically by Republican consultant Alex Castellanos:
Technology was the tipping point. The Internet does not mean the people feed politics. But fundraising is now no longer the province of big money alone. Campaign communication can now be sent online for free. Digital cameras, YouTube, have made producing advertising cheap. And like all advertising, political marketing is increasingly micro-targeted online. Minority ideological coalitions can also rapidly unite and influence the party through web-social networking (see MoveOn or Tea Party Express).
“We are moving from the top down industrial age to the bottom up communications age. Facebook is growing and The New York Times is dying. A few smart people in a room can run anything,” Castellanos said. “Ron Paul and the Internet is a political party. There will be political parties, but right now anyone with a computer is a political party.”
September 21, 2010