America Held a Tea Party

Americans (well, at least some Americans) held a Boston-style Tea Party yesterday. The protest was apparently about taxes and big government. I think it’s fair to say that those that participated don’t like President Obama very much. He’s (choose one) a Marxist/Leninist, a European Socialist, a Mussolini Fascist, a corporatist, a false Messiah (aka, the Antichrist), an immigrant (probably illegal), a Muslim who kowtows to Arab sheiks, and the guy who’s going to take away my assault weapons.

One of the brainchilds of this groundswell of public resentment against the President (67% of Americans say they trust him) was the one and only Newt Gingrich. Now I may not agree with much of what he says or does, but he’s smart and learned. He should know that the Boston Tea Party had little to do with conservative or libertarian principles and more to do with something called self-determination.

And the brouhaha was not over the high cost of taxes. The Tea Act actually allowed the East India Company to sell tea directly to the colonies without “payment of any customs or duties whatsoever” to Britain, instead paying the much lower American duty. This tax break allowed the East India Company to sell tea to the colonists for half-price, much less than their fellow countrymen in England were paying.

But the removal of the tea tax was seen as favored treatment for a powerful economic interest and a further attack on the colonists’ freedoms. Moreover, it put colonial merchants and wealthy tea smugglers (most notably, John Hancock) at a huge disadvantage.

The Boston Tea Party was more a protest against the Tea Act. It had little to do with onerous taxes. Of course, politics makes strange bedfellows and 7-8000 dissidents who gathered in Boston Harbor that night each had their own motivation for being there.

It is important to note that Colonial merchants were getting their tea from smugglers who obviously were not paying any duties on the “imported tea”. As a result, they easily undercut the East India Company which didn’t make this powerful company very happy.

It’s analogous to organized crime smuggling cigarettes into the US and selling their wares directly to US smokers. It wouldn’t make the tobacco companies very happy either. Think about it this way: Since the taxes on cigarettes are substantial, a crime syndicate could sell them pretty cheap outside the law and still make a hefty profit.

The English Parliament passed the Tea Act in hopes of stemming the smuggling of tea and to protect the interests of the East India Company (by making it competitive with the contraband tea).

The Boston Tea Party also has its roots in the passage of the Stamp Act in 1765 and the Townsend Act in 1767. These two laws did impose new taxes on the colonists and numerous protests and boycotts ensued. The boycotts were so successful that by 1773, the East India Company was in massive debt and was holding huge stockpiles of tea which it could not sell. One can only imagine the strings it must have pulled to petition the Parliament to act on its behalf.

We’ve all heard the slogan “No taxation without representation”. And, yes, this was one of the colonists’ fundamental grievances. On the surface, they disagreed vociferously with Parliament’s perception that the colonists had “virtual representation” – meaning MPs virtually represented every person in the Empire.

In reality, the Parliament was correct. There was simply no practical way colonists could achieve actual representation. London and the Parliament were simply too far away to send representatives. What the real argument was about was self-determination. If taxes were necessary, the colonists wanted to decide. They wanted their own assemblies and control over their affairs.

Now I fully support the rights of Newt and his fellow “tea baggers” as the call themselves to express their opinions regardless of how wrong and hurtful they are. The rights to free speech, assembly, press, and the right to petition the government for redress of grievances are known as the “Four Freedoms”. They are the pillars of our democracy.

But the “tea baggers” long list of grievances was just a little fuzzy and no amount of public relations could seem to bring clarity to why this “highly organized” and “massive” demonstration was taking place.

In the words of Steve Martin, “And, you know, when you’re telling these little stories, here’s a good idea: have a point. It makes it so much more interesting for the listener!”

Copyright © 2008 Frank Schiavone

 <