Peer-reviewed paper shows Tea Party movement was created by tobacco companies

[A'isha]

The research paper, titled ‘To quarterback behind the scenes, third-party efforts’: the tobacco industry and the Tea Party, was published in the journal Tobacco Control, one of the many academic medical journals published by the British Medical Association's publishing group.

According to the abstract,

Background The Tea Party, which gained prominence in the USA in 2009, advocates limited government and low taxes. Tea Party organisations, particularly Americans for Prosperity and FreedomWorks, oppose smoke-free laws and tobacco taxes.

Methods We used the Legacy Tobacco Documents Library, the Wayback Machine, Google, LexisNexis, the Center for Media and Democracy and the Center for Responsive Politics (opensecrets.org) to examine the tobacco companies’ connections to the Tea Party.

Results Starting in the 1980s, tobacco companies worked to create the appearance of broad opposition to tobacco control policies by attempting to create a grassroots smokers’ rights movement. Simultaneously, they funded and worked through third-party groups, such as Citizens for a Sound Economy, the predecessor of AFP and FreedomWorks, to accomplish their economic and political agenda. There has been continuity of some key players, strategies and messages from these groups to Tea Party organisations. As of 2012, the Tea Party was beginning to spread internationally.

Conclusions Rather than being a purely grassroots movement that spontaneously developed in 2009, the Tea Party has developed over time, in part through decades of work by the tobacco industry and other corporate interests. It is important for tobacco control advocates in the USA and internationally, to anticipate and counter Tea Party opposition to tobacco control policies and ensure that policymakers, the media and the public understand the longstanding connection between the tobacco industry, the Tea Party and its associated organisations.

Citizens for a Sound Economy, of course, was the group founded by the Koch brothers.

 

[Gord_in_Toronto]

One does not establish a dictatorship in order to safeguard a revolution; one makes a revolution in order to establish a dictatorship.”
― George Orwell, 1984 http://www.goodreads.com/work/quotes/153313

 

[Twiggett]

Right because when one is trying to understand a U.S. political movement the best source of information is clearly a British M.A publication. Shouldn't this be in the CT forum?

 

[A'isha]

Right because when one is trying to understand a U.S. political movement the best source of information is clearly a British M.A publication. Shouldn't this be in the CT forum?

I'm sure that would be a devastating criticism, were not the authors of this paper all scholars right here in America.

The BMJ Group is kind of global these days, you know.

 

[Twiggett]

Ok, so the authors are American. Explain to me why I should place any value on an article in a pro tobacco control journal, even one that is peer reviewed (Are history or politics normal areas of expertise for physicians?), about the history of a political movement? An article behind a pay wall that doesn't even say in the abstract what the thread title states no less.

Rather than being a purely grassroots movement that spontaneously developed in 2009, the Tea Party has developed over time, in part through decades of work by the tobacco industry and other corporate interests.

I ask again, shouldn't this be in the CT forum?

 

[thaiboxerken]

Ok, so the authors are American. Explain to me why I should place any value on an article in a pro tobacco control journal, even one that is peer reviewed (Are history or politics normal areas of expertise for physicians?), about the history of a political movement? An article behind a pay wall that doesn't even say in the abstract what the thread title states no less.



I ask again, shouldn't this be in the CT forum?

because they have actual evidence.

 

[Twiggett]

because they have actual evidence.

So you paid to read the article itself? Because if there is evidence I'd be glad to reconsider my stance. As of now all I see being presented is a quoted abstract that doesn't actually say what the thread title states that it does.

 

[WildCat]

because they have actual evidence.

And they'll show it to us if we just give them a credit card number!

 

[A'isha]

If you both submit your detailed criticisms of the paper in question in writing to the peer-reviewed journal in question, they'd undoubtedly be happy to publish them.

Be sure to let us know when that happens, okay?

 

[casebro]

From the OPs quote: "There has been continuity of some key players, strategies and messages from these groups to Tea Party organizations. "

Oh. So the lobbyists are still working, but for different groups? How does that make Tea Party a tobacco shill?

 

[A'isha]

You could always read the paper to find that out, I suppose.

Or maybe explain why this "Tea Party" website was established by the Koch's Citizens for a Sound Economy over a decade ago...

 

[jj]

ANTPogo, it's very hard to argue with people who are willingly misled by these anti-American, anti-science groups, as you are finding out.

The curious "they aren't American" reply that extended this thread, for instance, is profoundly misleading and dishonest. Facts are facts, regardless of who uncovers and exhibits them, and arguing that the facts were exposed by a foreigner is simply meaningless, intentionally misleading, and unnecessarily disputatious.

 

[Noztradamus]

From the OPs quote: "There has been continuity of some key players, strategies and messages from these groups to Tea Party organizations. "

Oh. So the lobbyists are still working, but for different groups? How does that make Tea Party a tobacco shill?

"Barack Obama: Brought to you by the Weather Underground"

 

[Puppycow]

Does it matter, frankly?

Whether the movement is "grassroots" or not is like arguing about whether a food product is "all natural" or not. I want to know whether it is nutritious and delicious, and I don't care whether it's "natural", "organic" or any of that other marketing hype.

At the end of the day the movement attracted enough popular ("grassroots") support to have a significant political impact. What other political movement in recent memory has had the wherewithal to unseat incumbent "establishment" members of congress and replace them with their own preferred candidates? You can't do that without a fairly significant popular base of support. You can't do that with "astroturf" alone.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

Does it matter, frankly?

Whether the movement is "grassroots" or not is like arguing about whether a food product is "all natural" or not. I want to know whether it is nutritious and delicious, and I don't care whether it's "natural", "organic" or any of that other marketing hype.

At the end of the day the movement attracted enough popular ("grassroots") support to have a significant political impact. What other political movement in recent memory has had the wherewithal to unseat incumbent "establishment" members of congress and replace them with their own preferred candidates? You can't do that without a fairly significant popular base of support. You can't do that with "astroturf" alone.

And more importantly in this case you have to either start off with establishing a base or co-opting an existing one to jump off of. Politics make strange bedfellows as the old saying goes.

 

[Malcolm Kirkpatrick]

You could always read the paper to find that out, I suppose.

Or maybe explain why this "Tea Party" website was established by the Koch's Citizens for a Sound Economy over a decade ago...

Koch Industries doesn't look like a major tobacco industry player. The AGW faithful tell us they're into fossil fuels. In any case, the Tea Party policy, Constitutionally-limited government (separation of powers, federalism, and markets), existed long before the modern Tea Party, and dates back to 1787.

What's your point? That academics will use guilt-by-association as an argument? We argee, but I thought that was obvious by now.

 

[marplots]

Any stats on how many members of the Tea Party use tobacco contrasted with members of other political groups?

I'm guessing a better hook-up for tobacco would be libertarians. Don't those guys seek a free-market hullaballoo, winner take all?

 

[Sam.I.Am]

Any stats on how many members of the Tea Party use tobacco contrasted with members of other political groups?

I'm guessing a better hook-up for tobacco would be libertarians. Don't those guys seek a free-market hullaballoo, winner take all?

I'd bet that Hipsters are the latest demographic because smoking is so retro. I have no data to back that up of course but it wouldn't surprise me in the least.

 

[marplots]

I'd bet that Hipsters are the latest demographic because smoking is so retro. I have no data to back that up of course but it wouldn't surprise me in the least.

Yeah, I'd forget the Tea Party -- we smokers vote with our wallets and tend to vote for the menthol party.

 

[Sam.I.Am]

Yeah, I'd forget the Tea Party -- we smokers vote with our wallets and tend to vote for the menthol party.

That's Kool...