“The Americans are poor haters in international affairs because of their innate feeling of superiority over all foreigners. Should Americans begin to hate foreigners wholeheartedly, it will be an indication that they have lost confidence in their own way of life.” — Eric Hoffer, The True Believer

Be sure to read Steve Benen’s take on Beckapalooza and the tea party movement and the emptiness of its rhetoric.

This is about a fight for American “liberties.”

That sounds great, too. Who’s against American “liberties”? But I’m still looking for some details. Might this include law-abiding American Muslims exercising their liberties and converting a closed-down clothing store into a community center? No, we’re told, not those kinds of liberties.

This is about giving Americans who work hard and play by the rules more opportunities.

I’m all for that, too. But would these opportunities include the chance for hard-working Americans to bring their kids to the doctor if they get sick, even if the family can’t afford insurance? No, we’re told, not those kinds of opportunities.

It goes on. The point is that (a) the teabaggers don’t actually have a cause, just a lot of resentments; and (2) their slogans and symbols are displays of tribal dominance only. Most teabaggers have no idea what the slogans and symbols mean.

To get a clue about what’s going on with the teabaggers, look to Eric Hoffer and his analysis of mass behavior. Like another wise man, Erich Fromm, Hoffer recognized that people march blindly into mass movements because the group provides something the individual feels is lacking in himself.

In slightly different ways, both Fromm and Hoffer noted that the fanatic was someone trying to escape himself by merging with a group. Within the group the helpless can feel powerful; the confused can find certitude; the guilty can find absolution. Theatrical events such as yesterday’s Beck-a-palooza provide temporary relief from the fears and disappointments gnawing at their psyches.

So, ultimately, a successful mass movement doesn’t need a purpose other than to be a mass movement. It may be that a mass movement so utterly content-free and so obviously contrived as the “tea party” is exceptional, but show me a population of frustrated, disappointed, and resentful people, and there’s a mass movement waiting to happen. All it takes is a “leader” who can tap into those frustrations, disappointments, and resentments.

As Hoffer says, the propagandist does not instill new opinions but “articulates and justifies opinions already present in the minds of its recipients. The gifted propagandist brings to a boil ideas and passions already simmering in the minds of his hearers. He echoes their innermost feelings. Where opinion is not coerced, people can be made to believe only in what they already ‘know.'”

So, it doesn’t matter that the tea party has no discernible cause other than its own existence. It’s got everything else a mass movement needs to thrive and grow, especially hate. Hoffer went on and on about the power of hate as a unifying agent.

You don’t have to be Freud to realize how mostly white, mostly middle class, mostly middle-aged and older people can feel that today’s America is not the country they knew when they were much younger, and not like that one bit. Even white privilege, while still around, ain’t what it used to be. To powerful interests manipulating public opinion to their particular advantage, this demographic group is low-hanging fruit.

And with the help of adulation junkies like Palin and Beck who know exactly what to say to bring those ideas and passions to a boil — and have no scruples about saying it even when it’s nonsense — the mob is primed for the master’s command.

[Update: For those who wish to send a donation to the Muslim community in Murfreesboro, there is a donation button on their website.]

Arsonists set fire to some equipment at the construction site of a mosque in Murfreesboro , Tennessee. I guess it was too close to Ground Zero.

The ATM, FBI, and local law enforcement are investigating.

There have been Muslims in the community for 30 years; they have been worshiping in an office building. Members of the Muslim community say they have never experienced hostility until they began to build their new facility.

Opponents of a new Islamic center say they believe the mosque will be more than a place of prayer; they are afraid the 15-acre site that was once farmland will be turned into a terrorist training ground for Muslim militants bent on overthrowing the U.S. government.

“They are not a religion. They are a political, militaristic group,” Bob Shelton, a 76-year-old retiree who lives in the area, told The Associated Press.

Shelton was among several hundred demonstrators who recently wore “Vote for Jesus” T-shirts and carried signs that said “No Sharia law for USA!,” referring to the Islamic code of law.

Others took their opposition further, spray painting a sign announcing the “Future site of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro” and tearing it up.

Earlier this summer opponents criticized the planned mosque at hearings held by the Rutherford County Commission, as supporters held prayer vigils.

At one such prayer vigil, WTVF reported opponents speaking out against construction.

“No mosque in Murfreesboro. I don’t want it. I don’t want them here,” Evy Summers said to WTVF. “Go start their own country overseas somewhere. This is a Christian country. It was based on Christianity.”

So can we call Evy Summers et al. bigots now? If that isn’t bigotry, I don’t know what is.

All you need to know.

Frank Rich writes about “The Billionaires Bankrolling the Tea Party,” meaning Rupert Murdoch and the Koch boys.

All three tycoons are the latest incarnation of what the historian Kim Phillips-Fein labeled “Invisible Hands” in her prescient 2009 book of that title: those corporate players who have financed the far right ever since the du Pont brothers spawned the American Liberty League in 1934 to bring down F.D.R. You can draw a straight line from the Liberty League’s crusade against the New Deal “socialism” of Social Security, the Securities and Exchange Commission and child labor laws to the John Birch Society-Barry Goldwater assault on J.F.K. and Medicare to the Koch-Murdoch-backed juggernaut against our “socialist” president.

Frank doesn’t mention this, but ultra-conservative Christianity has been part of this mix all along, also. Fundamentalist preachers railed against child labor laws, for example. I think they misread the part where Jesus said “Suffer the little children …”

Anyway, the Koch boys’ daddy was crazy, too, and warned of a Communist takeover of the government back in the day. Frank says you could dig up Koch Senior’s opinions from 50 years ago and read them verbatim to any tea party gathering today, and they’d fit right in.

I’ve got some quibbles with some of what Rich writes, though. He says that Jane Meyer’s recent portrait of the Koch brothers in the New Yorker caused a stir among “Manhattan’s liberal elite,” who associated the Koch family with cultural philanthropy and didn’t know about their political activities. If that’s true, then “Manhattan’s liberal elite” have had their heads up their asses for the past several years. Rank and file progressive activists were not surprised at all.

But the people who really have no clue about the puppet masters are the puppets themselves, such as the fools who clogged up Washington today to see Glenn Beck and Sarah Palin. If you try to explain to them they’re being manipulated to work against their own best interests by a small cadre of mega-billionaires (more than just those three, of course) they start sputtering about George Soros. But, as Rich says, “Soros is a publicity hound who is transparent about where he shovels his money.” The Koch boys stand behind the scenery, pulling the strings. And, unlike the Koch boys, Soros’s causes are not tied to how he makes his money.

When David Koch ran to the right of Reagan as vice president on the 1980 Libertarian ticket (it polled 1 percent), his campaign called for the abolition not just of Social Security, federal regulatory agencies and welfare but also of the F.B.I., the C.I.A., and public schools — in other words, any government enterprise that would either inhibit his business profits or increase his taxes. He hasn’t changed. As Mayer details, Koch-supported lobbyists, foundations and political operatives are at the center of climate-science denial — a cause that forestalls threats to Koch Industries’ vast fossil fuel business. While Koch foundations donate to cancer hospitals like Memorial Sloan-Kettering in New York, Koch Industries has been lobbying to stop the Environmental Protection Agency from classifying another product important to its bottom line, formaldehyde, as a “known carcinogen” in humans (which it is).

Rich shows he is still a couple of steps behind when he says there is still a difference between “mainstream conservatism” and the Koch’s “fringe” agenda. There is no “mainstream” conservatism; just a few fossils left over from the Time Before Glenn Beck who haven’t realized they are dead yet. The fringe is the only potent “conservatism” active at the moment. “The Koch agenda is morphing into the G.O.P. agenda,” Rich writes. Make that past tense, Rich; “morphed.”

But the real issue, as Rich says, is that working “Americans are aiding and abetting their [Koch, Koch and Murdoch] selfish interests.” Those rubes on the Washington mall today know that something is very wrong, which is true, but they don’t see how they are enabling the very forces that are making America more and more dysfunctional. They wear T-shirts proclaiming “liberty” and “don’t tread on me” even as they chain themselves to their corporate lords. Pathetic.

Update: A crowd estimate commissioned by CBSNews put the size of the crowd at Beck-a-looza at 87,000. See also Dave Niewert, “Snoring Honor: Beck’s big rally just a long-winded and boring sermon. And boy, was the crowd white.”

Update update: Scenes From a Glenn Beck Festival

You might remember that one of the Bush Administration’s big ideas was to find ways to funnel tax money to religious, or “faith-based,” organizations. Most of us recognized this as a way to cement the loyalty of the Religious Right. We lefties grumbled when our tax dollars went to programs like the “silver ring thing” and to churches promoting a right-wing political agenda. But neither did we riot in the streets about it, although perhaps we should have.

The argument behind giving tax dollars to “faith-based” organizations was that the money was supposed to be used for charitable and other initiatives that would benefit entire communities, and that this money was to be kept separate from the organization’s religious activities. This ignores the reality that proselytism is woven into the fabric of most Christian charity work, but no one was supposed to notice that.

So, holding that thought, Reuters reports that someone in the New York City comptroller’s office said that Park51 might be eligible to receive tax-free bonds to help pay for construction of the cultural center. The center would have to repay the bonds, which would be issued through a local development corporation created for the purpose. Reuters continues,

The mosque’s backers hope to raise a total of $70 million in tax-exempt debt to build the center, according to the New York Times. Tax laws allow such funding for religiously affiliated non-profits if they can prove the facility will benefit the general public and their religious activities are funded separately.

I’m sure you can imagine the tantrum-throwing that story touched off. “I’m sure the ACLU and Islamist-loving Lefturds will be outraged by this violation of separation of church and state…” wailed one blogger.

So let’s talk about that. Whenever tax money is given to any religious organization, I say there needs to be lots and lots of transparency and many, many strings attached to it. Right now a lot of religious groups are protesting the Obama Administration’s policy of prohibiting religious groups from religious discrimination in employment if they receive federal funds. From OMB Watch (posted 8/26/10):

Faith based organizations have always served their communities, providing a wide range of services, what continues to make the issue contentious is that some religious groups want to base their hiring policies on the religion one practices, effectively using tax payer funds to selectively discriminate. Yesterday leaders from over 100 religious organizations sent a press release urging Congress against tampering with what they call “freedom of religion”, contending that pending legislation would deny religious charities receiving federal grants their fundamental right to hire people who share their faith. The groups recent activity appears to be aimed at a provision in legislation to reauthorize the Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration H.R. 5466, that would prohibit them from receiving federal money if they consider a job applicants religion when hiring.

But if these groups are using the funds to run a completely religion-free program, then it shouldn’t matter what faith their employees follow, should it? This is a good policy that should help keep these charities honest about keeping religion out of taxpayer-funded programs.

(BTW, I learned today that over a 20-year period, $1.5 billion in federal money was flushed away in abstinence-only sex ed programs that didn’t work. There is other data showing that the Bush Administration’s faith-based programs didn’t have the promised effect of providing more social services to communities. It mostly all fizzled out.)

Anyway, by the same token, seems to me that if Park51 receives any kind of tax breaks for its building, New York can require that the center can’t deny employment to non-Muslims. That ought to reassure all those terrified folks out in Gopher Hole, Nebraska, that Park51 won’t be a secret jihadi training center that will dispatch suicide bombers to blow up the local VFW lodge.

Oh, and to Mr. Riehl, who writes, “The damned thing will be up before they ever get around to doing anything on the precise spot where the WTC stood.” Be assured that “ground zero” is now a construction site and several stories of the “freedom tower” have been built. Do keep up, dude.

On the other hand, I keep reading that the Park51 project will take a few years to complete. They don’t even have architectural drawings yet, and they are just beginning fund raising. The Freedom Tower (I really hope they don’t call it that; it sounds so Orwellian) is supposed to be finished in 2013, and no one expects construction on Park51 to be underway that soon.

I have a post up on the other blog about parallels between the Japanese-American internment during World War II and anti-mosque hysteria today.

In Today’s Outrage, Michael Fletcher writes in the Washington Post that the state governments in Louisiana and Mississippi structured their Katrina recovery programs in ways that favored the more affluent.

I started to title this post More News That Isn’t News, especially since the states have been especially stingy to people who lost homes in predominately African American neighborhoods. This month a federal judge ruled that Louisiana’s formula for distributing recovery funds discriminated against African Americans, so the state is begrudgingly preparing to cough out a few more dollars for low-income residents.

Some things never seem to change, do they?

You may have heard about some remarks by Rep. John Fleming (R-LA), who told a Republican women’s club that the November elections are a choice between Christianity and godlessness. Here’s what he said:

We are either going to go down the socialist road and become like western Europe and create, I guess really a godless society, an atheist society. Or we’re going to continue down the other pathway where we believe in freedom of speech, individual liberties and that we remain a Christian nation. So we’re going to have to win that battle, we’re going to have to solve that argument before we can once again reach across and work together on things.

You can find a similar statement on Rep. Fleming’s website, on a page headlined “America’s Religious Heritage and Religious Freedom” (emphasis added; pay close attention to how he uses the words “rights” and “freedom”):

The American people, in the vast majority, are a profoundly religious people. We must never allow the noisy liberal minority and radical groups like the ACLU to impose their secular vision on the majority. We must resist the oppression of religious liberty.

We must never allow the Liberal, anti-God, anti-religious freedom minority to remove the words Under God from the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag. We must never allow them to abolish our National Motto: In God We Trust.

The Ten Commandments are the very foundation of the American system of law and justice. I will vigorously defend the rights to display the Ten Commandments in our schools, city halls, courthouses, and other public venues. He will stand up for the right of public officials to acknowledge God.

I support the right of students to pray in our schools. I support the rights of students, parents, teachers, and members of the community to pray at graduation ceremonies and school sports events.

Rep. Fleming is, of course, is not just revising history (the Ten Commandments are not the “very foundation of the American system of law and justice,” for example); he is turning the founder’s concept of “rights” on its head. The guys who wrote the Constitution added the Bill of Rights as limitations on government so that government cannot deprive individual citizens of their rights. Among their concerns was that a religious faction might gain control of government and use government to force their beliefs and practices on everyone. As James Madison wrote in Federalist #10:

If a faction consists of less than a majority, relief is supplied by the republican principle, which enables the majority to defeat its sinister views by regular vote. It may clog the administration, it may convulse the society; but it will be unable to execute and mask its violence under the forms of the Constitution. When a majority is included in a faction, the form of popular government, on the other hand, enables it to sacrifice to its ruling passion or interest both the public good and the rights of other citizens.

Madison goes on to say that there are two ways to prevent a majority faction from tyrannizing a minority. One way is to somehow prevent people from forming passionate opinions and interests that cause them to form factions. The other is to prevent the effects of factions, depriving them of the means to tyrannize the minority. And the eventual remedy was the Bill of Rights, which lists stuff that government may not do even if a majority wants to do it.

In other words, putting limits on the power of government is the chief means to prevent large factions from seizing the means to tyrannize everyone else. In the case of religion, government may not interfere with everyone’s free exercise of religion, which is the same thing as saying a majority religious faction may not use government to interfere with other peoples’ free exercise of religion. (See also Jonathan Turley, “James Madison and the Mujahedeen.”)

But “rights” according to Rep. Fleming is the right of the majority faction to maintain tribal dominance by erecting its totems in government buildings (the Ten Commandments in courthouses) and to force everyone to participate in its religious rituals (prayers at graduation ceremonies and football games).

I think too many Americans have no idea what “rights” are. They throw the word around a lot, but they have no idea what it means. As in the Park51 controversy, even people who pay lip service to the rights of a Sufi congregation to build an Islamic center on their own property seem to think that others have a “right” to stop them by force, either legal or physical. In this context, “right” seems to mean “power.”

See also the last part of Fleming’s web page:

The Constitution gives Congress the authority to limit the jurisdiction of federal judges. We must stop radical judges from legislating from the bench, destroying revered American religious traditions and religious symbols that have been part of American life for 230 years.

Limit the jurisdiction of federal judges? The Constitution gave Congress the authority to establish federal courts inferior to the Supreme Court, but it doesn’t give Congress the power to take authority away from the courts. Again, there’s much waving around of the Constitution without actually understanding it. (See “Truth and Totems.”)