Joseph Stack: Disillusioned Leftist, Not “Racist Right-wing Teabagger”
Despite the leftist ideology revealed in Joseph Stack’s manifesto, shortly after he crashed his plane into the IRS building in Austin, TX, progressive media lept to align him with the Tea Party movement, describing him as right-wing, racist, anti-tax, patriot, or militia. Sensing the danger the average American citizen in the Tea Party movement represents to Democrats in 2010 and 2012, they seized the opportunity to insinuate Stack’s alliance hoping to halt the movement’s rising populist wave across the nation.
As expected, leftists at the NY Times, Washington Post, NY Mag, Time, Newsweek, ABC and Daily Kos swiftly established the talking points. ABC News went so far as to resurrect Janet Napolitano’s quickly retracted Depatment of Homeland Security April 2009 report citing,
“Rightwing extremists have capitalized on the election of the first African American president, and are focusing their efforts to recruit new members, mobilize existing supporters, and broaden their scope and appeal through propoganda, but they have not yet turned to attack planning.”
Quoting Mark Potok, of the Southern Poverty Law Center, ABC maligned,
“the result is what [is] referred to as a ‘broad-based, right-wing populist rebellion.’”
But Joseph Stack cannot be branded as a member of the right. Stack was neither a teapartier nor right-winger. And he was more than just a loon who attempted to avoid paying income taxes. Although incoherent and underdeveloped, his rants are decidedly left-wing and his manifesto, or at least parts of it, are very similar to diaries at the Daily Kos. Stack expressed hatred for George W. Bush, the Catholic Church, and capitalism. He attacked “fat cat” owners, railed against the health care industry and bemoaned the lack of consideration for the masses. Joseph Stack was devastated that his dreams of a benevolent government have been shattered.
In his manifesto he proclaims,
““The intent of this exercise and our efforts was to bring about a much-needed re-evaluation of the laws that allow the monsters of organized religion to make such a mockery of people who earn an honest living. “
“There are two “interpretations” for every law; one for the very rich, and one for the rest of us.”
“Now when the wealthy f*ck up, the poor get to die for the mistakes… isn’t that a clever, tidy solution. “
“The joke we call the American medical system, including the drug and insurance companies, are murdering tens of thousands of people a year and stealing from the corpses and victims they cripple”
“The recent presidential puppet GW Bush and his cronies in their eight years certainly reinforced for all of us that this criticism rings equally true for all of the government.”
Even the leftists at the Democratic Underground recognize one of their own,
“I think he presented his case well, lucidly, and has expressed what many of us here on DU have expressed: Anger at the injustices done to the American people, frustration at the unwillingness of our government to help us, and helplessness at the realization that we ultimately have no power.”
“There are many points made that I read on DU everyday.”
Overtly embracing Karl Marx, Stack chose to end his manifesto with an attack on free-market capitalism,
“The communist creed: From each according to his ability, to each according to his need. The capitalist creed: From each according to his gullibility, to each according to his greed.”
It is the Left who are slaves to Marxism, the foundation of today’s Democratic Party. A foundation which celebrates resentment and advocates control of the individual while rejecting the notions of liberty and freedom. This foundation forms a trap for the idealogue who will eventually become saddened by the failure of his expectations. Joseph Stack fell into the trap formed by the fraud of statism. In the end his leftists ideals left him disillusioned, a consequence both destructive and deadly.
I can always count on you Ms Blaine for intelligent analysis. THANK YOU!
Evidently someone forgot to send the memo to the tea partiers that popped up saluting him.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/2010/02/...
And yes, this perfectly explains why he crashed the plane into a GOVERNMENT building. Just face it. There are problems with both government AND corporate corruption against the people. This was a guy who felt the pinch from both sides and didn't know how to handle it.
Are you sure those were teapartiers? Perhaps it was the same members of the left who started the Facebook page trying to denegrate the Tea Party movement.
"…same members of the left who started the Facebook page…"
Do you have proof of this, or is it speculation? The only things I was able to find is that the main FB profile being mentioned was started by Emily Walters, yet no one seemed to know with whom this person aligned herself. So far it's all just speculation with both sides trying to cover their ass. Some have said she wasn't an "official" tea party member, but what difference does that make if someone believes in the same ideals as the tea party movement? Is the tea party movement gonna require membership cards now?
And that still doesn't address the many government grievances also mentioned in Stack's note. Like I said, he sounds like a man who got pinched from BOTH sides (government AND corporate greed) and didn't know how to deal.
Come on Liz. You're not saying that there aren't at least a handful of people who showed up at some of those Tea Parties last year who are capable of espousing those kinds of views, are you?
A handful of extremists can be found on every political side. Those who I know are upstanding, professsional people who object to the direction the country is heading with increased government regulation, taxation and control. Tea Parties are not aligned with any one political affiliation despite what the Left and media would like to report.
That sentence should read:
Those Tea Party attendees I know are upstanding, professsional people who object to the direction the country is heading with increased government regulation, taxation and control.
Liz what is the "I Hate Bush" graphic above? Where is it from?
Well, one thing that I clearly don't agree with you on is that any person that I would likely call an "extremist" – someone like, say, Joseph Stack – is not someone that I would be inclined to describe as an "upstanding professional". Perhaps I've misread your post?
Sorry Liz. I did misread your post. I was reading your original entry and not the correction which you entered below it.
Accept my apology, por favor.
I agree completely.
"This was a guy who felt the pinch from both sides…."
But when a lefty kills somebody, he magically becomes right-wing….
I saw Stack as a disgrunted Obama voter who looked for the Democratic reign in DC as a way that would "fix" his personal problems. After all, the left had promised him Utopia. What drove him over the edge is that he saw the final product of his dreams in the election of Obama and it was not what he expected.
He is a product of total disillusionment.
Surely you aren't implying that much of this man's rant did not come as much from right-wing, anti-government propaganda as it did from the left. Any extremist positions which even suggest a resort to the use violence of any kind should be thoroughly condemned by members of both sides of the ideological spectrum. As a left-leaning moderate, I blame the left-wing nut-jobs in this country as much as anyone else for stirring up fear, hate, and divisiveness.
In the immortal words of Rodney King, "Can't we just all get along?"
"In the immortal words of Rodney King, 'Can't we just all get along?' "
Not according to all of recorded history. You lefties are really slow learners.
I believe that Rodney King was simply offering a plea. Are you implying that lefties are somehow "slow learners" because they believe that it's at least worth trying for us "to all get along"? I don't what your ideological beliefs are, but they apparently include a rather healthy dose of cynicism.
If you keep reasoning always in terms of left and right you will be unable to understand reality. Ortega y Gasset, already in 1937, in his Prologue to "La rebelión de las masas," gave one of the best clarifications of what actually means to accept the left and right categorization: "To be of the Left or to be of the Right is to choose one of the many ways available to people for being an idiot; both are, actually, forms of moral paralysis".
A very astute observation. While I would say that to describe any particular political position as being somewhat left-of-center or mostly right-of-center is not necessarily an unreasonable thing to do, I would tend to agree that to consistently choose to identify exclusively with either the right or the left can easily lead to extremism. I have observed that the more ideologically extremist one becomes, the more that person actually begins to talk and act almost exactly like his "opposite" on the other side.
I don't think you understand what it means to be on the Left or the Right. http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/THE%2...
While so many are trying to tie Joseph Stack's actions to either the right or the left, one must at least be willing to conclude that the current presence of so much anti-government rhetoric which dominates much of certain television networks, talk-radio stations, and the blogosphere surely played a part in fanning the flames of this man's mental instability.
The very ominous phrase which ends the first paragraph of his manifesto is very revealing – "Desperate times call for desperate measures". I won't mention any name in particular, but I have heard that phrase used more than once over the past months from a well-known, anti-big-government political pundit.
While "not trying to tie Joseph Stack's actions to either the right or the left," you proceed in the same sentence to covertly attempt to do just that when you say, "certain television networks, talk-radio stations, and the blogosphere surely played a part in fanning the flames of this man's mental instability."
You don't want Stack asociated with the Left because you are left of center, yet his manfesto fails to mention the actual leftist President for the past year who increased his taxes, instead focusing on Bush.
And things like, "…in the case of the GM executives… when it's time for their gravy train to crash under the weight of their gluttony and overwhelming stupidity, the force of the full federal government has no difficulty coming to their aid within days if not hours," or "…corrupt union (not to mention the government) raided their pension funds and stole their retirement," doesn't sound like part of something being promoted by the tea party movement against the actions of the Obama administration?
According to this man, BOTH sides had their hands dirty, and trying to blame either side instead of trying to work together on solutions to our collective problems isn't going to get anyone anywhere.
If you re-read my posts, you will plainly see that I believe that Joseph Stack was apparently ("apparently" being the operative word here) influenced by BOTH right and left extremist ideology. The above post to which you are replying is simply an effort to demonstrate that there were clearly influences from the right. No matter what views others like myself may present in these posts, I have to admit that you made a pretty substantial argument in your above article "Joseph Stack: Disillusioned Leftist, Not Racist, Right-wing Tea Bagger". But it's our job to try to merely balance out that view – not to try to contradict it. I'm actually halfway on your side on this one, Liz. I'm afraid that's the best I can do.
I tell you the more i read the more I realize to what extent progresives are willing to lie! This guy says he hates Bush Hates capitalism hates our healthcare and ends his note with the Communist creed and the capitalist creed! What more evidence do you need to say he was an on the extreme left, Saul ALinsky's book in his hand! The Progressives are in such deep Sh**T come November that they will spin everything they can just like Saul Alinsky taught them!
Perhaps you should go back and read all the previous posts again, and then find a copy of Joseph Stack's manifesto and read that all the way through again. While it's painfully obvious that this guy had rather easily-recognized, life-long leftist inclinations and beliefs, there's no doubt that the kind of anti-tax, anti-big government propaganda which has been coming from many (but no, not all) of those Tea Party attendees and from the right in general over most of the past year clearly had to have played a part in this guy's thinking. Whatever drove him to incorporate those beliefs from both the left AND the right to help him push himself over the edge was, in the end, his and his alone.
For your information, most of the liberal Democrats that I know who voted for Obama don't even know who Saul Alinsky is. Much of what Glenn Beck talks about on his radio and TV programs is just sort of made up. I hate to tell you, but the vast majority of liberals in this country are not progressive, Saul Alinsky-reading, Che Guevara T-shirt-wearing, Stalinist-Marxist pals of Bill Ayers who are ready to kill your grandmothers and steal your country at the first opportunity. But to be fair, neither do I think that most conservatives are right-wing, John Birch Society anti-communist Klu Klux Klanners who are preparing to buy up as many guns as possible and all move to Texas or New Hampshire and secede from the United States of America where no blacks, Mexicans, or gays will be allowed in.
"Much of what Glenn Beck talks about on his radio and TV programs is just sort of made up. "
No, that's really not true. Have you fact checked him? Exactly what has he claimed that you know to be a falsehood?
" But to be fair, neither do I think that most conservatives are right-wing, John Birch Society anti-communist Klu Klux Klanners who are preparing to buy up as many guns as possible and all move to Texas or New Hampshire and secede from the United States of America where no blacks, Mexicans, or gays will be allowed in. "
Hmmmm, now that's an idea. The Blacks in this country are getting more bolden everyday, the Mexicans need to go home, and I for one am sick of the GLBT Community.
Thank you for providing some direct quotations from Stack's angry manifesto. It's quite illuminating, and demonstrates the bias behind many mainstream media reporters.
His attack on the government, however, should serve as a reminder that rhetoric matters. Let's keep the debates rational, reduce the continual name-calling, and find a way to solve our deep national problems. In a democracy, we must be able to disagree without being disagreeable.
Well spoken.
Rodney King: violent, alcoholic felon who spent all his settlement cash on drugs. Great guy to quote…
Can't, can't we all just get along here?…
I didn't quote Rodney King to simply use it as an opportunity to lavish praise on Rodney King, but this time I will. If you're old enough to remember the Los Angeles riots of 1992, you may remember that over one billion dollars worth of real estate went up in flames over a six-day period, and that fifty-three innocent people lost their lives. I personally believe that it was incredibly brave for Rodney King to go on television and plead for order during a riot that he himself was actually responsible for. I don't understand why it's somehow uncool to believe that trying to bring people together is eminently preferable to encouraging them to fight to the death – I really don't.
I don't believe Rodney King was "actually responsible for" the LA riots. That is a lot to put on one person. Maybe he was in the sense the court verdict was the spark igniting the fuel that had been building up for quite some time, but it wasn't a one incident event. A book by Keith Phillips called "Out of Ashes" explores this in greater detail, if anyone is interested.
Let's be honest here. This guy was a nut job. He had a bunch of screws loose and then he decided to kill people and himself. His "manifesto" was a mishmash of stuff from both the extreme left and right. We'll find out soon the real story behind this but for now I'm in with the "Joseph Stack was a suicidal crackpot" camp.
Okay, Ghost, which "stuff" was extreme-right? Now, be accurate in your material, cause whichever quote you cite, I'm gonna check it myself.
JW
Once again, a common-sense approach to this whole debacle.
In the end, I would agree with Ms. Blaine that this man was probably a "left-winger" for most of his life – much of his manifesto does indeed reveal a decidedly leftist discontent. But as I attempted to point out in a reply to Mr. Piero de Bellis above, Joe Stack had apparently moved away from moderate, mainstream politics years ago. His long-standing obsession with the IRS and taxes is something that is heard almost daily these days from conservative libertarians like Neal Boortz, who has been railing against the tax code and the intrusiveness of the Federal government for decades. More recently, the intense level of outspoken frustration with taxes and big government has come primarily from the right, and from the Tea Party movement in particular.
The posts from those like myself who are willing to acknowledge that Joe Stack was more than likely influenced as much from the left as from the right, however, are on the right track here. It's amusing to me that so many would prefer to insist that this world is neatly divided into different ideological camps where "never the twain shall meet" rather than trying harder to find ways in which can agree to look for common solutions to our vast economic problems.
The last sentence of the above comment should read, "..rather than trying harder to find ways in which
we can agree to look for common solutions…"
I swear that last post was not entered that way.
Perhaps his obsession with the IRS came from his interactions with the IRS. Conservative talk radio and anti-socialist political movements had zilch to do with it. Desperate people are unpredictale at best. The shameless attempt of the leftist media to blame this psycho's actions on anything but himself is an Alinsky smear tactic. Nancy already tried it once and it didn't work, it won't work this time either. Occams razor should be applied to the investigation behind his motivation.
Well, right now we don't really know whether this guy ever listened to the radio, watched television, read newspapers and magazines, or surfed the internet. But it's a pretty good bet that he didn't come up with all that anger and frustration all by himself – as you may know, he admitted to having "interactions" with anti-tax groups from as far back as twenty-five years ago. Oh, and let's not forget that he was a computer software engineer as well, so I would imagine that he was more than familiar with "the google".
And yes, I think we can all agree that he alone was the only one who was ultimately responsible for his actions. But like a previous poster said – that doesn't mean that our words don't have consequences. If our words weren't able to somehow influence how other people thought or acted, then why have books been selling well for almost five hundred years, and why do radio, television, movies, and the internet continue to be important sources of entertainment and information for a very large portion of the population of this planet?
Those who disagree with increased taxation and attend Tea Parties are from all walks of life and political affiliations. I know many Democrats, Independents and Republicans who have attended. Trying to brand the Tea Party movement as solely a "right-wing" issue is false.
The Tea Party is not "solely" right wing, I agree. But I'm pretty sure it's mostly right-wing and right-leaning independents – and I seriously doubt if the left is represented in any significant numbers.
I would be curious to know, however, if anyone has ever done a reliable survey to actually find out what the general break-down of self-identified political affiliations of the Tea Party movement really is.
Funny, I once thought as you, until I actually attended an event where I was corrected many times over. Do you think all Democrats are progressive leftists who believe after the past year that Obama, Pelosi, Reid and the DNC have the people's best interest at heart? Not only are Independents sobering up from their koolaid grog, but Democrats are also.
I was just reading joe stacks manifesto (you will have to click my name for the link, i couldnt post it here)… whilst i dont agree with what he did his manifesto makes a lot of sense and i think it echoes how a lot of Americans feel right now.
The Left has little to fear from disgruntled loose screws who commit suicide. Their "concerns" merely cover up their real fear: American voters waking up to their destructive agenda.
So does that mean that now it must be the Party of "No" that has somehow managed to put together the most "constructive" agenda this country has seen in a very long time?
If there really is a party of "no," sign me up. Govt. controlled health care? No. Higher taxes? No. Bureaucrats solving our problems? No thank you. In fact, the Bill of Rights is the most valuable list of "no-nos" this country has. I'm hard pressed to think of anything more constructive than working towards a more limited government.
Great work here, Liz! It's a home run. And didn't we know the Lefties would immediately grab this one and accuse the Right Wing. Makes a great distraction from the Jihad Problem. I saw Timothy McVeigh's name came up right away, too.
Best,
JW
I believe the Unibomber was enamored with one Algore. No?
I dreamed I saw Joe Stack last night,
alive as you and me.
Says I "But Joe, you're one week dead"
"I never died" said he,
"I never died" said he.
"The IRS Bosses killed you Joe,
they killed you Joe" says I.
"Takes more than the IRS to kill a man"
Says Joe "I didn't die"
Says Joe "I didn't die"
"In Austin, Texas, Joe," says I,
Him standing by my bed,
"They framed you on a murder charge,"
Says Joe, "But I ain't dead,"
Says Joe, "But I ain't dead."
And standing there as big as life
and smiling with his eyes.
Says Joe "What they can never kill
went on to organize,
went on to organize"
From San Diego up to Maine,
in every mine and mill,
Where working men defend their rights,
it's there you'll find Joe Hill,
it's there you'll find Joe Hill!
I dreamed I saw Joe Hill last night,
alive as you and me.
Says I "But Joe, you're one week dead"
"I never died" said he,
"I never died" said he.
Here's my diagnosis: he was on the verge of realizing that his leftist dogma was totally bankrupt and produced exactly the opposite results intended. Rather than face this existential realization he decided to end his life. Progressivism is a mental disorder and those who suffer from it are delusional and unstable. The disorder is more dangerous to their life than smoking so it is advisable they receive treatment as soon as possible.
I seem to recall two distinct periods in our history where both liberal elements and conservative elements said enough is enough. The first was our war for independence when we told King George to stop taking our British civil liberties away from us (right to trial in America, rather than being shipped back to England, right to trial by jury, etc. see Declaration for full details), as well as attempting to take away our right to self-govern (taxing ourselves to provide funds for Britain's protection against hostile French and Native Americans). In this case, both elements joined together to retain the rights of Englishmen (thus a war to conserve our freedoms, not create new ones).
The second pitted conservative elements against each other. Our first civil war. Conservative, mostly christian, elements of the north wanted to abolish slavery, which was perhaps a liberal idea. Conservative, mostly christian, elements of the south wanted to keep slavery and reaffirm Jeffersonian "state's rights theory" that said, yes, the Constitution was stronger than the Articles of Confederation, but not as strong as the Federalists and Chief Justice John Marshall has said.
Now we seem to face a similar time of crisis. Both liberal and conservative elements are–to put it mildly–are upset. But are they needlessly upset with each other. Both, in my opinion, are really upset with the status quo, governmentally and corporately. I tend to be conservative on most, but definitely not all, issues. And I have begun to ask myself, who has been creating the problems? The answer has been, repeatedly, elites from both parties. And pundits from both sides stir it all up. Who's really creating your problems.