|By Alan Hall | Excerpted from the May 2011 Socionomist
Originally published under the title “Rising Social Mood Steals Tea Party’s Thunder”
[Ed: The Tea Party movement was born in the negative mood climate of anger that grew around the March 2009 low in the stock market and continued to simmer throughout 2010. But in the past several years, the movement has suffered plummeting voter interest. In this timely report from 2011, socionomist Alan Hall hypothesizes that a roaring smaller degree social mood rally was behind the drop in the Party’s popularity.]
Figure 1 compares interest in the Tea Party to prices of U.S. stocks. The first sharp spike in searches on Google.com for the term “Tea Party” closely followed the March 2009 low in the Dow Jones Industrial Average. That is the point at which the Tea Party began its nationwide protests and adopted the Gadsden Flag—originally an emblem of colonial America’s angry revolt against British rule—as its symbol.
Subsequent spikes in Tea Party searches occurred on tax and election days, when news about the group climaxed, according to a daily index of references by major media(not shown). But in general, as social mood continued to rally in late 2010, interest in the Tea Party waned. Indeed, across its short life so far, the Tea Party seems to have had greatest appeal when social mood as registered by the Dow has trendied negatively or when people are at their most angry and fearful for other reasons.
Dale Robertson, de facto founder and president of the Tea Party movement, manifested the angry mood in February 2009 by displaying a highly polarizing racist sign. Robertson now presents a far more diplomatic face in a recent video interview at teaparty.org.
The Tea Party’s proponents in Congress have also tempered their vitriol in the elevated social mood environment. ABC News reported on April 20, 2011, “They swept into power on a wave of popular enthusiasm less than a year ago, but it’s not so easy being a Tea Party Congressman these days.” One freshman Tea Party House Representative communicated the difficulties in being a Tea Party legislator in a mixed-mood period: “I desperately want to vote ‘no’” on raising the debt ceiling, but “I also desperately don’t want [the economy] to crash.”1 … .
In this two-page article, Hall graphs the results from two polls measuring favorable / unfavorable views of the Tea Party Movement. He also explains why a revival of the movement is likely in coming years.
If you’re interested in American politics—or are part of the political process in any country—you should take a closer look at Hall’s study.
Want more content like this?
The Socionomist is the only monthly publication that offers you practical insights on the relationship between social mood, financial markets and cultural trends. Each issue warns you about big societal changes before they can harm you and reveals breakthrough opportunities emerging from trends in society.
(Socionomics Members: Log in for the full article and your complete, exclusive archive.)
Socionomist is a monthly online magazine designed to help
readers see and capitalize on the waves of social mood that contantly occur
throughout the world. It is published by the Socionomics
Institute, Robert R. Prechter, president; Matt Lampert, editor-in-chief;
Alyssa Hayden, editor; Alan Hall and Chuck Thompson, staff writers; Dave Allman
and Pete Kendall, editorial direction; Chuck Thompson, production; Ben Hall,
For subscription matters, contact Customer Care: Call 770-536-0309 (internationally) or 800-336-1618 (within the U.S.). Or email firstname.lastname@example.org.
We are always interested in guest submissions. Please email manuscripts and proposals to Chuck Thompson via email@example.com. Mailing address: P.O. Box 1618, Gainesville, Georgia, 30503, U.S.A. Phone 770-536-0309. Please consult the submission guidelines located at http://www.socionomics.net/PDF/Socionomist_Submission_Guidelines.pdf.
For our latest offerings: Visit our website, www.socionomics.net, listing BOOKS, DVDs and more.
Correspondence is welcome, but volume of mail often precludes a reply. Whether it is a general inquiry, socionomics commentary or a research idea, you can email us at firstname.lastname@example.org.
Most economists, historians and sociologists
presume that events determine society’s mood. But socionomics hypothesizes
the opposite: that social mood regulates the character of social events. The
events of history—such as investment booms and busts, political events,
macroeconomic trends and even peace and war—are the products of a naturally
occurring pattern of social-mood fluctuation. Such events, therefore, are not
randomly distributed, as is commonly believed, but are in fact probabilistically
predictable. Socionomics also posits that the stock market is the best available
meter of a society’s aggregate mood, that news is irrelevant to social
mood, and that financial and economic decision-making are fundamentally different
in that financial decisions are motivated by the herding impulse while economic
choices are guided by supply and demand. For more information about socionomic
theory, see (1) the text, The
Wave Principle of Human Social Behavior © 1999, by Robert Prechter;
(2) the introductory documentary History's
Hidden Engine; (3) the video Toward
a New Science of Social Prediction, Prechter’s 2004 speech before
the London School of Economics in which he presents evidence to support his
socionomic hypothesis; and (4) the Socionomics Institute’s website, www.socionomics.net.
At no time will the Socionomics Institute make specific recommendations about
a course of action for any specific person, and at no time may a reader, caller
or viewer be justified in inferring that any such advice is intended.
All contents copyright © 2019 Socionomics Institute. All rights reserved. Feel free to quote, cite or review, giving full credit. Typos and other such errors may be corrected after initial posting.