Recently, people who disagree with the stimulus package that's been proposed to get our country out of this recession have organized what they call "Tea Parties," named after the Boston Tea Party. It's great when people get involved in political matters. But the association with the Boston Tea Party fails on several levels.
First, the Boston Tea Party was an act of civil disobedience that required a great deal of courage. Had the men that participated in it gotten caught, they would've been punished. The modern tea parties require no real courage, just a willingness to get together for a cause.
Second, the Boston Tea Party was performed by men that were very unpatriotic. Remember, this was before the US government was organized. These men were unpatriotic to their government--which was the British Empire. I hardly think the participants in the modern tea parties would want to be seen as unpatriotic...but they give that impression by calling their gatherings tea parties.
Third, and most importantly, the purpose of the Boston Tea Party was to protest taxation without representation. There is a single area on the continental US that has a right to protest taxation without representation. That's Washington DC. There's no doubt that the DC representatives would vote for the stimulus, not against it. Everyone else is represented. The purpose of these modern tea parties is to protest decisions made by politicians that already represent the people--the people, after all, voted for them just a few months ago.
It's great that people are getting together for a political cause. But to call these tea parties, and to compare them to the original Boston Tea Party?