Last week I wrote a post comparing the mid-19th century Know Nothing movement to the modern Tea Party movement. As expected, Tea Party supporters didn't appreciate the comparison. In keeping with the theme of this month's poll, I'm going to draw another comparison; this time to the late 19th century Populist (People's Party) movement. What was the People's Party? From Wikipedia: "The People's Party, also known as the 'Populists' was a short-lived political party in the United States established in 1887. Based among poor white cotton farmers in the South, and hard-pressed wheat farmers in the Plains states, it represented a radical crusading form of agrarianism and hostility to banks, railroads and elites generally." While the movement was short-lived, it did manage to get elected 10 governors, 6 senators, and 39 representatives. Comparison to the Tea Party movement Similar to the modern Tea Party movement, the People's Party was born out of frustration with the federal government, and the belief that the two major political parties were controlled by elites hostile to the plight of the common American. Additionally, the Populist movement was dominated by whites, and unlike contemporary political movements they actively included women in the movement. Furthermore, the Populists called for the dissolution of all national banks, similar to the End the Fed and Audit the Fed programs of the Tea Party movement. How they were different The biggest difference between the People's Party and the Tea Party movement is their relationship to the government. Populists wanted more government intervention, most notably, government control of railroads, telephones, and telegraphs. Also, the Populists wanted a progressive income tax rate, whereas the Tea Party wants to shrink the federal government and eliminate federal taxes. Finally, the Populists were made up of former Democrats, whereas the Tea Party movement is sympathetic to the Republican Party. The Downfall The People's Party failed to incorporate racial minorities into their movement, and even had some political candidates and supporters that were overtly racist. As a result, they were unable to gain the support of blacks, nor were they able to spread their influence beyond the South and the Midwest. Ultimately, the demise of the People's Party came about when they supported William Jennings Bryan, the Democratic nominee for President, in the 1896 election, rather than fielding their own candidate. Bryan's campaign was based on issues that were not central to the Populist cause, such as Free silver, and this fractured the Populist movement. From that point forward, the Populists could not decide who the bigger enemy was, state-level Democrats, or federal-level Republicans. This inability to unify against a common adversary led to the eventual disbanding of the Populist Party. The Legacy While the People's Party was short-lived, it did have a lasting effect on American politics. Two major changes that came about because of the Populist movement was the progressive income tax rate, and the direct election of U.S. senators. Prior to the Populist movement, the income tax, when implemented, was a flat tax rate, and senators were elected by their respective state legislatures. Nobody knows the future, so we don't ultimately know what will come of the Tea Party movement. One thing is for certain, though, the Tea Party should get out of bed with the Republicans if they wish to survive beyond the 2012 election. The current brand of Republicanism will derail the Tea Party train if the movement doesn't try to stand on its own, and instead continues to run political candidates on the Republican ticket. However, just because the Tea Party movement ceases to exist doesn't mean that it won't have a lasting impact on American politics. Again, though, only the future can tell what impact that will be.