Login

Register

Member List

RSS Feed

Amanda | Contact

Auguste | Contact

Jesse | Contact

Pam | Contact

Next entry: Snowpocalypse! Previous entry: Teabaggers: Having it both ways

No True Teabagger

imageMelissa Clouthier writes what’s become the standard Tea Party trope: the Tea Party is not responsible for anyone associated with the Tea Party, because no Tea Partier ever has to be associated with things they don’t like.  In fact, it’s the central tenet of the Tea Party movement: no Teabagger is responsible for that except which he or she personally deigns to Teabag, and no true Teabagger would ever do something that whatever Teabagger is speaking doesn’t like.

Sarah Palin’s not a “leader” of the movement, because the movement has no leaders; it just has contributors.  In a way, they’re like a living, breathing version of Marx’s dictatorship of the proletariat, except that they’re lying because folks like Palin, Limbaugh and Beck are all very clearly leaders of the movement and Marxists were almost certainly saner than most Tea Partiers.

But it speaks to the inherent power of the Tea Party’s postmodern incoherence.  It’s a movement which claims millions but for which each member can deny every other member’s validity as a member per se, yet also make up that all those other people whose affirmative beliefs they deny in fact believe something else which reintegrates them back into the whole.  It’s like the Borg, if the Borg operated by Calvinball rules where they could just land on a planet, point at a tree, a ceiling fan and a stereo playing Phil Collins and simply say “All of this - Borg”. 

As Amanda pointed out, Teabaggers get handled with kid gloves.  But it’s worse than that.  In many ways, the Tea Party movement, a chaotic mess of people many of whom hate each other and can only unify around the sort of vitriolic conservatism that predated any effort on their part to organize or protest, benefits from the fact that the media is willing to build up the organization that they’re constitutionally incapable of constructing themselves. 

When a gaggle of people show up to protest pimps and czars and the little moon men who give all the welfare to the crack babies, it’s hard to tease anything coherent or rational or mainstream out of that.  But when the press is willing to show up and look at this group of crazies with the inherent presumption that whatever person this group of chaotic lemmings deigns to cheer for is a leader, it then creates the presumption that the leader is also leading something definable and real.

Because the Tea Party movement refuses to define itself in any real way - in fact, because it can’t define itself in any real way other than “batfuck nutso” - it ambles along with more credibility and less accountability than almost any major movement that has come before it.  And I should know, because by some insane definition, I think I’m a Tea Partier, too.  And so are you.

 

------

Registration is now required! We're still in the process of getting it all squared away, so for the moment don't forget to Login or Register using the links in the upper left menu before starting to write your comment.

Posted by Jesse Taylor on 07:08 PM • (39) Comments

Exactly right. A TPist already tried to persuade me that opposition to immigrants is not part of the Tea Party movement, even though anti-immigration Tom Tancredo was picked to make the TP convention’s kickoff speech.

Comment #1: Hector B.  on  02/10  at  07:20 PM

Hey, I’m a Tea Partier by a non-insane definition: I like tea.

Comment #2: thecynicalromantic  on  02/10  at  07:20 PM

And here I thought all of those teabagging Scotsmen were just a coincidence…

Comment #3: damnedyankee  on  02/10  at  07:20 PM

The Teabagger definition is just and extension of the definition of “Conservative”:  You’re a Conservative until you say something wrong, or fail, and then you become Not a Real Conservative. 

That’s how Bush Jr. went from being A Great Conservative in the Mold of Saint Ronald Reagan to being another damn liberal, while “Big Dick” Cheney has clung like glue to his lies and manipulations of reality and so is still considered a True Conservative…

At least Sarah “Jr. Evita” Palin has a bright (economic) future as long as she can continue to fleece the suckers at Teabagger events…

Comment #4: MikeEss  on  02/10  at  07:34 PM

And here I thought all of those teabagging Scotsmen were just a coincidence…

Why else would they go commando under those kilts?

Comment #5: keshmeshi  on  02/10  at  07:46 PM

The actual point is that as long as you can’t nail them down to any real theory, political agenda, or general existence, you can’t attack them.  Out side of them mobbing up in random places who knows what a teabagger really wants?  When you beat them on an issue they move away from it for a time.  The teabagger agenda is simply to be a thorn in the side of everything they don’t like.  MikeEss hit the second point for me.  Obviously they’re conservatives being fueled by Fox News and their battle chest but eventually Fox will lose control of them and then we’ll see the whole teabag thing fade away.

Comment #6: Xeranar  on  02/10  at  07:47 PM

Calvinball Tea Party Movement—can I start a band by that name?

Comment #7: DAS  on  02/10  at  07:47 PM

it amuses me greatly that the Teabaggers are basically behaving like the stereotypical “anarchists”, while real anarchists are usually far more non-chaotic and organized :-p

Comment #8: jadehawk  on  02/10  at  07:48 PM

Because the Tea Party movement refuses to define itself in any real way - in fact, because it can’t define itself in any real way other than “batfuck nutso” - it ambles along with more credibility and less accountability than almost any major movement that has come before it.

The ideal political party.  Composed of 100% ideology and 0% substance.  It’s everything the Republican Party has ever aspired to.  Truly, we’ve reach the pinnacle of the conservative movement on this one.  A scream mob of idiots marching for an assortment of fringe religious beliefs and bigotry with absolutely no expectations and no standards except that their elected representatives be just as obnoxious and thick-headed as they are.

I guess we get to lean back and see how this shit storm plays out.

Comment #9: Zifnab  on  02/10  at  07:53 PM

“Composed of 100% ideology and 0% substance. It’s everything the Republican Party has ever aspired to. “

As opposed to Democrats, which are 0% substance and 100% ideology.

Comment #10: ayutokamina  on  02/10  at  08:08 PM

“I guess we get to lean back and see how this shit storm plays out.”

...as the targets of much of the Teabagger incoherent rage, it’s hard to see how we Leftists can just watch from the sidelines and assume we won’t be caught right in the middle of their lunacy…

Comment #11: MikeEss  on  02/10  at  08:12 PM

The one Teabagging unifying principle:  “DOAN’T KAWL USS STOOPID!  YOO STOOPIDZ!”

Comment #12: damnedyankee  on  02/10  at  08:17 PM

As opposed to Democrats, which are 0% substance and 100% ideology.

:-p Well, that would be true, if the Democratic Party didn’t have specific policy proposals - health care reform, funding for renewable energy and high speed rail, immigration reform… you know, substance.

Comment #13: Zifnab  on  02/10  at  08:23 PM

I think by now it should be clear the Democrats would be 0% substance, 0% ideology…

Comment #14: BlackBloc  on  02/10  at  08:36 PM

@BlackBloc, it’s funny because it’s oh god it hurts.

Comment #15: Punditus Maximus  on  02/10  at  09:13 PM

I was going to say, what ideology for the Democrats? I’d give them somewhere 5-25% on substance—they try to get things done. But ideology?

And I do like tea and maybe a cookie in the afternoon.

Comment #16: Samantha Vimes  on  02/10  at  09:19 PM

The actual point is that as long as you can’t nail them down to any real theory, political agenda, or general existence, you can’t attack them.

At the risk of Godwinning, I point out that this is a classic aspect of fascism - you can’t quite say what fascism is because it is protean and incoherent.  It’s only when it gets into power that the leaders start turning their neuroses and psychopathies into policy.

Comment #17: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  02/10  at  09:59 PM

Olbermann coined the perfect name for the Tea Party movement last night - Tea Klux Klan.

Let’s not kid ourselves, that’s what they are - a white nationalist movement.  That’s their agenda.

Comment #18: DTG in STL  on  02/10  at  10:04 PM

Nah, they’re not marxists. They might aspire to be stalinists, where the politically correct thing to be thinking changes 180 degrees from day to day, and everyone has to assert that we’ve always been at war with Petraeustan. But I think they’re really totalitarian anarchists. Every one of them gets to have their own opinion, which absolutely must be held by all the others. But since it must be held by all the others, then it follows that it is held by them in some ideal sense, regardless of what opinion they actually hold.

It’s more as if the Borg split into a zillion subcubes, each one of which went up to a planet and said “You will be assimilated. Look at all the millions who have already joined with me.” And the pundits on the planet would squint, see nothing, listen to the tiny subcube shouting even louder, and advocate immediate surrender because no one would shout like that unless they really had the power they claimed.

Comment #19: paul  on  02/10  at  11:14 PM

Conservatism means never having to say you’re sorry because the entire miserable enterprise is aimed at avoiding responsibility.

Oh you can adore authority, but even then, the authorities are just doing what god or the marketplace demands.

Comment #20: Porco Rosso  on  02/10  at  11:44 PM

they are officially now “tea baggers,” they have owned that label, because they are mad at capt. america for having a tea bagger sign in one of his comic book adventures.

i kid you not.

Comment #21: skippy  on  02/11  at  12:12 AM

At the risk of Godwinning, I point out that this is a classic aspect of fascism - you can’t quite say what fascism is because it is protean and incoherent.  It’s only when it gets into power that the leaders start turning their neuroses and psychopathies into policy.

Fascism is well defined, but it’s general bases can change.  The concept of the extreme right is facism, but what it is fascist over time can change.  The teabaggers are facists in the classic textbook case and frankly nobody wants to take them head on because they’re loud and they want to make the media appear shrill especially with Fox News in their corner arguing those points.

Comment #22: Xeranar  on  02/11  at  12:30 AM

The tea party types I have seen are a whole lot like the klan types I’ve met.  There aren’t any significant differences in the way they think and their hopes for society.  They are ignorant, bigoted rednecks for the most part who actually believe that they are the salt of the earth.  The rich conservatives who own and control mainstream media are aware that these people are stupid and hateful, but their usefulness as tools of the power structure makes it more convenient to portray them otherwise.

Keeping the lower classes divided, separating us by ethnicity or religion or sexual orientation, is a technique as old as civilization.  Finding an enemy for us to hate is a key goal in our manipulation.  Blaming our problems on the others keeps us from looking up to see who’s really causing them. 

As Jay Gould said, ““I can hire one half of the working class to kill the other half.”

Comment #23: G Porgey  on  02/11  at  12:39 AM

Anyone who did an adolescent tour of duty on 4chan recognizes the teabagger ethos. There’s a universal delight in incoherency, members constantly have to defend their claim to authenticity by putting down either non-members or other members, shock value IS value, and above all, the (incoherent) movement is the (incoherent) message.

Comment #24: Seize  on  02/11  at  12:44 AM

The tea baggers are just continuation of the anti-anti-war protesters (Freepers, Protest Warriors, Eagles) we saw during the Bush era.  The name “tea party” was started a year ago this month by not a Fox News host, but by Rick Santelli and he started it at the Chicago Stock Exchange surrounded by wealthy gamblers.  The entire movement is astroturf even if it appears to be grassroots.  It’s much like the Civil War, most southerners didn’t own slaves, but still fought against the north to preserve slavery and a much larger sense of hierarchy that affected poorer whites.  The teabaggers are supporting by proxy wealthy bankers even if they won’t benefit one penny from it.

Comment #25: Albert Cirrus  on  02/11  at  12:57 AM

The first rule of tea bagging is that you don’t talk about tea bagging.

Comment #26: weirdnoise  on  02/11  at  01:35 AM

The first rule of tea bagging is that you don’t talk about tea bagging.

Well, of course not - your mouth is full.

Comment #27: Phoenician in a time of Romans  on  02/11  at  02:50 AM

They probably aren’t lying when they say they have no leader. Not to exaggerate, but their psuedo-fascism, though guided by a certain charismatic few, hasn’t seemed to have chosen the one who embodies them (though, Beck would be the likeliest candidate). The movement is young; the many speakers who pulled out and others who refused to attend (some of whom, likely couldn’t afford the exorbitant price) or even protested at their convention, and their apparent disdain for certain republicans attest to the fact that their territory hasn’t yet been clearly marked out.

Comment #28: massimo  on  02/11  at  05:09 AM

I can’t help but pop over to Eric Raymond’s blog every once in a while, just to remind myself how truly batshit crazy he’s become over the last ten years or so (he managed to make a complete and utter fool of himself with his code analysis of Climate"gate”, for example, and he thinks Alan Turing deserved his fate for having the nerve to not be closeted). Now he happens to be neopagan, and apparently a Wiccan. He is also a teabagger, and recently published a message from another Wiccan teabagger along with a plea to not assume the teabag movement is inherently Christian or inherently stupid.

I swear, some people have no self-awareness at all…

Comment #29: BrianX  on  02/11  at  05:26 AM

Raymond was always batshit crazy. Perfect example of the outcome of the philosophy “I think, therefore I’m right.”

Comment #30: weirdnoise  on  02/11  at  11:06 AM

And I should know, because by some insane definition, I think I’m a Tea Partier, too.  And so are you.

And since they refuse to define themselves and they refuse to acknowledge anyone as a leader, maybe its time that liberals took over the teabagger movement?  Or just claim the mantle of teabagger and start screeching from the furthest left ideological position possible.  Which would just make the tea party move appear even more incoherent.

We should have gotten on this a while ago, but it could be done.  Maybe we can arrange a massive drop of teabags into DC with letters attached that say Single Payer Now!  Repeal DADT Now!  End the Wars Now!  Kill the banks Now!! etc, etc, etc.  Actually, we should look for further left positions to stake out.  Some real marxism perhaps? 


The teabaggers do have many aspects of a proto-fascist political movement, but until they are able to develop a more coherent outlook and until they find an identifiable leader, theirs is mostly unchannelled rage.  Yeah, it can lead to shifting control in Congress, and the media loves the teabaggers in a disproportionate manner, but since it lacks direction, the rage will remain unfocused.

And if they put republicans back in power, those teabaggers who aren’t true republicans will find themselves outraged all over again, since they are angry at a whole lotta shit that started with Bush (but they repressed their anger at the time since Bush talked the way they liked). 

I think that a lot of the teabaggers are certainly racist, hateful people.  A lot of them are cultural conservative ideologues.  A lot of them are run of the mill republicans.  However, I think that a significant chunk of them are people who are just angry and are angry that nothing seems to be changing.  They’re hearing rightwing messages that say that Obama’s to blame, and they don’t think much.  Low-info “independent” voters and all.  So they buy into it.  But they’re being used by power republican interests that are hiding their involvement.

If they help the republicans back into power, they’re just gonna get angrier.  And some of them are gonna learn more about organizing from all of this. 

And then there are a lot of angry non-teabaggers out there. 

Anyway, I digress.  It’s not facism yet.  But it could certainly move in that direction.  Just needs a charismatic leader and a bit of focus, a larger dose of Nationalism, and some clearly defined scapegoats.  They’ve got the victim mentality and the anger down pat.  Facism varies quite a bit, the exact nature varies between different cultures.  But their are common seeds, and they exist within the hard right.

Comment #31: jerry_101  on  02/11  at  01:31 PM

no Teabagger is responsible for that except which he or she personally deigns to Teabag, and no true Teabagger would ever do something that whatever Teabagger is speaking doesn’t like.

Sarah Palin’s not a “leader” of the movement, because the movement has no leaders; it just has contributors.

You know what movement on the left is like this? Earth First!  Of course, the left is pretty keen to distance themselves from that fringe, while the right seeks ways to cater to theirs.

Comment #32: Cris  on  02/11  at  01:40 PM

Cris, the right is the fringe, there are no rational conservatives.  Even the so-called “sensical” ones are deep down insane.  Conservatism is built on exploiting what’s wrong with society (greed, fear, stupidity, hate, etc) and “intellectualizing” it.

Comment #33: Albert Cirrus  on  02/11  at  02:10 PM

I’ve always thought of the Tea Party as the right’s equivalent of “globalization” opponents: a mass of ill-defined resentments. The Tea Partiers are louder, older, more racist, and seem to have more time on their hands (although they’re less inclined to riot and smash windows…so far).

Comment #34: Bitter Scribe  on  02/11  at  02:48 PM

I’ve always thought of the Tea Party as the right’s equivalent of “globalization” opponents: a mass of ill-defined resentments.

That’s a very good analogy.  May Palin be their Nader.

Comment #35: Cris  on  02/11  at  03:02 PM

What we have here is a problem of definitions.  there is no good definition of “Teabagger” ideology beyond “y’know, conservative stuff”, because there is no meaningful definition of “Conservatism”.

That’s because you can be a conservative catholic, or a conservative architect or even a conservative Marxist, but you can’t be just “a conservative”, any more than you can wear “a blue”.

The people who call themselves “conservatives” and espouse an ill-defined ideology they call “conservatism” are, in reality, conservative liberals, as opposed to us progressive liberals.

They and we share a common ideology that says all men are created equal, that we all have certain inalienable rights, that people create governments to secure those rights, and that governments are entitled to govern only with the consent of the governed.

That is an ideology that can get you beaten, shot or jailed in some parts of the world.  But it is something that we Americans take so much for granted that it is easy to forget that our “opposite numbers” are really only a few degrees away from us, not 180 degrees.

So yes, let’s by all means start having our own tea parties, and embrace the traditions of our far-left ancestors when they protested against the “Tea Tax”, a government subsidy granted to that huge corporation, the East India Company, that was wiping out small local businesses.

Comment #36: Dr. Psycho  on  02/11  at  08:53 PM

That’s a bad analogy between the tea baggers and the anti-globalization people.  Even though I wouldn’t label myself anti-globalization per se, but there some good anti-globalization people out there with good ideas and good concerns.  The tea baggers on the other hand by definition all suck.

Comment #37: Albert Cirrus  on  02/11  at  10:31 PM

After years of reading I finally registered so that I can make a comment on a comment at the tail end of a day old post, but whatever… Yay Blasphemy!

Dr Psycho, I don’t see things like advocating torture (excuse me, “harsh treatment”, just because we once executed folks from other countries for doing the same things we’re doing now don’t mean it’s “torture”), shunning trials for terrorists (obv. the white christian ones shouldn’t be subjected to military tribunals), preventive war (collateral damage happens, oh well, if they didn’t want to get bombed to death, they shoulda been borned in ‘merica), etc. as the sorts of things that put liberals and teabaggers in the same camp, just at different ends of it.
The teabaggers seem to emphatically believe that we are very much not created equal and the only right that seems to be inalienable to them is the right to have and/or tote around a gun.
Their positions on these things are way more than just a few degrees off from those of myself and liberals I know.

Comment #38: mcinack  on  02/12  at  12:15 PM

In a way I wish progressives could actually be what Clouthier pretends teabaggers are. It would be nice to be able to support reproductive freedom and oppose concentration of wealth without appearing to buy into every bit of malevolence or insanity calling itself left-wing.

Insofar as the Tea Party Movement stands for anything, it seems to be questioning authority, albeit in a much less sophisticated way than a 14-year-old. So of course no one teabagger takess responsibility for any of the others’ beliefs.

massimo (28):

They probably aren’t lying when they say they have no leader.

Not when the thing they claim to most agree on is distrust of the institution of leadership.

Cris (35):

May Palin be their Nader.

I thought Palin was the nadir.

Dr. Psycho (36)

They and we share a common ideology that says all men are created equal, that we all have certain inalienable rights, that people create governments to secure those rights, and that governments are entitled to govern only with the consent of the governed.

How do you square the first part with the racism, the second part with the classism and homophobia, the third part with the opposition to govt. healthcare and welfare, and thelast part with the rejection of the expressed wishes of the electorate?

Comment #39: Hershele Ostropoler  on  02/12  at  02:09 PM
Page 1 of 1 pages
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.