Conservatives Debate: Is ‘Teabagger’ Their ‘N-Word’?

In the latest issue of National Review, Jay Nordlinger details the history of ‘teabagging’ and reports on the conservative debate about what to do about it. But it’s not what you think — no, really, it’s not what you think.

Nordlinger’s article isn’t about tea bagging in the fun sense, nor is it about the long-term effects on the GOP from teabagging in the tri-corn hat-and-time-on-your-hands sense. Rather, it’s the story of how conservatives are trying to fix the mess they made when they first decided to call for the “teabagging” of Nancy Pelosi with a straight face.

The key moment in the early history of the tea party movement, described by Nordlinger in his article Rise of an Epithet:

The first big day for this movement was Tax Day, April 15. And organizers had a gimmick. They asked people to send a tea bag to the Oval Office. One of the exhortations was “Tea Bag the Fools in D.C.” A protester was spotted with a sign saying, “Tea Bag the Liberal Dems Before They Tea Bag You.” So, conservatives started it: started with this terminology. But others ran with it and ran with it.

The article then goes through the sophomoric early days of ‘teabagging’ among progressives — the collective “Teabaggers, eh? Well, if you insist…” from knowledgeable snarkers on the left. The lesson: if you want serious coverage of your new political movement, it’s probably best not to give your first call to action the same as a sex act. Don’t expect that the press (or your opponents) will take the high road. By the end of that first era of the tea partier, Nordlinger writes, conservatives were embarrassed and liberals were still laughing:

Some on the right are using “teabagger,” but mainly the word is a putdown from the left. Conservatives realize that nothing friendly is meant by it. You can tell by tone and context, for one thing.

You might think that would be the end — it would be completely understandable if tea partiers just decided to pretend the whole “teabagging” thing never happened and never, ever discussed it again. Let’s just call it a rookie mistake, right?

Nope.

As Nordlinger reports, conservatives are now debating whether to embrace the “teabagger” epithet as a kind of badge of honor, “like ‘Christian’” or…well, how about we let him explain it:

When I was growing up, in Ann Arbor, Mich., there was a little debate: Should school officials try to prevent black students from using the N-word? I don’t believe the issue was ever settled. And this brings up the question of whether “teabagger” could be kind of a conservative N-word: to be used in the family, but radioactive outside the family.

In the end, though, Nordlinger decides this is probably a bad idea — or at least an unworkable one:

[I]t may well be too late to purge “teabagger” from our discourse, certainly from discourse controlled by liberals. But I’m for giving it a try: for running “teabagger” out of town, even at this late date. It is really a lowdown term. “Tea partier” is a neutral term. “Tea-party patriots” is a positive term, used by some of the protesters themselves. “Teabagger” — not so positive, and not so neutral.

Late Update: Washington Independent’s Dave Weigel fact-checks Nordlinger, and finds that his recollection of tea partier history is a bit off. The first mention of “teabagging” came on Feb. 27, Weigel writes, not on April 15.

Thank you for the gracious welcome. I love discourse, and while we may disagree on many things, I think positive dialogue is the only way to move this country forward. One of the things that irritates me most about my side of the argument is that thoughtless goobers like to bash the Left as unpatriotic. I always refer them to the fact that men like John Adams, Patrick Henry, and George Washington stood along side men like Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Paine. They had very different views of how this country should form, but they all love the United States and were all patriots. So, my fellow patriots, thank you for the welcome and I will be reading and posting occassionally, so to be too difficult with me please.

Glad you found our little blog and took the time to post, Michael. Again, welcome!

By the way, fun fact: Girlfriends can also be teabagged!

I really did try and find a picture of Nigel, but couldn’t. I think the whole hanging and burning thing turns most sane people completely OFF. Sorry, but the nooses and torches really conjure up some pretty ugly images of racism. It’s YOUR rally and even YOU cannot control that mob. It’s really hatred run amuck.

Have a GREAT burning! I am looking forward to seeing the photos of the event

I still don’t “get” why people are so upset about health care reform. AARP, AMA and even business associations are supporting reform. Health care insurance as it stands is unsustainable, except for the heads of those companies. Doing NOTHING is not an option. People are going broke and dying in the process under the current status quo.

Rogue Elephant,
I think that gimmicks like burning political figures work against whatever cause the protesters are trying to promote. In third world countries, they burn flags and figures in effigy – because, let’s face it – what ELSE do they actually have going on? Here in this country we have all sorts of ways to carry on PRODUCTIVE DISCOURSE. People who are so inarticulate that they would rather burn stuff up, than carry on sane, coherent arguments create distance from rational sympathizers.

I am sure that some of these teabaggers would really love to tar and feather people but they know they’d do hard time in jail for that. Angry mobs have cropped up throughout history. Intimidation tactics of fire and hanging are a disgrace. It’s just shameful behavior by folks who are out of control.

While offensive, burning politicians in effigy predates the American Revolution. Fortunately for politicians, the public no longer tars and feathers them (as the Sons of Liberty did to loyalist officials).