Marl Levin, virtuoso niggerizer
The ethics problem with the use of “nigger,” or “bitch,” or “fag,” or any of the other culturally disapproved denigrating labels for human beings belonging to particular groups, is not that they are insulting—adults should be able to handle mere insults—but that they unfairly diminish the status of individuals, their character, opinions and deeds before they have had the opportunity to be judged on their merits. It isn’t the words, but the effect, in essence sticking a foot out to trip a runner at the beginning of the race—and the race may be a job, an election, a debate, an argument, or policy deliberations.
The No-Labels movement focuses on characterizations and civility, but these are far too vague as concepts to enforce culturally, and subject to easy manipulation for political ends. John Avlon, a leader of No-Labels, still calls politicians he disagrees with “wingnuts.” Why? Because, well, they are wingnuts! Just ask John. Niggerizing, however, goes well beyond labels, and fair people should reject it from either side of the political spectrum. It is a bully tactic, and it is a dishonest debating technique, completely delegitimizing an adversary before addressing his arguments, or giving them an objective hearing.
The poster child for this technique is conservative talk show host Mark Levin. Rachel Maddow, in Levin-speak, is “Rachel Mad-Cow.” MSNBC is “MSLSD.” The two major newspapers are “The New York Slimes” and “The Washington Compost.” Vice President Biden is “Joe Bite-me.” He has dozens of these. Levin can be funny, but this is is just juvenile, and worse. It represents a complete absence of respect, and makes his job of countering the positions of these voices far too easy…it is cheating, in fact.
The other end of the spectrum is equally outrageous. Using the term “tea-bagger” for members of the Tea Party is niggerizing at its most disgusting and inexcusable. Coined and initially embraced by the likes of Maddow and Anderson Cooper, “tea-bagger” attaches a sneering sexual-act to a political movement in the epitome of disrespect and denigration. Yet it is somehow acceptable, appearing regularly in major newspapers and supposedly respectable websites. Keith Olbermann, before he mercifully was eaten by his own ego, routinely used the term, much to the glee of his fans.
Yet this kind of language is indistinguishable in purpose, tone and damage to the use of “nigger,” which will get any media personality fired if it dares to escape his or her lips. Why is that? Just “because”? Is it just a taboo, and reasons don’t matter any more? Or is it, as it should be, because using such terms rob American citizens of their right to be seen and heard without having their dignity stripped away at the outset?
Niggerizing is an ugly word and needs to be. When we laugh at Levin or cheer Olbermann when they reduce Americans to epithets, there should be no mistaking what we are supporting. Disrespect, unfairness, denigration, bigotry and hate. That’s niggerizing. And it will continue to dominate our political discourse until all of us stop tolerating it even when it is done by people we agree with to diminish people we don’t.
Ethics Alarms 
I’m not sure the “tea-baggers” example works. That term was created by the tea partiers themselves. They were tea-bagging the democrats. The irony was amazing, and it was useful in showing how clueless the protesters were (protesting nonexistent tax raises by referencing a protest of a corporate tax cut). Rethuglicans is a better example. Otherwise, I could carp with a term here or there, but it’s pretty spot on.
They used tea bags as props for sure, but I never read or heard of a Tea party use of “tea-bagger” or “tea-bagging” which, as you know, has nothing to do with tea. At any rate, after the despicable Anderson Cooper snicker-fest about the sexual implications of the name, that was the meaning of the word from then on. The key is, how is it used now? Tea Partiers regard it as a slimy smear, Tea-party haters use it as a code for denigration.
But if true, your origin note is good to know.
The term “tea-baggers” certainly was *not* a “created by the tea partiers themselves”; the only early use of it I ever saw was on a photo of a s *single* sign, carried by a *single* protester who was clearly referencing the same inane joke that the Left has been obsessing over for the past year or two.
(That sign read “tea-bag the democrats before they tea-bag you.”.)
The idea that tea partiers invented the term indicates that “tgt” needs to form contacts outside of those that simply agree with him/her politically.
While the origin of “Tea-bagger” is from a sexual act, it entered mainstream pop-culture as a result of First Person Shooter video games, primarily Halo.
As some of the guys playing were pretty good, they would do their usual vocal taunting and harassment. But once their victims muted their aggressors, a new way to denigrate the victims had to be created.
Playing Halo, there is generally 5 seconds where your camera shows your dead body before you respawn. Your killer would quickly run up to your lifeless body and “Tea bag” you by hitting the crouch repeatedly….going up and down. It’s a sign of dominance on the part of the Tea Bagger and a sign of weakness for those who are getting Tea Bagged.
Now, I’m not a member of the Tea Party, Coffee Party, or any political affiliation, but it seems to me that you wouldn’t want to assign your opponent a term that suggests dominance. Would you?
I think it’s fair to say that almost no one, denigrator, denigratee or commentator, knew anything about Halo’s use of the term. You might as well point out that in the Fiji islands, “tea-bagger” means wise pasta. The meaning that matters, thanks to our two, classy, gay TV commentators being objective and fair and civil as always, is someone lowering their scrotal sac into someone’s open mouth—maybe fun for Anderson, definitely not a complement to a political group. And the BEST, part, teehee, was that those uncool, gun-toting, heterosexual yokels wouldn’t even know they were bein’ made fun of on TV!
It’s one of broadcast news’ all-time lows. Videogamers don’t have a duty to be ethical…and they are mostly on the sidelines.
I’m wagering that the Halo influence has tentacles into the 40 year olds. If 40 and under isn’t a large enough demographic, then I resign for ten years until it’s 50 and under.
I’m just sayin’…
I wonder. I’m way past 40, but I’m about as up on popular culture as most 35 year olds, if not more—and I have a 16 year old who plays Halo. Never heard of it. I’m going to do a Facebook poll and see.