[The Final Dakar]

Serious question. The tea party, as either a term or a faction has disappeared in the past year with the rise of the alt-right. Looking at Trump's cabinet picks, I feel like a few would qualify under the old tea party paradigm. Is the alt-right just the tea party without all the previous baggage? If not, what are the fundamental differences?

[subego]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

what are the fundamental differences?

Cartoon frogs.

[subego]

Sorry, couldn't resist.

The Tea Party always struck me as hardcore Libertarianism minus the hookers and blow.

The alt-right is... Ann Coulter? She doesn't want to dump the Republican Party, she wants to reform it in her image. That image is just as much about culture as it is about policy.

[BadKosh]

the TEA Party came about as Obama raised and created lots of new taxes and regulations.

Taxed Enough Already.

[subego]

By American Government.

[Waragainstsleep]

The Tea Party were morons. The alt right has some smart people pulling the strings.

[besson3c]

I think of the tea party as largely economic, the alt-right as largely social.

Why aren't Sanders supporters and anti-Hillary people called the alt-left?

[Snow-i]

They're just labels the left uses to stereotype, discriminate, and practice their own flavor of bigotry & intolerance. It's easier to target people when they're perceived to belong to a group that has a negative connotation.

Much the same way the word "terrorism" has been appropriated by the government to justify anything and everything under the sun, and create an "us v them" mentality.

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I think of the tea party as largely economic, the alt-right as largely social.

Why aren't Sanders supporters and anti-Hillary people called the alt-left?

Because the right isn't so interested in manufacturing labels for people with which to stereotype?

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by subego 

By American Government.

I see what you did there

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

Because the right isn't so interested in manufacturing labels for people with which to stereotype?

Except for libtards, soclalists, tree huggers, etc.?

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Except for libtards, soclalists, tree huggers, etc.?

Save for socialists (who ascribe to a real political ideology), they hardly seem comparable. They are obvious insults, as opposed to "alt-right" and "tea party" which are used in a manner that tries to gain credibility.

When was the last time you saw a headline with "libtard" or "tree hugger"?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

Save for socialists (who ascribe to a real political ideology), they hardly seem comparable. They are obvious insults, as opposed to "alt-right" and "tea party" which are used in a manner that tries to gain credibility.

When was the last time you saw a headline with "libtard" or "tree hugger"?

Socialist is used as a negative label. Bernie Sanders was constantly referred to as a socialist by his enemies (and in headlines, I'm sure), despite the fact that he is a democratic socialist.

I would say too that left-wing base is more diverse and harder to stereotype. You have your urban, african american, hispanic, gay, all sorts of religions (and no religions), etc. Statistically Trump supporters are largely white Christian rural males. There are just tons of them.

[Waragainstsleep]

I'm pretty sure tea party and alt-right were coined by their own people. Sometimes you just don't want to be lumped in with other groups so you create a differentiating label or category. Most likely it gives you the freedom to adopt other groups when you like what they say and disown them when you don't.

[subego]

I always thought it was a self chosen term. I've used it to describe myself.

Here's a handy-dandy alt-right map, created a few years BP (Before Pepe).



I'd say now, the dominant faction has become the dirty pink group on the bottom (conservative nationalists). You can kinda put me in the green section on the top right (techno-commercialists/futurists), but they can get kooky.

[Paco500]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

Because the right isn't so interested in manufacturing labels for people with which to stereotype?

Your position is peculiar. Neither Tea Party or Alt-Right are labels liberals came up with to stereotype people they don't agree with- those groups (or movements) came up with the names themselves.

[subego]

I can see where the impression comes from. Is it fair to say the left attempted to fashion both names as epithets?

[BadKosh]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

I'm pretty sure tea party and alt-right were coined by their own people. Sometimes you just don't want to be lumped in with other groups so you create a differentiating label or category. Most likely it gives you the freedom to adopt other groups when you like what they say and disown them when you don't.

All Assumptions.

[Laminar]

"Regressive Left"

[andi*pandi]

I think you have to get a whole lot more left to get an alt-left. Tree supremacists. Environmental terrorists.

[subego]

I'd put the louder (as in screaming) and/or more violent factions of the Social Justice movement on the "alt-left".

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by Waragainstsleep 

I'm pretty sure tea party and alt-right were coined by their own people. Sometimes you just don't want to be lumped in with other groups so you create a differentiating label or category. Most likely it gives you the freedom to adopt other groups when you like what they say and disown them when you don't.

[citation needed]

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by Paco500 

Your position is peculiar. Neither Tea Party or Alt-Right are labels liberals came up with to stereotype people they don't agree with- those groups (or movements) came up with the names themselves.

Are you just making an assumption? Maybe the Tea party (taxed enough already). But alt right? Please provide some support for your assertion.

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by subego 

I'd put the louder (as in screaming) and/or more violent factions of the Social Justice movement on the "alt-left".

The equivalent here would be SJW.

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Socialist is used as a negative label. Bernie Sanders was constantly referred to as a socialist by his enemies (and in headlines, I'm sure), despite the fact that he is a democratic socialist.

Socialism had a well defined definition long before it was used "negatively".

I would say too that left-wing base is more diverse and harder to stereotype. You have your urban, african american, hispanic, gay, all sorts of religions (and no religions), etc. Statistically Trump supporters are largely white Christian rural males. There are just tons of them.

Ah yes those that ascribe to it may be physically diverse, but the moment your thoughts or beliefs fall outside the narrative you become an alt-right neo-nazi mysoginist xenophobic racist.

Diversity is far more than your skin color and what naughty bits you prefer.

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

I think you have to get a whole lot more left to get an alt-left. Tree supremacists. Environmental terrorists.

They already have that. It's called PETA

[Paco500]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

Are you just making an assumption? Maybe the Tea party (taxed enough already). But alt right? Please provide some support for your assertion.

Let me google that for you.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

I think you have to get a whole lot more left to get an alt-left. Tree supremacists. Environmental terrorists.

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

They already have that. It's called PETA

ALF: Animal liberation Front and ELF: Earth Liberation Front.

ELF affiliates claimed responsibility for many of the SUV and MacManion™ torchings

[finboy]

The Tea Party is (was) an actual group of people. The Alt-Right is something that someone in the media made up in order to have a new label, and the rest of the media saw it as a way to instill fear and panic. So far it's working.

[finboy]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I think of the tea party as largely economic, the alt-right as largely social.

Why aren't Sanders supporters and anti-Hillary people called the alt-left?

Yes, on both I would agree.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

[citation needed]

You're right but I figured it would be tricky finding anything too definitive when it comes to self-declaration of group membership.

I don't know if they coined the terms themselves, but I feel like they happily adopted them very early on.

[Paco500]

I find it bizzarre that there is even a question as to who coined the phrase 'alt-right'. Presumably everyone posting has access to the internet and can just look it up.

for those unwilling to do so, the labels alternative-right and alt-right were first used by a white nationalist named Richard Spencer. Others who have self identified with the label include communities an 4chan and Reddit, and Britebart have identified themselves as a media arm for it.

The phrase was used by the community long before the MSM became aware of it and went on to popularise it during the Trump campaign.

Evil, regressive, lying lefties are not responsible for the term. The MSM may be overusing it, but they didn't invent it.

The history is not a secret. It's actually pretty well documented and not under dispute.

[andi*pandi]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

ALF: Animal liberation Front and ELF: Earth Liberation Front.

ELF affiliates claimed responsibility for many of the SUV and MacManion™ torchings

Yes, and these groups are far far left extremists, not mainstream. They are known as wackadoos. Now imagine if Hillary started putting them in key cabinet positions. You'd think she lost her mind!

[tadd]

Going back to the OP
This is my opinion. If I were really humble I wouldn't be posting it on the Internet. I try to pretend I'm humble though. so.. IMHO :

The Tea Party is a group that started with many people who wanted to support an idea. The name was self-assigned by people who generally supported that group. Many people have claimed to be "in the Tea Party" though I don't think there was every a membership. There are web pages offering social media features and cater to the Tea Party.
The Alt-Right is a tag given by people who are against the things they claimed the Alt-Right supports. As a general ignoramus, I don't know of anybody who claimed to be in "the Alt-Right". Though there is history available on the InterWebs saying that people claimed the term? That doesn't seem right but ok. Perhaps they didn't have the MSM definition of Alt-Right when they were claiming it?. I know of people who qualify for the description offered for the Alt-Right, however, but I don't know anybody personally, There is a huge difference between a self-proclaimed something like the Tea Party, and an externally proclaimed something like what Alt-Right appears to me to be.

The Tea Party adherents are proud of what they think the Tea Party represents (namely less money in the hands of the Federal Government and less imposition on the citizens by the Federal Government). The ALt-Right is a derogatory label assigned to people who are White Supremacists. These are very different (though potentially overlapping) groups. Tens of thousands of people gathered in DC to do a demonstration in order to attract attention to the taxes-are-too-high movement. Has this happened with Alt-Right? Not that I know of, but then again, this is me.

The poster who said the Tea Party was like Libertarianism has it correct, I think. In effect the Tea Party want to be the nice guys. They have a reputation for being very clean and calm and not personally destructive.

[Laminar]

Originally Posted by tadd 

The ALt-Right is a derogatory label

But is it?

[OAW]

Originally Posted by Paco500 

I find it bizzarre that there is even a question as to who coined the phrase 'alt-right'. Presumably everyone posting has access to the internet and can just look it up.

for those unwilling to do so, the labels alternative-right and alt-right were first used by a white nationalist named Richard Spencer. Others who have self identified with the label include communities an 4chan and Reddit, and Britebart have identified themselves as a media arm for it.

The phrase was used by the community long before the MSM became aware of it and went on to popularise it during the Trump campaign.

Evil, regressive, lying lefties are not responsible for the term. The MSM may be overusing it, but they didn't invent it.

The history is not a secret. It's actually pretty well documented and not under dispute.

Exactly. Why people are pretending that the MSM made up the term "alt-right" is just .... nonsensical. The Richard Spencer guy ... well known for his "white supremacist" views despite his rejection of the label .... founded the "alt-right" and coined the term. Steve Bannon has said this about Breitbart.com .... "We're the platform for the alt-right." And the "alt-right" areas on Reddit speak volumes about what it's all about. If the Tea Party or mainstream conservatives don't like being associated with these types then they should unequivocally disavow them. With public denunciations of their ideology like they repeatedly demand moderate Muslims make about radical Islamists. As opposed to either A) pretending it doesn't exist, or B) blaming the MSM for it.

The room felt like a tinder box, ready to devolve any given moment into conflict, only to be calmed diffused by security.

Richard Spencer, the white nationalist who helped found the so-called alt-right movement, embraced the conflict as he spoke at Texas A&M Tuesday night..

For roughly two hours, Spencer delivered his message of white supremacy to a room of 400 people, the vast majority of whom were there in protest.

"At the end of the day, America belongs to white men," Spencer said.

Outside the banquet hall, thousands of protesters made their presence known throughout campus. They, along with university officials, criticized Spencer for showing up.

Richard Spencer's appearance at Texas A&M draws protests - CNNPolitics.com

Richard Bertrand Spencer (born May 11, 1978) is an American white nationalist, known for promoting white supremacist views. He is president of the National Policy Institute, a white nationalist think-tank, and Washington Summit Publishers, an independent publishing firm. Spencer has stated that he rejects the description of white supremacist, and describes himself as an identitarian.

Spencer and others have said that he created the term "alt-right", a term he considers a movement about white identity.

Spencer has repeatedly quoted from Nazi propaganda and spoken critically of the Jewish people, although he has denied being a neo-Nazi. Spencer and his organization drew considerable media attention in the weeks following the 2016 presidential election, where, in response to his cry "Hail Trump, hail our people, hail victory!", a number of his supporters gave the Nazi salute similar to the Sieg Heil chant used at the Nazis' mass rallies. Spencer has defended their conduct, stating that the Nazi salute was given in a spirit of "irony and exuberance".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_B._Spencer

Bannon told a Mother Jones reporter in August that "we're the platform for the alt-right," an online movement shot through with racists and neo-Nazis. In a 2015 radio appearance, he referred to feminists as a “bunch of dykes.” He has implied that Sen. Tim Kaine, Hillary Clinton’s vice presidential pick, is a Muslim Brotherhood agent.

As a result, leading anti-hate groups have decried Bannon’s appointment and urged Trump to rescind it. “It is a sad day when a man who presided over the premier website of the ‘alt-right’ — a loose-knit group of white nationalists and unabashed anti-Semites — is slated to be a senior staff member in ‘the people’s house,” Anti-Defamation League CEO Jonathan Greenblatt said in a statement. “Bannon must go,” the Southern Poverty Law Center declared.

In a normal administration, this kind of furor would likely destroy a new appointment. Generally speaking, connections to white nationalists and neo-Nazis are disqualifiers in modern American politics.

But the Trump campaign repeatedly defied this sort of rule, with the candidate himself sending out anti-Semitic graphics and retweeting fraudulent statistics about “black-on-white” crime with seemingly no consequences. Bannon was a key figure in the Trump campaign — and it seems like the lesson Trump took from this is that his ties to hate group are outweighed by his personal loyalty to the president-elect and clear skill at helping Trump articulate a message that successfully energized large numbers of white voters.

Steve Bannon, the Trump adviser who spent years mainstreaming white nationalism, explained | Vox.com

OAW

[Cap'n Tightpants]

Originally Posted by andi*pandi 

I think you have to get a whole lot more left to get an alt-left. Tree supremacists. Environmental terrorists.

The alt-Left are the regressives, the PC cultural Marxists (aka. SJWs)

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by Cap'n Tightpants 

The alt-Left are the regressives, the PC cultural Marxists (aka. SJWs)

Why don't you save yourself some bother and make this your signature. It has all your key trigger words in it.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by tadd 

In effect the Tea Party want to be the nice guys. They have a reputation for being very clean and calm and not personally destructive.

They might have that reputation among themselves. When the left labels someone as being a member of the Tea Party, its not because they are a nice guy.

[Waragainstsleep]

To be honest both the Tea Party and the alt-right are differently focussed aspects of the regressive right. Or rather they are the regressive right hiding behind different excuses.

The Tea Party name is a clear indicator that they long for the good old days. They claim its about taxes and big government but in practice it seems to more often be concerned with rolling back the rights gained by others and reinforcing the old control mechanisms. Most TP politicians tend to be far-right, Christian fundamentalists, white supremacists etc pursuing anti-gay, anti-science, anti-abortion agendas above anything to do with taxation or big government.

The alt right seems more laser focussed on SJWs than anything else but Trump has had to bolt on anti-abortion and anti-science stances to get elected (Though one assumes its not so much anti-science as it is refusing to let inconvenient consequences get in the way of profits).
So in essence they aren't really that different. Both are trying to protect White (male) privilege, hankering back to the good old days when they could do whatever they wanted and get away with it, which is what rural America was really pissed about when they elected Trump.

[Laminar]

The Tea Party had so much promise when it started - it was a liberitarian-esque departure from the Republican Party at the end of Ron Paul's political campaign. The Republican used to be the party of small government but from 2000-2008 proved that wasn't the case. It was supposed to be a return to those values, but then the movement go co-opted by every loud idiot with a complaint. Kind of like the Occupy movement.

[BadKosh]

True Dat!

[subego]

I've been brushing up, and here's my rough and ready history of the alt-right.

You initially had three, internet based philosophical movements.

The Neoreactionaries (labeled "Political Philosophy" on the map), who are intellectual monarchists.
The Human Biodiversitists, who are intellectual racists
The Techno-Commercial/Futurists, who are intellectual AI supremacists.

These three didn't and don't necessarily get along, but they like to argue with each other because they're all intellectuals, so they all got lumped together as a group.

This bundle of out-there philosophies was enough to start accretion. Part of why this happened was all three are (for their own reasons) really torqued off by Social Justice Warriors.

Milo and Ann, also torqued off by Social Justice Warriors, aren't really that far of a jump from monarchists. Stormfront, also torqued off by Social Justice Warriors, is even less of a jump to Human Biodiversity. Spencer, who coined the term "alt-right", lies somewhere in that second jump.

The thing is, if you're going to mash all this crap together and call it something, "alt-right" isn't the worst you can come up with. so it took off. A banner willingly accepted, even though each subgroup actually can't stand some of the other subgroups.


Though somewhat in the picture due to the hostility towards Social Justice Warriors, the left didn't really enter into it until (for their own reasons) most of these subgroups got on the Trump Train. The strategic response to this was to take a hatchet to the "ethno" wing of the alt-right, and this is the basis upon which the term has been given an unsavory reputation.

For most of the country, this strategic response was also the first they'd heard of the term. Before that, it was only someone who paid attention to internet slapfights who even knew it existed.

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by Paco500 

Let me google that for you.

Ah yes, because op-eds that cite Buzzfeed as their primary sources should be afforded the utmost credibility.

the “alt-right” is a rebranding of classic white nationalism for the 21st century. As BuzzFeed described the movement: “In short, it’s white supremacy perfectly tailored for our times: 4chan-esque racist rhetoric combined with a tinge of Silicon Valley–flavored philosophizing, all riding on the coattails of the Trump boom.”

You need a bit of work on your googling skills.

[Snow-i]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

The Tea Party had so much promise when it started - it was a liberitarian-esque departure from the Republican Party at the end of Ron Paul's political campaign. The Republican used to be the party of small government but from 2000-2008 proved that wasn't the case. It was supposed to be a return to those values, but then the movement go co-opted by every loud idiot with a complaint. Kind of like the Occupy movement.

[Paco500]

Originally Posted by Snow-i 

Ah yes, because op-eds that cite Buzzfeed as their primary sources should be afforded the utmost credibility.

You need a bit of work on your googling skills.

I gave you six sources. Admittedly, the formatting was stupid.

Let
me
google
that
for
you.

One has a Buzzfeed quote. Did you read any of the others? Can you use your google-fu and find anything that contradicts what I have posted?

[RobOnTheCape]

Didn't Richard Spencer, a white nationalist coin the term "alt-right"?

The White Nationalist Origins Of The Term 'Alt-Right' — And The Debate Around It : NPR

[Laminar]

So what I'm learning is that "alt-right," a completely benign term totally devoid of clever misspellings or negative connotation is now being interpreted as a slur by the people that not only coined the term, but also by the people who vehemently oppose today's "special snowflakes" for policing the words everyone uses to describe people.

Just don't say "alt-rock" to any guitar players, they really hate that loaded term.

[Waragainstsleep]

Seems to me that Snowflake-hating has become the primary indicator of an Alt-Right member/fan. The rest of their shtick like the white supremacy is just plain old ordinary "Right" isn't it?

[subego]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

So what I'm learning is that "alt-right," a completely benign term totally devoid of clever misspellings or negative connotation is now being interpreted as a slur by the people that not only coined the term, but also by the people who vehemently oppose today's "special snowflakes" for policing the words everyone uses to describe people.

Just don't say "alt-rock" to any guitar players, they really hate that loaded term.

Is there a way to question tone policing without oneself tone policing?