Another example is Starmer’s ‘jumping on the far right bandwagon’ used as a means of shutting down debate, thus enabling him to escape answering perfectly reasonable questions. This could illustrate a lack of arguments or it could mean that he prefers to hide what he really thinks and what his intentions are.
I've come to the conclusion that "far right" is the British equivalent of Hillary's "deplorables". Let's hope it works out as well for 2TFGK Farmer Harmer as it did for her.
Well done Andrew. You’ve done it again - highlighting the absurdity of the no-debate ignoramuses. But may I suggest we stop (I know your article very eloquently put it already) responding to these false accusations, with code names, eg dog whistle? Shall we pretend we don’t know what the accuser is saying, when he uses that expression? I see on tv debates, mainly GB News, how these activists (some of them are just imbecilic argumentative childish basement typers) often attack the others using these meaningless words. One of them is a black/mixed woman with some academic credentials. She wears her hair like Cleopatra. The other one is worse - a very loud ‘woman of colour’ (her own description!!!). These people just drain word salads out of their mouths non stop. Oh yes. Often they don’t stop talking.
So, stop acknowledging their ‘code’ words. Stop, and then ask them, ‘but what do you mean?’
That seems like a very large number considering the world’s population. Even so I believe that intersex people, despite their bodily anomalies do have either XX or XY chromosomes.
It is indeed a much smaller proportion than 1.7%. That stat is bandied about a lot. I wonder if it derives from the debunked but still quoted stat that as many people have DSDs as have red hair. Preposterous, of course.
It comes from Anne Fausto-Sterling and she arrived at that figure by including a load of medical conditions that affect genitals or sex organs but which aren't typically understood as 'intersex' or DSDs. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12476264/
This closely aligns with leftist activists' (they do invariably come from my own end of the political spectrum, unfortunately) amazing ability to read minds and to use ad hominem 'arguments'. Any nuance of argument about a subject has to be dismissed lest the ensuing crack brings their worldview crashing down. The number of times I've seen no borders advocates dishonestly conflate illegal and legal immigration, for example, in order to 'legitimise' calling someone a xenophobe (or worse) to derail any argument against the former; similarly with the conflation of Muslim and Islamist in order to label someone an Islamophobe. In these cases, of course, it is the dishonest conflation which is 'racist' or prejudicial towards Muslims. There are some dumb activists out there for whom critical thinking and debate are alien concepts, but I expect many of them know exactly what they are doing and are happy to sacrifice truth in order to 'win' an argument and curtail honest discussion about 'controversial' matters.
I believe the term refers to the language of politicians in the USA who wanted to signal to voters that they would keep the racial status quo. Terms like “inner city” or “welfare” as well as context and intonation in speech let voters know who to vote for. Dog whistles were not obvious to uninformed voters but they were pound and clear to the marginalized groups they referred to.
I have to say “amateur telepathy” is a superb phrase. It is the entire basis of internet mediated messaging. 😵💫 There I send a telepathic emoji message, did you receive?
I agree with every word of this apart from the headline. 'Dogwhistles' are real, but like most concepts co-opted by progressive authoritarians, the original, useful meaning has been so badly misused and distorted that the word itself can no longer convey anything meaningful.
An example of the original, useful meaning would be to describe something like the practice adopted by Neo-Nazis of placing a persons name in triple brackets to indicate that the person is Jewish.
I don't know anything about the origin of the expression. The meaning as I understand it is something like 'a verbal signal intended to communicate a message to members of an in-group, while concealing the meaning from non-members'
I can't say exactly when or where the expression "dog whistle" originated, but I do remember it being used by journalists to label speeches by the notorious segregationist, George Wallace, former governor of Alabama and two-time candidate for President and holder of the record number of electoral votes. His speeches featured repeated appeals to "law and order", pronounced "lawn order". They had nothing to do with encouraging respect for the rule of law or maintaining public order although he might have been able to keep a straight face while arguing they were.. They were universally understood as attacks on advocacy of civil rights, i.e., "outside agitators".
The more common dog whistle I've encountered is "family values", especially in listening as long as I could stand it to an event staged by the notorious opponent of gay equality, the Family Research Council . I think it was sometime after the Massachusetts Supreme Court's decision establishing a right to same-sex marriage in that state and U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in 𝘖𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘨𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘭𝘭 recognizing it under the U.S. Constitution. The phrase, of course, has nothing to do with encouraging marriages or measures to support keeping them intact or supporting the health and well-being of children. What it meant was trying to keep gay people where they belonged, deep in their closets and constantly afraid for their jobs, family affection, and other social relationships. They did stop short of saying what they'd really prefer, going back to the ancient practice of burning us at the stake. Theirs was a tough sell in the '90's as more and more people saw sons and brothers, nephews and uncles, coworkers and neighbors breaking out in horrible purple blotches or wasting away with an incurable disease. They couldn't go on denying in good faith as they once had that they knew any gay people. Listening to those speeches brought it home to me. I thought to myself, now I know what they mean by a dog whistle.
Regarding Wallace, his record for electoral votes was for a third-party candidate. He carried five states in the Deep South.
I don't mean to vilify Wallace too harshly. Late in life, he recanted his racist and segregationist actions. It's a vivid example of the possibility of repentance and redemption, to me
Another example is Starmer’s ‘jumping on the far right bandwagon’ used as a means of shutting down debate, thus enabling him to escape answering perfectly reasonable questions. This could illustrate a lack of arguments or it could mean that he prefers to hide what he really thinks and what his intentions are.
I've come to the conclusion that "far right" is the British equivalent of Hillary's "deplorables". Let's hope it works out as well for 2TFGK Farmer Harmer as it did for her.
Exactly. Also, far right has the added bonus of encompassing more people than the previous ‘racist’ slur.
Well done Andrew. You’ve done it again - highlighting the absurdity of the no-debate ignoramuses. But may I suggest we stop (I know your article very eloquently put it already) responding to these false accusations, with code names, eg dog whistle? Shall we pretend we don’t know what the accuser is saying, when he uses that expression? I see on tv debates, mainly GB News, how these activists (some of them are just imbecilic argumentative childish basement typers) often attack the others using these meaningless words. One of them is a black/mixed woman with some academic credentials. She wears her hair like Cleopatra. The other one is worse - a very loud ‘woman of colour’ (her own description!!!). These people just drain word salads out of their mouths non stop. Oh yes. Often they don’t stop talking.
So, stop acknowledging their ‘code’ words. Stop, and then ask them, ‘but what do you mean?’
Maybe we should just refer to XX and XY - there's no nuancing biological reality.
Not everyone is XX and XY; they’ve already weaponised those with any anomalies to pretend that biology doesn’t matter.
I've just googled it (for what that's worth!) - apparently only 1.7% of people are 'intersex'
That seems like a very large number considering the world’s population. Even so I believe that intersex people, despite their bodily anomalies do have either XX or XY chromosomes.
It is indeed a much smaller proportion than 1.7%. That stat is bandied about a lot. I wonder if it derives from the debunked but still quoted stat that as many people have DSDs as have red hair. Preposterous, of course.
It comes from Anne Fausto-Sterling and she arrived at that figure by including a load of medical conditions that affect genitals or sex organs but which aren't typically understood as 'intersex' or DSDs. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12476264/
Agree! As I said - Google....🤪
This closely aligns with leftist activists' (they do invariably come from my own end of the political spectrum, unfortunately) amazing ability to read minds and to use ad hominem 'arguments'. Any nuance of argument about a subject has to be dismissed lest the ensuing crack brings their worldview crashing down. The number of times I've seen no borders advocates dishonestly conflate illegal and legal immigration, for example, in order to 'legitimise' calling someone a xenophobe (or worse) to derail any argument against the former; similarly with the conflation of Muslim and Islamist in order to label someone an Islamophobe. In these cases, of course, it is the dishonest conflation which is 'racist' or prejudicial towards Muslims. There are some dumb activists out there for whom critical thinking and debate are alien concepts, but I expect many of them know exactly what they are doing and are happy to sacrifice truth in order to 'win' an argument and curtail honest discussion about 'controversial' matters.
I believe the term refers to the language of politicians in the USA who wanted to signal to voters that they would keep the racial status quo. Terms like “inner city” or “welfare” as well as context and intonation in speech let voters know who to vote for. Dog whistles were not obvious to uninformed voters but they were pound and clear to the marginalized groups they referred to.
Labels are often used to either shut something down, or as a way to not have to take it seriously.
I have to say “amateur telepathy” is a superb phrase. It is the entire basis of internet mediated messaging. 😵💫 There I send a telepathic emoji message, did you receive?
Get a professional!
Sorry of course I meant “loud and clear”!
I agree with every word of this apart from the headline. 'Dogwhistles' are real, but like most concepts co-opted by progressive authoritarians, the original, useful meaning has been so badly misused and distorted that the word itself can no longer convey anything meaningful.
An example of the original, useful meaning would be to describe something like the practice adopted by Neo-Nazis of placing a persons name in triple brackets to indicate that the person is Jewish.
Dog whistles are supposed to create an ultrasonic pitch that humans can’t hear, above the 44,000 Hz range but dogs can. Used in training.
The metaphor is then the pack can hear the training whistle, but others can’t.
But that still doesn’t explain the meaning or origin of the expression. Please elaborate further.
I don't know anything about the origin of the expression. The meaning as I understand it is something like 'a verbal signal intended to communicate a message to members of an in-group, while concealing the meaning from non-members'
Thanks for another great piece, Andrew.
The dogs go Woof Woof and the wokesters go Wo Woo.
Have cross posted.
https://dustymasterson.substack.com/p/hell-is-coming-to-breakfast-part
Dusty
I can't say exactly when or where the expression "dog whistle" originated, but I do remember it being used by journalists to label speeches by the notorious segregationist, George Wallace, former governor of Alabama and two-time candidate for President and holder of the record number of electoral votes. His speeches featured repeated appeals to "law and order", pronounced "lawn order". They had nothing to do with encouraging respect for the rule of law or maintaining public order although he might have been able to keep a straight face while arguing they were.. They were universally understood as attacks on advocacy of civil rights, i.e., "outside agitators".
The more common dog whistle I've encountered is "family values", especially in listening as long as I could stand it to an event staged by the notorious opponent of gay equality, the Family Research Council . I think it was sometime after the Massachusetts Supreme Court's decision establishing a right to same-sex marriage in that state and U.S. Supreme Court's ruling in 𝘖𝘣𝘦𝘳𝘨𝘦𝘧𝘦𝘭𝘭 recognizing it under the U.S. Constitution. The phrase, of course, has nothing to do with encouraging marriages or measures to support keeping them intact or supporting the health and well-being of children. What it meant was trying to keep gay people where they belonged, deep in their closets and constantly afraid for their jobs, family affection, and other social relationships. They did stop short of saying what they'd really prefer, going back to the ancient practice of burning us at the stake. Theirs was a tough sell in the '90's as more and more people saw sons and brothers, nephews and uncles, coworkers and neighbors breaking out in horrible purple blotches or wasting away with an incurable disease. They couldn't go on denying in good faith as they once had that they knew any gay people. Listening to those speeches brought it home to me. I thought to myself, now I know what they mean by a dog whistle.
Regarding Wallace, his record for electoral votes was for a third-party candidate. He carried five states in the Deep South.
I don't mean to vilify Wallace too harshly. Late in life, he recanted his racist and segregationist actions. It's a vivid example of the possibility of repentance and redemption, to me