I believe it’s using certain language or phrases that sound fine on their face but have hidden signals or meanings to certain groups. Probably a bad example but off the top of my head something like a politician saying “you should have the right to protect your family in your own home” could be a dog whistle to say that they oppose gun restrictions.
It’s not really a good example as most of the time a politician who says that it is not hiding the fact that they oppose gun restrictions.
It does show though the problem with the term, which is that plenty of perfectly valid and legitimate opinions can be claimed as ‘dog whistles’, and so people will throw the accusation around when it’s completely unwarranted.
Dogwhistling means saying something that’ll sound innocuous, but really contains an underlying message.
One example is people complaining about “international bankers” the phrase comes from an anti-semetic book that was used by the Nazis to as propaganda to justify and promote anti-Semitism. By itself, the phrase can seem to be a criticism of global capitalism, but is often really just people complaining about Jews.
This is a bit of a tricky example, if Orban or Meloni said that I’d be suspicious.
But if an environmentalist or leftist criticised bankers for investment in fossil fuel or the 2007 economic collapse then it’s obviously not dog whistle to blame it in international bankers.
Yeah, obviously context matters, if someone uses it once or twice when complaining about capitalism or economic issues, it’s probably not meant as a dog whistle.
The phrasing of “international bankers” is kinda weird, like the international part isn’t really relevant, and it’s not really something someone would come up with in most scenarios. I think most people would come up with something more closely related to what they’re criticizing.
I’d assume coming from a leftist it’s probably just them hearing it somewhere and not knowing the origin and common usage. I’d definitely be watching for any other signs of antisemitism though.
I believe this happened in the UK. I’m not totally familiar with their politicians, but I believe it was Corbin? that was standing in front of a mural that was supposed to be about some “illuminati” intentional banker conspiracy and he got a whole bunch of shit for being antisemitic because the bankers were Jewish, when their religion/ethnicity had absolutely nothing to do with the criticism.
Sort of. There’s no context where 1488 is not a nazi saying unless you’re literally using it as a number. But when it first started being used it could potentially qualify as a dog whistle.
For it to be a dog whistle it would have to sound like an innocent comment on face value unless you were the “dog”
What’s dog whistling?
I believe it’s using certain language or phrases that sound fine on their face but have hidden signals or meanings to certain groups. Probably a bad example but off the top of my head something like a politician saying “you should have the right to protect your family in your own home” could be a dog whistle to say that they oppose gun restrictions.
Got it, thanks! That was a good example.
It’s not really a good example as most of the time a politician who says that it is not hiding the fact that they oppose gun restrictions.
It does show though the problem with the term, which is that plenty of perfectly valid and legitimate opinions can be claimed as ‘dog whistles’, and so people will throw the accusation around when it’s completely unwarranted.
Dogwhistling means saying something that’ll sound innocuous, but really contains an underlying message.
One example is people complaining about “international bankers” the phrase comes from an anti-semetic book that was used by the Nazis to as propaganda to justify and promote anti-Semitism. By itself, the phrase can seem to be a criticism of global capitalism, but is often really just people complaining about Jews.
The most common and innocuous sounding one is “Family values” the moment I hear that I immediately assume anti-gay.
Ding ding ding
This is a bit of a tricky example, if Orban or Meloni said that I’d be suspicious.
But if an environmentalist or leftist criticised bankers for investment in fossil fuel or the 2007 economic collapse then it’s obviously not dog whistle to blame it in international bankers.
Yeah, obviously context matters, if someone uses it once or twice when complaining about capitalism or economic issues, it’s probably not meant as a dog whistle.
The phrasing of “international bankers” is kinda weird, like the international part isn’t really relevant, and it’s not really something someone would come up with in most scenarios. I think most people would come up with something more closely related to what they’re criticizing.
I’d assume coming from a leftist it’s probably just them hearing it somewhere and not knowing the origin and common usage. I’d definitely be watching for any other signs of antisemitism though.
I believe this happened in the UK. I’m not totally familiar with their politicians, but I believe it was Corbin? that was standing in front of a mural that was supposed to be about some “illuminati” intentional banker conspiracy and he got a whole bunch of shit for being antisemitic because the bankers were Jewish, when their religion/ethnicity had absolutely nothing to do with the criticism.
Like 1488 is a dog whistle. Pretty much saying you’re a nazi. But I could be wrong
Sort of. There’s no context where 1488 is not a nazi saying unless you’re literally using it as a number. But when it first started being used it could potentially qualify as a dog whistle.
For it to be a dog whistle it would have to sound like an innocent comment on face value unless you were the “dog”