It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Dog-Whistles, and The Racists Who Hear Them.

page: 1
32
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:
+16 more 
posted on Jul, 25 2016 @ 02:29 PM
link   

Dog-Whistles, and The Racists Who Hear Them.



Donald Trump has been called the Pied-Piper of Dog-whistle politics by Ian Haney Lopez in an NBC article. The dubious insinuation in that charge is that Trump is speaking in secret code to racists, bigots and xenophobes, whom I wager are hiding in the bushes, like dogs, awaiting the long-awaited sound to bring in the coming race war.

The thing about a dog whistle is that only dogs can hear it. So when I am lead to believe that Trump and his followers are engaged in “dog-whistle politics”, I have to wonder why these sounds always seem to ring so loud in the ears of the accusers.

What is a political dog-whistle? It is a coded phrase that means one thing to the general population, but means something else to others. According to an example in Lopez’s own book “Dog Whistle Politics”, when Nixon spoke of “Law and Order”, he was secretly sending “coded terms” to racists via cyphers. To the racist hounds who were able to pick up on this covert racism, “Law” means race and “Order” means anti-activism, as they tend to do. Luckily for us, Lopez had learned to decode the ciphers, though he never gives us insight into how.

When Paul Ryan had the audacity to link poverty to a “tailspin of culture”, especially in the “inner cities in particular”, “of men not working” and “generations of men not even thinking about working or learning the value and the culture of work”, the words magically morphed into the inaudible sound of a racist dog whistle. Rep. Barbara Lee recognized this as a “thinly-veiled racial attack”, and that when Ryan spoke of “inner-city” and “culture”, he actually meant “black”. According to Ryan, race never crossed his mind. It did cross the mind of Lee, however, whom when presented with the words in question, immediately thought of black people. She too knew how to decode the ciphers.

Former president Jimmy Carter knew all too well that the animosity against President Obama from the racist right was because he was a black man, and not because of, say, his policies, as has traditionally been the case between Republicans and Democrats. Mark Potok from the Southern Poverty Law Center agreed. "I think what President Carter said is precisely what is going on. I am not saying that everyone involved in opposing healthcare reform is a Klansman in disguise, but it is the elephant in the room." Congressman Henry Johnson echoed his statements. "I guess we'll probably have folks putting on white hoods and white uniforms again and riding through the countryside." The RNC chairman at the time and obvious racist Michael Steele denied the accusations; but the racist code, manifested in the form “opposing healthcare reform”, had already been delivered. It makes me wonder why Obama’s race is the first thing to pop into the head of Carter, but it is probably because he is well-versed in the meaning of dog-whistles.

Alex Hern, technology reporter for the Guardian, wrote on the subject of Republican dog whistles for the New Statesman. When a Mitt Romney aide commented that Romney would be a better president than Obama because he better understood the Anglo-Saxon heritage that Britain and America share, Hern’s ears started ringing. “This sort of statement is known in politics as a ‘dog whistle’,” he wrote. “To most people, it looks innocuous, if a bit weird, but to its target audience – in this case, racists – it reads as a perfectly clear statement that Romney is better than Obama because he is white.” Perfectly clear to racists, and oddly enough, perfectly clear to Alex Hern.

While it is probably true that there is a pack of racists out there making hilarious connections between such “coded terms” and racial stereotypes, it appears that they aren’t the only ones making these racist connections. So then, why do these dog-whistles always ring so loud and clear in the ears of the accusers?

The simple answer is because they are racist. When someone hears the phrase “men not working”, and instantly and without further inquiry thinks of black people, it is because she has made that connection herself, because she herself is racist.

In another example, when Avik S. A. Roy of Forbes watches the Republican National Convention, hears about strong policies against illegal Mexican immigrants and Muslims, then continues to write a headline about how the general message of the GOP is “Brown people make us less safe”, he is the one making racist connections, and not the GOP. Both Mexico and Islam are multi-racial and span all colors. It takes an ignorant racist to confuse both Mexico and Islam with “brown people”, because we know "brown people" was the first thing that popped in his head upon hearing those terms.

In conclusion, beware of anyone who constantly appeals to dog whistles, because you know they will project their racism on others, long before they realize their own prejudices.

-LesMis












edit on 25-7-2016 by LesMisanthrope because: (no reason given)



+1 more 
posted on Jul, 25 2016 @ 02:30 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Kinda like "taco bowls"?



posted on Jul, 25 2016 @ 02:38 PM
link   
a reply to: shooterbrody

you beat me too it.

Also

Remember, this is the DNC talking about the democrats who are voting in the primary.

In one email, Chief Financial Officer Brad Marshall allegedly said: “It might may (sic) no difference, but for KY and WVA can we get someone to ask his belief. Does he believe in a God. He had skated on saying he has a Jewish heritage. I think I read he is an atheist. This could make several points difference with my peeps. My Southern Baptist peeps would draw a big difference between a Jew and an atheist.”

Note that at least part of the senior leadership of the Democratic Party presumed a) that the voters of Kentucky and West Virginia are religious bigots; b) that Southern Baptist voters in those states are bigots, perhaps even more so; c) that these groups might have some problem with voting for a Jew; and d) but they would be even more troubled by voting for an atheist.

www.subjectpolitics.com...#



posted on Jul, 25 2016 @ 02:42 PM
link   
You make a valid point...

& I'd agree if it weren't for the fact that enlightened people like me and yourself can tell when someone is using a dog whistle, even if only the dog can hear it, we know it's being used.


Racists for the most part work with a smaller pea sized brain, metaphorically of course, but upon scientific study, possibly also quite literally.



When someone like Trump bangs on about borders and rapists, it doesn't take Einstein to figure out he is appealing to racists.

When someone like Trump retweets falsified data from blatant white supremacists it doesn't take Tesla much to comprehend that he is in fact appealing to racists.



But I do also concede the fact that projection plays a massive part in the accusations, myself excluded...
I just use my common sense to decipher who the target audience is.

As do you when you say "While it is probably true that there is a pack of racists out there making hilarious connections between such “coded terms” and racial stereotypes".

I wouldn't summise you were projecting your own racism for saying that.


As you know, and as I have eluded to, it's merely common sense.

Something inherent in people who have powerful encephalons as opposed to neanderthalic peons of society who feel superior because of their skin colour, no matter the race.



With all that said, I wouldn't call Trump a racist, or a fascist just yet...
Authoritarian to the hilt...

But they all are nowadays.



S&F LesMis.



posted on Jul, 25 2016 @ 02:43 PM
link   
a reply to: thinline

And to pick today of all days to start a trump is racist thread............



posted on Jul, 25 2016 @ 02:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: thinline

And to pick today of all days to start a trump is racist thread............


A verbose thread which you responded to within 30 seconds and reply once more claiming the exact opposite of what occurred.


You Trumpers are so desperate to be quick witted that you expose yourselves as ignorant.

TL'DR
This is not a "Trump is a racist" thread.

Epic fail!!!



posted on Jul, 25 2016 @ 02:50 PM
link   
a reply to: Hazardous1408

No it doesn't it takes someone who is projecting to do so. There has been NOTHING that Trump has said that has been racist. That is projection by other racists, or disengenuous meanderings by those trying to manipulate voters into doing what they want.

If you have a problem distinguishing between an illegal alien crossing from Mexico, and Mexicans, it's time to look in the mirror about what you think.

Jaden



posted on Jul, 25 2016 @ 02:53 PM
link   

originally posted by: Masterjaden
a reply to: Hazardous1408

No it doesn't it takes someone who is projecting to do so. There has been NOTHING that Trump has said that has been racist. That is projection by other racists, or disengenuous meanderings by those trying to manipulate voters into doing what they want.

If you have a problem distinguishing between an illegal alien crossing from Mexico, and Mexicans, it's time to look in the mirror about what you think.

Jaden


Who said he has said racist things? Not me.

He has retweeted falsified white supremacist myths though, numerous times.

I don't need to be projecting to know that, I just had to research the data he shared with truthful statistics from the proper agencies.



posted on Jul, 25 2016 @ 03:03 PM
link   
Thanks Les for an excellent explanation of a phenomenon that has puzzled me for years. Here I thought something was wrong with my hearing. I remember this stuff started with Reagan. I would listen to him make a speech then listen to the talking heads and wonder if they heard the same speech. I wasn't even a particular supporter of Reagan but couldn't figure out whence came the words pouring forth from the media. Now I realize that it was just my ignorance of the "code" preventing me from full understanding.
Now that I understand that I need the code book for the elephants, maybe someone will present the code book for the donkeys as well. What did Mr. O mean when he said, "the cost of your health care insurance will go down."?
Perhaps some of the media outlets can obtain these code books and begin a program to run the "real" meanings of the words below the pictures, like closed captioning, for those of us whose education came when words had meanings found in the dictionary.




posted on Jul, 25 2016 @ 03:10 PM
link   
I'll just say that it's not a very good code if everyone understands it. So what's the point of claiming that it's "code" language aside from attempting to shut down converstion on topics you'd rather not address by attempting to make them racial issues when they actually aren't and thus rendering them off topic?



posted on Jul, 25 2016 @ 03:11 PM
link   
This has been used forever, the "Well I didn't mean that, so YOU must be the *blank* one for reading into that statement."

There's no way to definitively catch these as pro-racists, but it doesn't seem that strange to me that the main people catching on to racist-adjacent wording are A: anti-racism activists, and B: Overtly racist activists. They're the opposite side of the same coin but tend to communicate along similar lines. So it seems pretty obvious that the two groups of people that would make these connections would be the ones attuned to this method of address.

It's funny because I just read an piece in the New York Times addressing the concept that while Trump-opposing people are worried that he's a racist in disguise the actual "Racist and proud" people are utterly convinced of this.
White supremecists optimistically looking towards Trump



posted on Jul, 25 2016 @ 03:17 PM
link   
so trump isn't racist or a fascist, its the people who see it in him ?

lol



posted on Jul, 25 2016 @ 03:20 PM
link   
a reply to: Hazardous1408


It's merely common sense, that the laws should be enforced the same to everyone. If people followed the laws to became Americans, then others should follow the same law.z

It's merely common sense if you have a boarder, you know who's crossing it.

It's merely common sense to laugh at liberals, pavlovian response, to their dog whistles.



posted on Jul, 25 2016 @ 03:58 PM
link   

originally posted by: Slanter
This has been used forever, the "Well I didn't mean that, so YOU must be the *blank* one for reading into that statement."

There's no way to definitively catch these as pro-racists, but it doesn't seem that strange to me that the main people catching on to racist-adjacent wording are A: anti-racism activists, and B: Overtly racist activists. They're the opposite side of the same coin but tend to communicate along similar lines. So it seems pretty obvious that the two groups of people that would make these connections would be the ones attuned to this method of address.

It's funny because I just read an piece in the New York Times addressing the concept that while Trump-opposing people are worried that he's a racist in disguise the actual "Racist and proud" people are utterly convinced of this.
White supremecists optimistically looking towards Trump


That's right. I think the difference between the overt racists (ie. KKK) and the covert ones, is that the covert ones at least feel shame for having those thoughts and feelings, whereas the overt ones feel pride. Either way, both believe the human race can be divided into "races", and those divisions are the shared currency of both the overt and covert racist's identity politics.



posted on Jul, 25 2016 @ 04:09 PM
link   
a reply to: Hazardous1408

I think you're right. It is common sense that overt racists would conflate Mexicans with "brown people" for instance, as there is much evidence of this sort, but it is perhaps a little more suspicious that someone supposedly opposed to such racism would arrive at the very same conclusions with the very same logic.



posted on Jul, 25 2016 @ 04:09 PM
link   
To further illustrate what I was alluding to above:

I have a function next week for children and parents of the young kids in my son's school and i need to make and take a treat. It just happens that I have the perfect one in mind - I found a recipe for watermelon "cupcakes!" To me they sound like the perfect healthy, vegan (I'm not but that should be diet safe for just about anyone) high summer afternoon snack treat to take just about anywhere.

Now, if I said this school was an inner city one, I might be accused of dog whistling because of the stereotypical connection between African-Americans and watermelon, but it's not.

However, in that case, who would be doing the actual dog whistling? Me or the person who is making the accusation? And in that case, whose code is it really?

Because if the whole point of a dog whistle is for me (the cupcake maker) to be making a racial statement without anyone else (specifically the people I am making the statement on) being any the wiser, then if they know and are able to "hear" my so-called dog whistle, then what is the point of it? It's not really a dog whistle is it if everyone can hear it?
edit on 25-7-2016 by ketsuko because: several edits to expand my thought



posted on Jul, 25 2016 @ 04:14 PM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko

With no evidence of you making such connection, the only ones making the connection are the accusers.

There was a story that a group of students ( from where I cannot rememeber) wanted to bring a camel in for celebration of Hump Day. Of course, the camel was cancelled because it was determined to be racist towards Muslims. Obviously the accusers made the connection between camels and Muslims, while the students wanting the camel connected it to Hump day.



posted on Jul, 25 2016 @ 04:15 PM
link   

originally posted by: shooterbrody
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

Kinda like "taco bowls"?

I had to look up what you were referring to. I'm still not sure I 'get it'.



posted on Jul, 25 2016 @ 04:17 PM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
I'll just say that it's not a very good code if everyone understands it. So what's the point of claiming that it's "code" language aside from attempting to shut down converstion on topics you'd rather not address by attempting to make them racial issues when they actually aren't and thus rendering them off topic?


I wonder why it is that the democrats are the only ones who can pick up on, and understand this "dog whistling" racism...
edit on 25-7-2016 by LSU0408 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 25 2016 @ 04:23 PM
link   
a reply to: LesMisanthrope

I agree although..........maybe some of this is "contextual" depending upon one's life experience.

For example, you stated: " When someone hears the phrase “men not working”, and instantly and without further inquiry thinks of black people,".

Where I live there are no "black people"; they just don't inhabit this part of the country which is extremely remote.
The population is roughly 80% Hispanic and 20% Latino. You go into the nearest small town near me and you discover hundreds of working age men who aren't working, or only work enough each week to pay for rent, smokes, & beer.

In this case.................they're almost exclusively white men. Go figure. A town full of "white men not working".

BTW, there's plenty of jobs goin' a beggin out here! I know.........I can't even find a guy wiling to friggin' PAINT a wall!



new topics

top topics



 
32
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join