Dog-whistling - Do you understand the term?

I'm not trying to be condescending. I don't know who understands what this means in a political context.

When Jimmy Carter talked about racism, he was probably basing his views on the dog-whistling going on. He can hear it just as well as those it was really intended for.

Dog-whistle politics, also known as the use of code words, is a type of political campaigning or speechmaking employing coded language that appears to mean one thing to the general population but has a different or more specific meaning for a targeted subgroup of the audience. The term is usually used pejoratively by those that do not approve of the tactics. According to blogger Ian Welsh,

When you speak in code(…), most of the time the only people who hear and understand what you just said are the intended group, who have an understanding of the world and a use of words that is not shared by the majority of the population.

http://ethicalmartini.wordpress.com/2008/07/29/what-is-dog-whistling/

If you know the code words, the noise is being ramped up daily. It explains some of what many consider the sudden growth of outrage on certain topics. It wasn't sudden. The outrage was being fueled constantly.

Dog-whistling gives plausible deniability to a lot of people who don't want to be caught outright espousing something like racism. It was used constantly by the McCain campaign.

That was educational. Hopeful some of the deniers will get this too.

"paranoid" and guilty of "exaggerating" how disgustingly hurtful and potentially dangerous these dog-whistlers are.

I also feel that those who are outraged by it and those who recognize it should call it out each and every time.

Thanks for the post Are_grits_groceries.

George W Bush was a master at dog-whistling. He was speaking to fundies and endtimers all the time. They knew he had their backs.

People need to widen their word spectrum. They would be appalled at what is constantly being said.

Rep. King was dog-whistling when he said gay marriage led to socialism.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x6626477

It's hard to keep up with all of it.

Same goes for "socialist," "communism," "liberals," "liberalism," "fascist," "fascism" "east coast," "elitist"

e.g. "Martin Luther King was a "socialist"/"communist"

>>>

As real socialists laugh at these clumsily made broadsides, and as scholars of actual socialist theory try and explain the absurdity of the analogies being drawn by conservative commentators, a key point seems to have been missed, and it is this point that best explains what the red-baiting is actually about.

It is not, and please make note of it, about socialism. Or capitalism. Or economics at all, per se. After all, President Bush was among the most profligate government spenders in recent memory, yet few ever referred to him in terms as derisive as those being hurled at Obama. Even when President Clinton proposed health care reform, those who opposed his efforts, though vociferous in their critique, rarely trotted out the dreaded s-word as part of their arsenal. They prattled on about "big government," yes, but not socialism as such. Likewise, when Ronald Reagan helped craft the huge FICA tax hike in 1983, in a bipartisan attempt to save Social Security, few stalwart conservatives thought to call America's cowboy-in-chief a closet communist. And many of the loudest voices at the recent town hall meetings--so many of which have been commandeered by angry minions ginned up by talk radio--are elderly folk whose own health care is government-provided, and whose first homes were purchased several decades ago with FHA and VA loans, underwritten by the government, for that matter. Many of them no doubt reaped the benefits of the GI Bill, either directly or indirectly through their own parents.

>>>

To begin with, and this is something often under-appreciated by the white left, to the right and its leadership (if not necessarily its foot-soldiers), the battle between capitalism and communism/socialism has long been seen as a racialized conflict. First, of course, is the generally non-white hue of those who have raised the socialist or communist banner from a position of national leadership. Most such places and persons have been of color: China, Vietnam, North Korea, Cuba, assorted places in Latin America from time to time, or the Caribbean, or in Africa. With the exception of the former Soviet Union and its immediate Eastern European satellites--which are understood as having had state socialism foisted upon them, rather than having it freely chosen through their own revolutions from below--Marxism in practice has been a pretty much exclusively non-white venture.

>>>

Now, given the almost instinctual connection made between socialism and redistribution, imagine what many white folks would naturally assume when told that this man, this black man, this black man with an African daddy, was a socialist. Even if those using the term didn't intend it to push racial buttons (and that is a decidedly large "if"), the fact remains that for many, it would almost certainly prompt any number of racial fears and insecurities: as in, the black guy is going to take from those who work and give to those who don't. And naturally, we all know (or at least our ill-informed prejudices tell us) who's in the first group and who's in the second one...

>>>

more : http://www.counterpunch.org/wise08112009.html

This guy gets it just about right.

at least not to where i could have defined it as you have here. thank you! THIS is why i love DU.

The phrase "states' rights", although literally referring to powers of individual state governments in the United States, has been described as a code word for institutionalized segregation and racism. Other terms that some people say are used to indicate alleged veiled racism are "crime in the streets" and "welfare queens".

Former president George W. Bush allegedly used coded language in his speeches to send messages to his supporters among the religious right that will be ignored by other parts of the U.S. population. Examples include his frequent use of biblical phrases and the veiled mention of the Dred Scott Supreme Court decision in the 2004 Presidential debates. The latter refers to overturning Roe v. Wade, which is likened to the Dred Scott case by some of its critics.

David Gergen claimed that John McCain's 2008 presidential campaign against Barack Obama used dog whistle tactics targeting racists, while retaining plausible deniability.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dog-whistle_politics#United_States

it keeps the rw coming to the voting booth.

ellen fl

They think he is being blocked by the godless libruls. They hear it as people trying.

Always have, always will.

**

hot button issues do all dems jump to like fundies jump to gay marriage and abortion . . . not to mention death panels?

ellen fl

a small dog whistle at DU for stupid. Everybody can dog whistle. It's just a matter of what you are doing with it. The RW is doing it for malicious reasons.

"hugh" is a takeoff on a mispelling of huge somebody saw. If you used that particular word in a larger group, DU members would get it and others would just think it was an unintentional mispelling.

around 'hugh' would have helped.

to your point, du uses these words within the community and not as secret code in the public realm. my orchid forum even has words like that. i think the broader use of code words to communicate with only certain persons in a public audience is different than the commonality of inside jokes as seen here. granted our use of those 'code' words is derisive, but it is not meant to impart a secret message.

ellen fl

But if taken outside of this group it could be. Dog-whistling is not inherently bad. However, the context in which the RW does it is evil.

I wasn't trying to equate DU with the RW.

Funny thing is, that's a comma after "states", not a period. In between there is that pesky "or the people" part of the 9th Amendment. Which means those are either rights reserved to the state governments, or civil rights reserved for the people.

And when you look at issues where Liberals have championed "states rights" it has been to favor civil rights: medical marijuana, right-to-die, etc.

When you look at issues where Conservatives have championed "states rights" it has been AGAINST civil rights: segregation, Jim Crow, etc.

So even when Liberals are opposed to states rights, they still have a constitutional argument on their side. Not so for the Conservatives.

decision...and continued to fight all the way to the SCOTUS to get pres shit-for-brains put into the White House.

As innocuous as it may seem. It is meant to re-enforce the terms "affirmative action" and how the Blacks only get their jobs through government programs while Whites are "hard working Americans". Notice how when pundits speak of "hard working Americans" and "average Americans" they are always talking about rural areas with high percentages of white people. I don't think I have ever seen stock footage of a Black neighborhood.

'We need to get our country back' ....

accusing him of being a "muslim" is calling him a "terrorist"
accusing him of "death panels" is asking some nut to assasinate him to save the country.


really. That's what all this dogwhistling is about.

In a Bush speech:
The phrase is: "Never put a period where God has put a comma." Which is to say - it ain't over yet, and God may well make it better. So Iraq's bad, but if we trust in God, he'll make it better.

References to the Dred Scott decision:
Anti-abortion activists see themselves as similar to anti-slavery activists. And they take heart that eventually Dred Scott v. Sandford was overthrown.
(Roe v Wade is their Dred Scott)

Calling people who were forced out by Katrina "refugees" instead of "evacuees."

"Family Values" means pro-life and anti-gay.

The Gadsden flag ("Don't Tread on Me)-The Gadsden Flag has been used throughout modern politics as a symbol of disagreement with the current governmment.

Minutemen:
Minuteman Project and its chapters have been called an extreme nativist group by the Southern Poverty Law Center."

Huckabee's dog whistle:
He is fond of talking about "vertical" politics rather than "horizontal" politics.
This is definitely dog-whistle politics -- that is, a message delivered in coded terminology and targeted to a particular subcultural group. Conservative evangelicals often talk about the need to prioritize their vertical relationships with God first and foremost before worrying about horizontal relationships among people. It's the individualized "get right with God" approach of conservative Protestantism.

By linking Barack Obama with Britney Spears and Paris Hilton, Republicans tap racist fears of black men and white women.

As significant as the cross is to Christ the swastika is to Satan. The insignia is a repugnant symbol of murderous racist hate.
They equate the swastika with Satan and that equates Obama to the Antichrist.

Svas tik is the Sanskrit word.

It means "good lucky symbol".

Too bad it was stolen by the Nazis.

Excerpt from "The Political Life of Children" by Robert Coles (1986):

"...Later he asked me why the governor keeps talking about 'the good people' of the state and the 'bloc vote.' Actually, he's heard me say to my wife that the whites are 'the good people' and we're the 'bloc vote' -- bloc instead of black is the way they do it these days!"

http://books.google.com/books?id=Sfc8MNtUw14C&pg=PA31&lpg=PA31&dq=%22good+people%22+%22bloc+vote%22+%22political+life+of+children%22&source=bl&ots=Kgjq6g1qY-&sig=QF7QM3b2uSxY3CARESG0-CX-tlQ&hl=en&ei=e8G8St3YI5GEswOcooG7BA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=1#v=onepage&q=&f=false

If some racists are talking amongst themselves in public but don't want anyone to overhear them using the "n" word or any other similar words, they will express their disappointment, frustration, annoyance, etc. with "those Canadians."

Of course, REAL Canadians are horrified about the adopted terminology.

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/falkenberg/5480917.html

http://boingboing.net/2008/01/27/southern-racists-ado.html

**

...You would hear the "good, hard working people of Mississippi" who "rolled up their sleeves and got back to work" compared to those in Louisiana/New Orleans who "just complained and whined."

A fairly long list leaped into my head immediately. I can't imagine anyone who spends much time at all at DU NOT getting it without examples. We see daily threads about such things... very hard to miss them.

when giving his address to Congress.

Translation: You need to know your place, BOY.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gm17pTJMI8k

is that close enough? :evilgrin:

K&R

He's black and can't be trusted with the government.

I see dog-whistling a lot in the rhetoric of the right wing teabaggers, commentators and Republicans.

This is an extremely enlightening post and should be required reading.

Thank you, Are_grits_groceries.

Bush dog whistle.

There is, indeed, a plethora of dog whistling going on since Obama became President. It has always been there as your examples from bush show but, imo, just as the threats on this President have increased hundreds fold so has the dog whistling.

It's like having a radio that can suddenly pick up a brazillion stations instead of a few.

our side should never, ever accept dog whistling against any minority, by any person, by any preacher, by any group. Because if you cast your McClurkin upon the waters, in many days it will come back to you shouting about Kenyan birth certificates.

It also reflects a disdain for education. That wasn't what I grew up with in the South. Most of the people I knew were going to go to college or get some type of training. I went to school with a diverse group of people.

Forcing creationism and other benighted ideas is also a way to dumb everybody down. We are sinking to the lowest common denominator.

All politicians are elitists. The ones that are not don't get elected. Republicans are the epitome of elitist, since they believe that the wealthy are inherently better than the rabble and so deserve to be free from the "burden" of taxation.

... not by accident of birth and money like the Bushes, but simply by having a college degree and being a Democrat. And at that, mostly by being educated. What does that say about our country, when you become something despised by trying to acquire knowledge?

Hekate

then spend the rest of your life protecting corporate profits as a corporate lawyer, then I would say that you were a waste of education.

For Wall street "Elite" bankers and such...

You know the "Elite" rich we have to tax...

Is that dog whistling too?

Sorry, I just don't see any descriptive term for any group by political opposition as coded race terms. Maybe I need the special decoder ring...

Elite as in "their shit don't stink." My words. Obama wouldn't be that crude.

When it's done like the rabid right is doing it, it is very destructive.

Not all terms are dog-whistles, but when used enough by certain people, a lot of them are.

So if you try to call someone out on dog whistling, they can act dumb and say "that's not what I meant" and play the victim card (e.g. you accused me of being a racist).

The word "elitist" does not have the same meaning in average usage as when some rabid right winger with a propensity toward racism uses it.

When someone with that kind of background calls a minority "elitist," it is meant to show resentment and disdain for that minority's using education as the great equalizer. It illustrates insecurity in having someone believed to be inferior move up the ladder.

Higher education, which is usually a good thing, becomes the subject of insult and ridicule when it's a minority who possesses it. Especially if they have attended an (elite) Ivy League institution. All of a sudden they're "affirmative action" students, which is also code for "they aren't smart enough, were not deserving, didn't belong there in the first place and took that spot from a white person."

The racist person believes educated minorities are attempting to rise to a position that in the past was not available to them, and that they are aspiring to something they are (supposedly) not capable of, through their education. Minorities are supposed to "know their place."

Blacks and Hispanics come historically from a background where their ancestors were denied or threatened with harrassment, punishment or death for even attempting to get a "formal" education. For their modern-day descendants who have overcome the odds and become successful through hard work and education, calling them "elitist" is a means of making light of their education in an attempt to bring them down, as if to say "well, they wouldn't be where they are if they didn't have an education (handed to them through affirmative action). I'm still better than them because I'm *white,* and all the education in the world won't change that."

(See Gates, Jr., Henry Louis and Sotomayor, Sonia.)

It helps to be able to historically connect the dots (and to a certain degree, accept the concept of White Privilege) in order to decipher the dog whistles.

superiority.

The Republicans can't win elections on policy or issues, so they rely on coded language to get their message of hate across to their angry, angry base.

Attempting to influence urban voting trends, which are usually democratic

is what got them on the rwhacko's hitlist.

Because they don't want "illegals" (read: Hispanic people) registering to vote.

... code words, to use the polite terminology of the day. "Law and order" segued into being about the suppression of demonstrations against the Vietnam War. "Family values" was always about sexual expression -- always.

Thanks for starting this thread. The more we understand how the radical right talks, the more we will understand how RW mind is manipulated.

Framing, dog whistling, code words -- whatever you call it, it's important for us all to be aware of it. It gets into the MSM as shorthand, as lazy reporting and non-journalism -- we need to be not only aware, but ready to call them out on it. For Gods'sake, look what has become of ACORN -- they've been destroyed with the complicity of the MSM, and only Rachel Maddow has the wit to point this out.

Hekate

Dog-whistling seems to give us plausible accusability, which is why we love it.

It reminds me a little bit of the Emperor's clothes. We claim to see the racism just like others claimed to be able to see the clothes. Nobody wants to admit that they are so clueless as to not be "in the know" about the code.

So, it's another way we can 'see' the racism in our 'enemies' and also mock the intelligence of those who don't see it.

I don't hear all of it because a lot of it is based on the Bible. I don't follow their theology enough. You don't have to believe it.

Just us evil liberals trying to find a reason to be just like Republicans, right?

Do I mock the intelligence of those who don't see it? No, but I will mock those who ignore it when presented and explained.

IN reference to white people

:-)

K&R

Some people are still of a mindset that unless someone outright says "n*****," they aren't really expressing racist thoughts and tendencies.

Was John McCain's calling Obama "that one" racist? You bet!

Thanks for the reminder.

If the recipients were to realize they have been trained like dogs do you think they would get pissed or go cower under the porch?

Until their "master" told them what to do next.

These dogs attack, and they bite.

I'd be more worried about their rabies shots, because they're sure foaming at the mouth these days.

Just wondering if I'm missing anything. Most of the examples that I've heard seem to be specific for groups like right-wing, fundamentalist Christians.

this rabble-rousing tool is usually easy to spot.

Of course, the books would be boring.

I recall that pres shit-for-brains was always using "code words" to appeal to his fundie base.

or for some reason down-playing what is going on. He has never liked Carter, and he may have disagreed just to be contrary. He also knows dog-whistling and the fundie Bible quite well. Better be glad he was never a RW nutter. He has the charisma, speaking ability and knowledge to really lead a revolution. He also could have fooled the mainstream.

That's why they aren't farther than they are. The people at the top are an unappealing bunch to say the least. Sarah Palin would be extremely dangerous if she was smarter.

I chat online on AOL. (I KNOW, I KNOW) I love the chat rooms what can I say?))Anyway there is a chatter in one of the rooms, who has just recently started with "ACORN this and ACORN that...but making ACORN replace the word n***ers. I was immediately aware of what he was doing, as others in the room either ignored it, or laughed about it, or had no clue. Yesterday, this chatter said "ACORNS are born to hang on trees..." I called him on it, and promptly reported him. Especially considering the strange death of the Census worker...this kook? Well you get my drift.

It's completely true. They talk in code, also this hate for ACORN by association is BLACK, And those of us who support Obama and ACORN...Well you get my drift.


They are playing with fire...like leaving a load gun sitting on the table.

But many pretend they don't. Been around for a while. Agree about Carter.

The most annoying part is that if someone is presented with them and doesn't see them right off, they probably won't. if you try to explain how "state's rights" and "patriotic american" are code words, they look at you and either think you're crazy, or start reviewing their shopping lists while you blather.

Don't even get me started on more subtle instances, such as mcCain's "that one" - Reducing his opponent into an object or at mest a nonhuman animal, a possession.

When Sarah Palin said some places in America are more "Pro-America" than others....


"We believe that the best of America is in the small towns that we get to visit, and in the wonderful little pockets of what I call the real America, being here with all of you hard-working, very patriotic, very pro-America areas of this great nation," she said.

"This is where we find the kindness and the goodness and the courage of everyday Americans," Palin added."


http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/17/campaign.wrap/index.html



In other words: Anywhere rural between the two liberal coasts, where it is majority white, Christian and republican = "pro-America" and "real America." When Bush was president, being "pro-America" also meant not questioning the president or his actions and policies, a la Britney Spears.

These days, though, being "pro-America" means taking up arms against that "socialist" squatting in the White House. ("I want my country back," parading around presidential events with guns to "exercise their 2nd amendment rights" and Glenn Beck crying about how much he loves his country fall under this.)

And there's "hard-working" thrown out there again for good measure. Basically racists think minorities are LAZY (welfare queen, too lazy to leave NOLA before a hurricane hit, etc.), and only white people are "hard-working."

So many code words, so little time....

And so I'm simultaneously intrigued and repulsed by Republicans and their ability to manipulate language. I wonder if half of them are even aware of the messages they're sending.

It's just so ingrained in your being, you know racist talk when you hear it.

what he's really saying is . . .

a. "I'm just a stupid fat fuck with no clue"

b. "when they were passing out brains, they forgot me"

c. "with a body like this, of course I have to pay for it!"

d. _____________________________________________________________

(fill in your own) . . .

Have you seen this article from AlterNet?

http://www.alternet.org/politics/142333/the_wing-nut_code:_what_glenn_beck_and_sarah_palin_are_really_saying_to_their_followers/

is the fact that a lot of it is based on the Bible. The fundies have certain passages and beliefs that fly over most heads unnoticed. I can pick up on some of it, but I know a lot gets by me.

One reason Jimmy Carter made his statement about racism so broadly is that he knows the theology they use so well. He has heard it all of his life.

Even if you attend church regularly, you probably won't pick up their clues. It is a different world.

This book will give you a glimpse into their culture.
The Unlikely Disciple: A Sinner's Semester at America's Holiest University by Kevin Roose

"Brown University student Roose didn’t think of himself as being particularly religious, yet he conceived the novel idea of enrolling at Liberty University, the school Jerry Falwell built, thereby transferring from a school “a notch or two above Sodom and Gomorrah” to the evangelical equivalent of Notre Dame or Brigham Young. His reasons were logical, though curious. To him, a semester at Liberty was like studying abroad. “Here, right in my time zone, was a culture more foreign to me than any European capital.” He tells his story entertainingly, as a matter of trying to blend in and not draw too much attention to himself. One hardened habit he had to break was cursing; he even bought a Christian self-help book to tame his tongue. Throughout his time at Liberty, he stayed level-headed, nuanced, keenly observant. He meant to find some gray in the black-and-white world of evangelicalism, and he learned a few things."
http://www.amazon.com/gp/feature.html/?docId=1000027801

He had a friend at Brown who grew up in an evangelical household. Roose had to have some basic knowledge if he was going to even begin to fit in. His friend gave him lessons because she knew he could never even begin to pass as an evangelical seeking a better education.

Roose was lost even with the help he got. Luckily he was a quick learner. He doesn't make fun of them. The interesting and scary thing was that he could feel himself being drawn in, and came very close to joining. His friend at Brown talked to him a lot, and she worried about this. she even warned him.

With apologies to Pavlov, consider this potential altered experiment in which you have three groups of dogs.

1. With the first group you would ring the bell as Pavlov did and then feed them. Those dogs come to view the bell as a positive or nurturing reinforcement signal. They salivate at the mouth before food is ever seen or smelled.

2. With the second group you would ring the bell and let them watch the first group of dogs eat but the second group wouldn't be fed at that time. They could only come to view the sound of the bell with increased resentment and animosity.

3. The third group of dogs would be kept separate and would hear the bell ring at random times having nothing to do with being fed or watching other dogs eat. To them the bell would sound neutral and have no meaning other than making sound.

The propagandist many of whom make their living with the corporate media can ring the same bell to motivate their target audience, antagonize or trash their opponents and when called on it, play the ringing as an intended exercise in neutrality.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Classical_conditioning#Pavlov.27s_experiment

Thanks for the thread, Are_grits_groceries. :thumbsup:

poutrage,special rights, anti family, PUMA,