Bah, nobody recognized that quote. The speech was written by Matthew Scully, a senior speech writer for GWB, who was possibly unknowingly quoteing Pegler. It’s not like Pegler was Nathan Forrest or something.
In any case, Fegler, before he went crazy, was actually really well respected, won the Pulitzer Prize,, was an early foe of Nazism, condemned Lynchings in the South when few would, was a war correspondent in WWI and WWII (and was known for his personal bravery) and nationally syndicated.
Yes, we went off the wall just a few years before he died at the age of 76. That does not invalidate his earlier great contributions, nor does it make any quote of his a “dog whistle”. His later senile ramblings do not make his Pulitzer Prize for exposing criminal racketeering in labor unions any less a feat.
That quote was from his earlier writings, in any case.
I am in no way surprised that Palin didn’t write the speech. Scully probably got it from Pat Buchanan. Dog whistling Buchanan is really no better than dog whistling Pegler.
I’ll admit I’m not that familiar with Pegler’s career. Wiki says he was obstinately opposed to all unions, not just corruption. He advocated for the government to “smash” and take over the AFL-CIO, saying, “Yes, that would be fascism. But I, who detest fascism, see advantages in such fascism.” Wiki also says he vehemently opposed the New Deal, denounced the Civil Rights movement, and in 1965 wrote, “Some white patriot of the Southern tier will spatter [RFK’s] spoonful of brains in public premises before the snow flies.” Apparently by the late 50s he was seen as shrill and extreme.
You don’t get to quote that guy’s “early work” and pretend the extremism doesn’t matter.
Sure, he was an extremist. But altho he denounced Civil Rights, he also was one of the first to loudly denounce lynchings. A man of many extreme opinions, some of which were racist, at least later in life. But he is by no means a standard bearer for racists.
Here’s a quote from a known racist , is it a Dog Whistle? :*I hold it that a little rebellion now and then is a good thing, and as necessary in the political world as storms in the physical.
*
In fact we daily use quotes from men who were known racists- slaveholders, bigots, and sexist too.
It’s gutless because the deniability is built in. It’s a way of saying something without actually saying it and then when you’re called on it you can not only deny that you said it, you can criticize the person who pointed it out by assigning venal motives to them. “It says a lot about you that you’d think I meant that.”
As a completely non-political statement in the General Questions forum, I find it interesting when only the opposition seems to hear these so-called dog whistles. Are these dog whistles so secret that even the original speakers and their intended audience don’t know when they’re occurring? And only the opposition hears them?
Those (who are not the opposition) may not know they are hearing these things. But they may be responding to them very strongly. Those who hear them consciously will deny they are dog whistles. It’s the nature of the beast.
The opposition is a large population having heterogenious perspectives. Some will see it and some miss it.
But we live in an environment that is more and more sophisticated about these things. We change every day. It won’t get easier to use them, and it will be necessary to adjust. Unless we just become fascist.
Seriously? Those (who are not the opposition) may not know they are hearing these things???
That’s my question. Are these dog whistles so secret that not even the original speakers or their intended audience are aware that they’re occurring? If only the opposition hears them, are they actually dog whistles?
I think it would be disingenuous to claim that political audiences don’t have a psychology or respond to subtexts that may or may not be consciously considered.
Are you saying that it doesn’t matter if the original speaker, or the intended audience, is aware of an alleged dog whistle as long as the opposition can claim that a dog whistle was issued???
Pretty much **I **am. Oh sure, in the ear of the opposition, they hear them, but they are not the intended audience. How come the opposition can hear and detect them so clearly, when they are supposedly tuned to a certain set of ears? :dubious:
In the General Questions forum, “opposition” means exactly what it says. They are the people who are opposed to the position(s) of the original speaker and claim to hear dog whistles.
It has been unacceptable political practice to appeal to the racist voter overtly.
I guess your position is that no politician (on the right) ever appeals to a racist vote covertly either. You may even be saying that there is no racist block of voters. I disagree.
It wouldn’t matter much whether you knew you were being singled out as a racist. And as the politician, you could very easily say that you just picked it up from prior political practices and campaigns.
But there’s no question that states rights have to do with slavery, lynching, and local sherriffs jurisdictions. and that All-american means white, and so on ad infinity. That’s where these things were born. This practice is losing it’s deniability as we speak.
It’s just as easy to claim that no politician (on the left) ever appealed to racist voters either. :rolleyes:
I’m saying that just because someone thinks they hear dog whistles doesn’t mean that there are any actual dog whistles being issued. Just the claims that there must be dog whistles seems to satisfy the opposition.
It’s not always the opposition who detects them. It was William Safire who pointed out the hidden message when Bush referred to the Dred Scott decision. Also, most people in the opposition will “hear” the message when it’s pointed out to them by someone like Paul Krugman or Geoffrey Nunberg.
Satisfy in what way? What are you talking about? I say it’s a dog whistle when you signal that you are their guy for clannish reasons by using a subtextual talking point. You can keep doing it. You can stop. People can vote for you, or they don’t. Your party will win or they won’t. You lose elections or you don’t. Do you have a guilty conscience, and want me to tell you it’s OK?
Dog whistles will be obsolete after history decides what will happen to the early 21st Century Republican party. The Dog vote is not going to decide elections in the future.