The left does not have any dog whistles and neither does the right. It is a stupid way of accusing someone of racism without evidence.
Here’s a pretty blatant dog whistle along those lines.
Doesn’t that mean paying to ride the bus or subway?
No, that’s “Pay they’re fare share.”
Typically, I’ve heard it more rigorously defined than that. Usually something like “housing which is affordable at 30% or less of income of families making 60% (or sometimes 80%) of area median income (AMI.)” And even here in the quite-expensive Seattle area, everyone who’s informed understands that there is “naturally affordable housing”, which is usually older buildings that sound like what you’ve described, though potentially multi- rather than single-family.
That said, I agree that if the topic is new construction, ‘affordable’ here inevitably means subsidized, though sometimes the subsidy is from private sources rather than the government.
Velocity wrote:
The term “holistic approach to admissions” is sometimes used as a dog whistle in academia to mean “We have too many Asians.”
Again, that’s not what the term “dog whistle” means. You’re describing euphemisms it seems.
The deal with a literal dog whistle is that its sound is so high-pitched that only dogs, the intended audience, can hear it. An example of this term’s use would be when someone adds “WWG1WGA” to their tweet or post - most people don’t know what it means, but those who do will see that person as one of them.
I thought it was “Pay they’re fare, Cher.”
OK, what does it mean?
88 is some kind of dog whistle for Heil Hitler, right?
I guess if you mean “technically subsidized by requiring cheap housing be built where a developer otherwise wouldn’t.” But, if you mean “housing that the government pays for directly, at least in part”, you’re incorrect.
We have very little section 8 housing in my neighborhood, but if someone wants to put in a development, some portion of it can’t be million dollar condos, but has to be affordable. So, that’s sort-of economically subsidized, but there aren’t direct payments. Is that what you meant?
That’s not a dog whistle at all, I was talking about that on Twitter and you can find a ton of existing pictures of the American Eagle that look way more similar to the Trump shirt than the Nazi one. It even looks like the USMC Eagle if flipped.
And bingo. That’s the dog whistle in action. It can plausibly be just “the USMC Eagle if flipped”.
You’re knowingly completely missing my point. You can find pictures of American Eagles that are almost 1/1 rightward facing already on existing t-shirt designs from at least 20 years ago. Unless now we’re interpreting ANY Eagle design on Trump anything as a direct reference to the Nazi Eagle.
If you have to literally count words/letters in every single Trump tweet to find the one that has the perfect dog whistle, maybe it’s not a dog whistle.
Where’s the anchor?
How do you imagine a dog whistle works, pray tell? It’s only a dog whistle if Trump writes “I am a Nazi. Period.”?
The point of a dog whistle is that the intended audience can interpret the thing in a way that is meaningful to them, without it being obvious to all. It doesn’t have to be impossible to interpret some other way - quite the opposite.
If a racist sees that Trump posed his eagle just like the nazi logo and clumsily chopped down the US flag to fit in the nazi logo’s circle, he’s not going to nod sagely and say “Ah, the USMC eagle.” He’s going to nod sagely and say “Yes, that racist is our boy. And how he just equated the US flag to the swastika is quite striking, I say.”
That shirt isn’t the first time Trump had trouble with Nazi symbolsim.
When the left says “bankers” it is a dog whistle for “Jews”
Could you give an example of this?
Coming from a left-winger in a context where it’s plausible that they mean it to be understood that way by other lefties, specifically. I have no doubt that that’s a code word used by antisemites, but it was my understanding that american left lost all of their antisemites to the right, who has better support for naziism.