Sorry, I thought you were asking in general, not for specifics.
But, as for specific groups that would have some members that would pick up on it and nod sagely, there are people in PETA, GreenPeace, the Sierra Club and a few others that would happily support legislation that limited the number of children people could have.
Farrakhan and Sharpton aren’t right wingers. And there is quite a bit of anti-semitism in the BLM movement.
If there was ever a time I needed an upvote button, your comment was it. Nicely summed up all of the non-whistles listed.
When I think of dog whistles, I think 88, pepe, and even states’ rights. Or thugs, looting, rioting (as opposed to protestors). So definitely a strong race component, but the “states’ rights” does hint that “no no we’re not taking rights away from people, we’re just transferring rights from the federal govt to states”, which is generally total BS.
What would I have to pay you to work at McDonald’s and flip burgers?
And…? Science has 0 support for creationism and fully supports evolution, so that’s not really a dog whistle.
Neo Nazism or support for the Confederacy IS hate speech. The Nazis believed that people like me should be dead, and they killed 6 million of us. I have a hard time thinking of anything MORE hateful than that. The Confederacy meanwhile was a pack of traitors to the United States who rebelled for the continued right to enslave the black race and treat its members as property.
Trump Supporters aren’t inherently hateful but it doesn’t tend to take them very long to start expressing hateful positions. But if someone is trying to ban support for Trump in and of itself under grounds of “hate speech” that’s not appropriate. Got any examples?
Again, how is this a “dog whistle”? I’m not sure how you can say a woman has bodily autonomy if she can’t even decide whether to carry a baby or not.
This is true and seems to back up the idea that it isn’t people who hold a political position who need dog whistles, but rather racists.
k9bfriender: “Could you give an example of this?”
For some (and not just on the left) “Goldman Sachs” has been a dog whistle for “Jews”.
Naw, there is a lot of antisemitism on the left, and as best as i can tell, it’s growing.
Me? A hell of a lot more than McDonalds pays. Maybe I’m missing your point?
Yup. Conservatives don’t need dog whistles. They are proud of their views and want to advertise them. Same with liberals. It’s people who have view that they know the rest of us will condemn them for – principally racists – who use dog whistles.
That was not a response to something that you said, it was in response to @Tim_R.Mortiss, so I’m not sure if you are reading something into it differently than I meant it.
The point is that @Tim_R.Mortiss says that paying a living wage is more than they contribute to society. If you would not flip burgers at McDonalds for the wage that is offered, then it sounds as though they are providing more value than their pay, not less.
I don’t see how that follows. There are lots of jobs I wouldn’t do for the wage they pay, because I can make much more in my chosen profession. It has nothing to do with how much value that job contributes to society, or if it pays more or less that the contribution is worth.
I’ve worked plenty of minimum wage jobs in my youth, and I could never have lived on them, nor would I have expected to. It motivated me to increase my skill set to where I could earn much more. I’m sure the same is true for most of us here.
I don’t think that’s true at all. When the left says “bankers” (or “Wall Street” or “Goldman Sachs” for that matter) I’m pretty sure they are talking about American capitalism.
Agreed. I’m left and that is what I mean.
The left doesn’t need dog whistles. We don’t find it clever or useful to use messaging that intentionally confuses outsiders. If you hear words or phrases that aren’t familiar, that’s good, you’re being intellectually challenged and we’re happy to explain ourselves.
Well you did suggest earlier that these things are coupled, and a living wage necessarily means paying more than a person’s contribution to society.
If you’re now accepting that pay and contribution is not the same thing, then great.
It would be nice if we hard a simple yardstick for measuring value to society. But we don’t, and salary is not it.
If hiring another burger flipper can earn my business an extra $5000 per week, I don’t pay that flipper some percent of $5000, I pay them whatever is the current market rate for unskilled labor in that region.
So if an employee is currently earning X, the only guarantee is that their perceived value to that company is greater than X, but it could be 10X, 20X, whatever.
And how you decide what kind of work is good for society is another massive issue with this line of thinking.
Let’s say I strike it rich by starting a new fad of, I dunno, PVC dungarees. Within a year the fad is over, and there’s a big spike in the amount of plastic in landfills. But anyway, since I’m rich, my contribution is worth much, much more than nurses, firefighters etc?
HAHAHAHA!!! Good one! Man, you had me rolling on the floor.
Here’s a new classic Leftist dog-whistle: Black Lives Matter. The BLM organization only cares about black lives that are extinguished by white cops. That’s it. Sure, black people being killed by white cops is a bad thing; nobody disputes that. But it’s a trivial proportion of the problem! Last weekend alone, eleven black lives were extinguished in Chicago. Every one of those murders was perpetrated by a black thug. Where was BLM? Nowhere, mon frère. Hundreds of black-on-black murders have occurred in the USA this year so far, compared to a handful of white-cop-on-black citizen murders, but look where BLM chooses to focus. Classic misdirection and dishonesty. A clear dog-whistle to their followers, hoping to deceive the rest of society.
What, praytell, is it a dog whistle FOR?
I think you’re right: we should expand the discussion to include gun control, reparations and of course, as we were just discussing, a living wage…
…oh, sorry, did you mean we should just label blacks as “thugs” and continue to be racist while at the same time denying systemic racism?
Ironic that you would accuse others of misdirection.
If BLM is laser-focused on one problem, then let’s discuss that specific problem, yes? There are always other problems we can “whatabout”, but one thing at a time.
Interesting how when criminals kill white people, it’s the police’s problem, but when criminals kill black people it’s black people’s problem.
But in fact, I agree with you - BLM should be protesting the police’s inability or unwillingness to protect innocent black civilians from criminals who prey on them. Ordinary black people have no obligation to stop criminals, of any race, any more than ordinary white people do; that should be the authorities’ job, and the authorities aren’t doing it.
This is the only one that immediately popped to mind. Antisemitism in the left is pretty firmly rooted in the “Israel=Evil AND Israel=Jews THEREFORE Jews=Evil” canard.
Farrakhan : “Who’s the master of the bankers?”
Audience: “Jews”
Yes that really happened. It’s typical for the Nation of Islam