8 ms·

Which part is the racist dogwhistle?

ivanbakel 7y ago
"People are absolutely not what you’d expect french to look like ( and i’m not talking about size)" What would you "expect" the French to look like, that they do not look like in Paris (while cities in Europe are all much more non-white than the countryside, which for the commenter does not have the same problem)? This is a dogwhistle.
- ThrowawayR2 7y ago
  Frankly, you are reading subtexts in the original post that are clearly not there. The sensible interpretation is that Parisians don't look like the stereotype that non-French have: https://www.google.com/search?q=stereotypical+frenchman&tbm=isch https://www.google.com/search?q=stereotypical+frenchman&tbm=...
  - claudiawerner 7y ago
    That interpretation would only make sense, charitably, if OP for whatever reason thought that people look like those images anywhere else in France (unless you're joking, and I'm missing out on the irony).
  - ivanbakel 7y ago
    This is a slightly ridiculous position if it is taken genuinely - just look at the other comments in this thread complaining about "melting pots" and "cultural erasure". More to the point - dogwhistles are meant to give subtexts with plausible deniability. That you can find an alternative meaning for them is precisely their intent. It is not a compelling argument to claim that the original commenter was, in fact, innocent - you should instead be able to absolve them beyond all doubt. And clearly that isn't possible here.
    - leftyted 7y ago
      I have a fantasy of Paris as a city of beautiful, elegant people, effortlessly fashionable who walk from outdoor cafe to outdoor cafe where they order espresso and croissants while carrying baguettes under their arms. So when I read the original comment, that (admittedly childish) impression came to mind. The fact that other people immediate jumped to "melting pots" and "cultural erasure" doesn't indicate that that's what the original comment was referring to. > More to the point - dogwhistles are meant to give subtexts with plausible deniability. That you can find an alternative meaning for them is precisely their intent. Human communication is difficult. The original comment wasn't specific and so it acted as a rorschach test. It isn't possible to know what the original poster meant without asking. > It is not a compelling argument to claim that the original commenter was, in fact, innocent - you should instead be able to absolve them beyond all doubt. No. It isn't possible to "absolve someone of all doubt" when the accusation is "vague racist dog whistle". You have to deal with uncertainty in these situations and your inability to do that, to understand that the meaning of a sentence as intended by the author is almost always partially undefined and open to interpretation, is seriously disturbing.
      - cma 7y ago
        > I have a fantasy of Paris as a city of beautiful, elegant people, effortlessly fashionable who walk from outdoor cafe to outdoor cafe where they order espresso and croissants while carrying baguettes under their arms. So when I read the original comment, that (admittedly childish) impression came to mind. The linked article says: > Renoux indicates that Japanese media, magazines in particular, often depict Paris as a place where most people on the street look like "stick-thin" models and most women dress in high fashion brands such as Louis Vuitton. So when OP said he wasn’t talking about size, presumably in reference to that, I read it as a dog whistle too. Especially given the whole “great replacement” conspiracy out there and Trump’s “Paris isn’t Paris anymore.” The whole point of a dog whistle is plausible deniability though, so who knows for sure.
- notduncansmith 7y ago
  > cities in Europe are all much more non-white than the countryside, which for the commenter does not have the same problem Interesting. I have not been to Europe so did not have that context, but thank you very much for explaining.
- GrayTextIsTruth 7y ago
  > What would you "expect" the French to look like Like French, like Europeans. Must France be a “melting pot” too? Why do Americans project so much?
  - frostburg 7y ago
    Nobody forced the French to colonize a significant portion of the world, by the way.
    - GrayTextIsTruth 7y ago
      What about Berlin and Stockholm? It’s not unique to the colonizers.
      - IfOnlyYouKnew 7y ago
        In Berlin. A great city: fast, honest, poor & sexy. Stay away.
    - douglasmurray12 7y ago
      But what Paris has become is not somehow a direct consequence of colonialism. Those were two separate decisions, and should be criticized and judged separately.
      - frostburg 7y ago
        All those people of Algerian descent surely aren't there by chance.
        douglasmurray12 7y ago
        I could be wrong, but it is my understanding that it was a deliberate policy of the French government after WW2 to invite them in. It is also natural that French-speaking people of the world would prefer to migrate to France. But if French governments wanted to limit migration from Algeria or elsewhere, they could have done so. It was certainly not an inevitable consequence of colonialism.
jacobush 7y ago
I didn’t realise it, but it must be “and i’m not talking about size”. I thought he meant they are just ugly, the French.
core-questions 7y ago
Some people would like to deny the idea that the French are in any sense a 'race', or deny them the privilege of being classified as 'native' to their country. They may employ tactical nihilism in order to do this ("what even is French", "French is just a social construct", "this war from hundreds of years ago and this movement of people prove that France was never French", etc.) in a fashion that some call "cultural erasure", even though that concept is generally only employed _against_ people like the French when they try to practice their own culture. This effect in turn serves to dismantle the old, original culture of the country over time, as it loses any ability to assert itself publicly, which is obviously critical to meaningful cultural propagation. It is replaced instead by a genericized, consumer-focused, global culture of international brands and experiences that can be had in every major city. What remains of the old culture might be better thought of as just a large scale museum, at some point; if you visited Notre Dame before the fire you'll know this, as it's full of people selling junk and even vending machines inside, and you're shuffled through like you're on an assembly line. There's no authenticity at all to the experience; rather, it seems like something those who built it originally would have been disgusted by. You are expected to be okay with this. If you are not, and like hundreds of thousands of French you perhaps spent every weekend of 2019 out protesting for someone, anyone to find a non-violent solution to the replacement of your culture by external parties, you will be decried as a racist and have the main thrust of your argument denied reasonable media coverage at all. Any attempt to discuss the issue frankly will be met with comparisons to Nazis immediately, no matter what related hardships and problems you can point to with evidence in your own communities, no matter how carefully you try to distance yourself from this, no matter how many of your ancestors were in the Resistance, etc. The issue will be framed as your people against the newcomers, denying you any chance of the correct framing, which should be your people against those who allowed the newcomers in. This forces you to look like an exclusionary, hateful person rather than someone who wanted to protect and safeguard what made their community and city great. You're forced into a corner where there's no way out, as long as you allow the castigation of the term "racist" to cow you. You're left fighting proxy wars that go nowhere, like complaining about taxation Of course, this entire dynamic only applies to European-derived countries; if you're Japanese or Israeli or hail from any number of other single-ethnicity states, you're totally A-OK to advocate for all of the same things the French want in their nation, without any accusations at all. So there's the dogwhistle for you, I guess.

"People are absolutely not what you’d expect french to look like ( and i’m not talking about size)" What would you "expect" the French to look like, that they do not look like in Paris (while cities in Europe are all much more non-white than the countryside, which for the commenter does not have the same problem)? This is a dogwhistle.

ThrowawayR2 7y ago
Frankly, you are reading subtexts in the original post that are clearly not there. The sensible interpretation is that Parisians don't look like the stereotype that non-French have: https://www.google.com/search?q=stereotypical+frenchman&tbm=isch https://www.google.com/search?q=stereotypical+frenchman&tbm=...
- claudiawerner 7y ago
  That interpretation would only make sense, charitably, if OP for whatever reason thought that people look like those images anywhere else in France (unless you're joking, and I'm missing out on the irony).
- ivanbakel 7y ago
  This is a slightly ridiculous position if it is taken genuinely - just look at the other comments in this thread complaining about "melting pots" and "cultural erasure". More to the point - dogwhistles are meant to give subtexts with plausible deniability. That you can find an alternative meaning for them is precisely their intent. It is not a compelling argument to claim that the original commenter was, in fact, innocent - you should instead be able to absolve them beyond all doubt. And clearly that isn't possible here.
  - leftyted 7y ago
    I have a fantasy of Paris as a city of beautiful, elegant people, effortlessly fashionable who walk from outdoor cafe to outdoor cafe where they order espresso and croissants while carrying baguettes under their arms. So when I read the original comment, that (admittedly childish) impression came to mind. The fact that other people immediate jumped to "melting pots" and "cultural erasure" doesn't indicate that that's what the original comment was referring to. > More to the point - dogwhistles are meant to give subtexts with plausible deniability. That you can find an alternative meaning for them is precisely their intent. Human communication is difficult. The original comment wasn't specific and so it acted as a rorschach test. It isn't possible to know what the original poster meant without asking. > It is not a compelling argument to claim that the original commenter was, in fact, innocent - you should instead be able to absolve them beyond all doubt. No. It isn't possible to "absolve someone of all doubt" when the accusation is "vague racist dog whistle". You have to deal with uncertainty in these situations and your inability to do that, to understand that the meaning of a sentence as intended by the author is almost always partially undefined and open to interpretation, is seriously disturbing.
    - cma 7y ago
      > I have a fantasy of Paris as a city of beautiful, elegant people, effortlessly fashionable who walk from outdoor cafe to outdoor cafe where they order espresso and croissants while carrying baguettes under their arms. So when I read the original comment, that (admittedly childish) impression came to mind. The linked article says: > Renoux indicates that Japanese media, magazines in particular, often depict Paris as a place where most people on the street look like "stick-thin" models and most women dress in high fashion brands such as Louis Vuitton. So when OP said he wasn’t talking about size, presumably in reference to that, I read it as a dog whistle too. Especially given the whole “great replacement” conspiracy out there and Trump’s “Paris isn’t Paris anymore.” The whole point of a dog whistle is plausible deniability though, so who knows for sure.
notduncansmith 7y ago
> cities in Europe are all much more non-white than the countryside, which for the commenter does not have the same problem Interesting. I have not been to Europe so did not have that context, but thank you very much for explaining.
GrayTextIsTruth 7y ago
> What would you "expect" the French to look like Like French, like Europeans. Must France be a “melting pot” too? Why do Americans project so much?
- frostburg 7y ago
  Nobody forced the French to colonize a significant portion of the world, by the way.
  - GrayTextIsTruth 7y ago
    What about Berlin and Stockholm? It’s not unique to the colonizers.
    - IfOnlyYouKnew 7y ago
      In Berlin. A great city: fast, honest, poor & sexy. Stay away.
  - douglasmurray12 7y ago
    But what Paris has become is not somehow a direct consequence of colonialism. Those were two separate decisions, and should be criticized and judged separately.
    - frostburg 7y ago
      All those people of Algerian descent surely aren't there by chance.
      - douglasmurray12 7y ago
        I could be wrong, but it is my understanding that it was a deliberate policy of the French government after WW2 to invite them in. It is also natural that French-speaking people of the world would prefer to migrate to France. But if French governments wanted to limit migration from Algeria or elsewhere, they could have done so. It was certainly not an inevitable consequence of colonialism.

jacobush 7y ago

I didn’t realise it, but it must be “and i’m not talking about size”. I thought he meant they are just ugly, the French.

core-questions 7y ago

Some people would like to deny the idea that the French are in any sense a 'race', or deny them the privilege of being classified as 'native' to their country. They may employ tactical nihilism in order to do this ("what even is French", "French is just a social construct", "this war from hundreds of years ago and this movement of people prove that France was never French", etc.) in a fashion that some call "cultural erasure", even though that concept is generally only employed _against_ people like the French when they try to practice their own culture. This effect in turn serves to dismantle the old, original culture of the country over time, as it loses any ability to assert itself publicly, which is obviously critical to meaningful cultural propagation. It is replaced instead by a genericized, consumer-focused, global culture of international brands and experiences that can be had in every major city. What remains of the old culture might be better thought of as just a large scale museum, at some point; if you visited Notre Dame before the fire you'll know this, as it's full of people selling junk and even vending machines inside, and you're shuffled through like you're on an assembly line. There's no authenticity at all to the experience; rather, it seems like something those who built it originally would have been disgusted by. You are expected to be okay with this. If you are not, and like hundreds of thousands of French you perhaps spent every weekend of 2019 out protesting for someone, anyone to find a non-violent solution to the replacement of your culture by external parties, you will be decried as a racist and have the main thrust of your argument denied reasonable media coverage at all. Any attempt to discuss the issue frankly will be met with comparisons to Nazis immediately, no matter what related hardships and problems you can point to with evidence in your own communities, no matter how carefully you try to distance yourself from this, no matter how many of your ancestors were in the Resistance, etc. The issue will be framed as your people against the newcomers, denying you any chance of the correct framing, which should be your people against those who allowed the newcomers in. This forces you to look like an exclusionary, hateful person rather than someone who wanted to protect and safeguard what made their community and city great. You're forced into a corner where there's no way out, as long as you allow the castigation of the term "racist" to cow you. You're left fighting proxy wars that go nowhere, like complaining about taxation Of course, this entire dynamic only applies to European-derived countries; if you're Japanese or Israeli or hail from any number of other single-ethnicity states, you're totally A-OK to advocate for all of the same things the French want in their nation, without any accusations at all. So there's the dogwhistle for you, I guess.