4 ms·

There are two issues. First, I don't think it's one or the other: race privilege exists, and class privilege exists too. Second there are actual dog-whistles d

There are two issues. First, I don't think it's one or the other: race privilege exists, and class privilege exists too. Second there are actual dog-whistles disguised as reasonable viewpoints, and it's incredibly hard to distinguish them. Suppose you're talking to a random person, with no context on who they are, probably on a site where a comment took five minutes to write and doesn't fully develop the ideas. First time you find that, you might think it's just someone with a different opinion. But as time goes on and you notice that certain arguments are used not to promote debate but to derail conversations, you get suspicious and start seeing everything as dog-whistles. In other words, public debate is degraded by people that don't present arguments honestly and by people who are either way too worried or not worried at all about those dishonest people

santoshalper 6y ago
You are starting to get to the root of it. For years, people with liberal or progressive viewpoints tried to have good-faith discussions and debates with conservatives only to get back absolute garbage. Arguments like: "If you let gay people marry, what's next allowing adults to marry children?" or "You never complain when black people kill each other, so you are just pretending to care about police brutality" These are undeniably bad faith arguments - all strawmen, slippery slopes, and other ugly rhetorical devices. In most cases this was all you would get back in return for trying to have a good faith debate with conservatives. So yes, after a while, we started to assume that people who disagreed with us were acting in bad faith and were essentially trolls. This is extremely unfortunate. It is harmful to the discourse. It casts a wide net that catches the honestly curious or unorthodox thinkers (people that I may think are incorrect but arguing from a position of good faith). But, it has also been extremely effective. In one generation, the relatively brutal tactics have helped us make real progress on gay rights and drug-decriminalization in the United States. Cancellation tactics work as an effective tool for combating bad faith arguments and trolls, so until conservatives want to come to the table for real discussion and debate, that is how things will continue to be. I look forward to a time when this is not necessary. To be clear though, the well of intellectual discourse was poisoned long ago by Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, Sean Hannity, et al, and a million internet trolls. The only part of this they don't like is that now they are losing the horrible game they invented.
- symlinkk 6y ago
  Why are those “garbage”? It’s true that gay rights have led towards the push for other things like trans rights. And it’s true that liberal media will run front page stories on (relatively rare) police brutality against black people but don’t run stories on (relatively common) black on black violence.
  - triceratops 6y ago
    > It’s true that gay rights have led towards the push for other things like trans rights I fail to see the equivalence between trans rights and "adults marrying children"-rights. What you're saying is closer to "it's true that abolishing slavery has led towards the push for other things like voting rights for everyone". Which is technically true but is also the way things should be going in order to have a more just society. > And it’s true that liberal media will run front page stories on (relatively rare) police brutality against black people but don’t run stories on (relatively common) black on black violence. One is a crime committed by law enforcement. The other is just regular crime. You figure out which one is more newsworthy or in the public interest (not that most media care about the latter). Also if "all lives matter" we shouldn't be talking about "black-on-black" or "x-on-y" crimes. Crimes are crimes and the skin color of the perpetrator or victim is irrelevant (unless it's specifically a hate crime, for which there are legal definitions).
    - symlinkk 6y ago
      Wait, you’re giving your opinion as if it’s fact. Some people disagree that trans rights will make society better. And if what you’re saying is true, that these stories are only notable because they involve police brutality, why don’t we get front page news articles when a black cop shoots a black guy? You’re blind if you don’t see that news publishers have an agenda.
      - triceratops 6y ago
        > Some people disagree that trans rights will make society better. Trans rights are human rights. > why don’t we get front page news articles when a black cop shoots a black guy? They don't exclusively front-page "white cop shoots black civilian" stories. Here's some prominent counter-examples just off the top of my head. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jun/07/justine-damond-death-mohamed-noor-minneapolis https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jun/07/justine-damo... https://www.vox.com/2016/7/7/12116288/minnesota-police-shooting-philando-castile-falcon-heights-video https://www.vox.com/2016/7/7/12116288/minnesota-police-shoot... (Cop was Latino) News publishers do have an agenda, but it doesn't go too far beyond "get clicks, make money". They publish whatever kinds of stories will get traffic from their readers. And they know the preconceived notions and biases of their readers. News publishing is a tough business these days unfortunately. There are news orgs that do good investigative journalism and uncover important stories but even they need money to survive.
symlinkk 6y ago
It’s not a “dog whistle” if it’s a true fact that is relevant to the discussion. Doesn’t matter what types of people use it. Facts are facts.
- gjulianm 6y ago
  Facts can be maliciously used to derail conversations and debates on purpose, or be used without proper context to push a certain view. Not everything is black or white.

santoshalper 6y ago

You are starting to get to the root of it. For years, people with liberal or progressive viewpoints tried to have good-faith discussions and debates with conservatives only to get back absolute garbage. Arguments like: "If you let gay people marry, what's next allowing adults to marry children?" or "You never complain when black people kill each other, so you are just pretending to care about police brutality" These are undeniably bad faith arguments - all strawmen, slippery slopes, and other ugly rhetorical devices. In most cases this was all you would get back in return for trying to have a good faith debate with conservatives. So yes, after a while, we started to assume that people who disagreed with us were acting in bad faith and were essentially trolls. This is extremely unfortunate. It is harmful to the discourse. It casts a wide net that catches the honestly curious or unorthodox thinkers (people that I may think are incorrect but arguing from a position of good faith). But, it has also been extremely effective. In one generation, the relatively brutal tactics have helped us make real progress on gay rights and drug-decriminalization in the United States. Cancellation tactics work as an effective tool for combating bad faith arguments and trolls, so until conservatives want to come to the table for real discussion and debate, that is how things will continue to be. I look forward to a time when this is not necessary. To be clear though, the well of intellectual discourse was poisoned long ago by Rush Limbaugh, Fox News, Sean Hannity, et al, and a million internet trolls. The only part of this they don't like is that now they are losing the horrible game they invented.

symlinkk 6y ago
Why are those “garbage”? It’s true that gay rights have led towards the push for other things like trans rights. And it’s true that liberal media will run front page stories on (relatively rare) police brutality against black people but don’t run stories on (relatively common) black on black violence.
- triceratops 6y ago
  > It’s true that gay rights have led towards the push for other things like trans rights I fail to see the equivalence between trans rights and "adults marrying children"-rights. What you're saying is closer to "it's true that abolishing slavery has led towards the push for other things like voting rights for everyone". Which is technically true but is also the way things should be going in order to have a more just society. > And it’s true that liberal media will run front page stories on (relatively rare) police brutality against black people but don’t run stories on (relatively common) black on black violence. One is a crime committed by law enforcement. The other is just regular crime. You figure out which one is more newsworthy or in the public interest (not that most media care about the latter). Also if "all lives matter" we shouldn't be talking about "black-on-black" or "x-on-y" crimes. Crimes are crimes and the skin color of the perpetrator or victim is irrelevant (unless it's specifically a hate crime, for which there are legal definitions).
  - symlinkk 6y ago
    Wait, you’re giving your opinion as if it’s fact. Some people disagree that trans rights will make society better. And if what you’re saying is true, that these stories are only notable because they involve police brutality, why don’t we get front page news articles when a black cop shoots a black guy? You’re blind if you don’t see that news publishers have an agenda.
    - triceratops 6y ago
      > Some people disagree that trans rights will make society better. Trans rights are human rights. > why don’t we get front page news articles when a black cop shoots a black guy? They don't exclusively front-page "white cop shoots black civilian" stories. Here's some prominent counter-examples just off the top of my head. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jun/07/justine-damond-death-mohamed-noor-minneapolis https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jun/07/justine-damo... https://www.vox.com/2016/7/7/12116288/minnesota-police-shooting-philando-castile-falcon-heights-video https://www.vox.com/2016/7/7/12116288/minnesota-police-shoot... (Cop was Latino) News publishers do have an agenda, but it doesn't go too far beyond "get clicks, make money". They publish whatever kinds of stories will get traffic from their readers. And they know the preconceived notions and biases of their readers. News publishing is a tough business these days unfortunately. There are news orgs that do good investigative journalism and uncover important stories but even they need money to survive.

symlinkk 6y ago

It’s not a “dog whistle” if it’s a true fact that is relevant to the discussion. Doesn’t matter what types of people use it. Facts are facts.

gjulianm 6y ago
Facts can be maliciously used to derail conversations and debates on purpose, or be used without proper context to push a certain view. Not everything is black or white.