9 ms·

The white supremacy sign is a white power sign because white supremacists use it to signal each other. It is called a "dog whistle" because people like you cann

The white supremacy sign is a white power sign because white supremacists use it to signal each other. It is called a "dog whistle" because people like you cannot hear it accurately.

kazinator 6y ago
Whoa there, Roofus; have a Milk-Bone of information: "In 2017, users on the message-board site 4chan[40][41][42] aimed to convince the media and other people that the OK gesture was being used as a white power symbol. According to The Boston Globe, users on 4chan's /pol/ ("Politically Incorrect") board were instructed in February 2017 to "flood Twitter and other social media websites...claiming that the OK hand sign is a symbol of white supremacy," as part of a campaign dubbed "Operation O-KKK".[37] Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OK_gesture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OK_gesture O-KKK? ... mmmmkay, whatever. You've been taken for a ride ... a wild-eyed ride with your head sticking out of a rolled-down passenger window.
- slg 6y ago
  These are such weird arguments. The origins are irrelevant because it wasn't just a trick pulled on normies; white supremacists also fell for the joke. Once they started genuinely using the gesture it did become a symbol of hate. The Wikipedia article you linked says exactly that a few paragraphs below the paragraph you quoted.
  - rendall 6y ago
    > white supremacists also fell for the joke. Once they started genuinely using the gesture it did become a symbol of hate. [citation needed]
    - WickyNilliams 6y ago
      https://nypost.com/2019/03/15/suspected-new-zealand-shooter-appears-in-court/ https://nypost.com/2019/03/15/suspected-new-zealand-shooter-... The Christchurch shooter, whilst likely in on the "joke", made the gesture in court. At that point, the difference between it being a joke made by a white supremacist, or a symbol of white supremacism evaporates. It is a symbol used by a white supremacist, therefore it is a white supremacist symbol. Context matters of course, but I don't feel you can truly deny it has taken on meaning outside of the original joke
      - rendall 6y ago
        Context matters of course, but I don't feel you can truly deny it has taken on meaning outside of the original joke Oh I do deny. Nearly every example ever shown is indistinguishable from accident or people using it for other purposes. Mexican workers "flashes" it while driving around: fired. West Point cadets goofing off, punching each other: sanctioned. Random individuals in photos: obviously white supremacist. to inflate this non-issue, and then use the very fact of its inflation as justification for its further inflation is reprehensible, and then get actual innocent people labeled as racist. Truly despicable
        WickyNilliams 6y ago
        You asked for an example, so I gave a particularly egregious example of exactly what you asked for. You suddenly switch your position to "nearly every example" and do not address the very specific and relevant example I gave at all. /shrug
        rendall 6y ago
        I was very clear elsewhere what it would take to convince me that there is something to this nonsense. One guy using it in a courtroom ain't it. Did anyone interview him about it? Ask what it was, where he heard about it, what our who he was trying to signal, if he was? Or, did the journalist make up the association on their own?
        WickyNilliams 6y ago
        I'm not here to read your entire comment history. I replied to a specific request of yours with a relevant example. You go off on a mostly irrelevant screed. Come on. Does it really need to be speculated on? That "one guy" is a white supremacist who killed 50+ people - I think it's pretty clear what his intentions were. On top of that, his written manifesto was a) steeped in 4chan memes and winks to those in the know, b) released on either 8chan or 4chan itself. So it is clear he would know the origins and was playing it up
    - kazinator 6y ago
      White supremacists didn't "fall" for the joke; they were obviously instantly infatuated with the idea of hijacking a thoroughly familiar, positive hand gesture for their purposes.
      - rendall 6y ago
        Let's talk about what's really going on here. Certain factions of society would like to present white supremacy as more prevalent than it is, and these include white supremacists, but upsettingly, also include organizations and political stances that "fight" white supremacy. These "opposing" factions would love to hijack the OK symbol as a white supremacist symbol, so that each can claim that white supremacy has more support than it does. Each of these factions will feel satisfaction of fighting their fight, as they point at pictures of West Point cadets, Mexican truck drivers, Japanese tourists, college kids having fun and say "See! White supremacy is everywhere!" I have contempt for all of these people, who insist that "OK" is white supremacist. They promote white supremacy, irrespective of whether they are for it or against it. They turn a stupid joke into a battle cry, because they want to. This is despicable. Reprehensible. Awful. If you actively insist that OK is white supremacist, you are a bad person and I have zero respect for you. Noam Chomsky talks about how the most violent of two opposing factions gain prestige within their factions by escalating drama and violence with the other faction. That's you. You "fight" white supremacy by promoting it. Contemptible.
    - slg 6y ago
      The very next sentence of that comment referred to the previously linked Wikipedia article with its own citations. You were one click away from being able to answer your own snarky comment.
  - kazinator 6y ago
    The origins are totally friggin' relevant. Firstly, the OK gesture is a deeply entrenched, familiar, everyday gesture—at least in North American culture. Only a complete moron could think that it suddenly has to do with white supremacy, and accept it for such use to the point of believing that it is a white supremacist symbol and not the OK gesture any more, so that anyone using it is a racist. Secondly, anyone who has any doubts about it whatsoever can search for it, and learn about the 2017 4chan campaign in seconds. Therefore, thirdly, the situations in which the gesture refers to the hoax-induced meaning are very narrow, like someone pulling the gesture on camera behind a black man's back or something like that, or a known white supremacist pulling it in courtroom. Then we know "oh, he's referring to that 4chan meme". Where by "we" I mean that minority of people who are informed about this. And that's all it is; some damned Internet meme, and a minor one. Nobody will remember it in 5, 10, 15 years. Do you know Dancing Baby? 1996 3D video meme of a 3D rendered dancing baby: probably the world's first viral video. Do you remember people saying a delayed "...not!" at the end of a sentence to negate it? "I wanna be your friend ... NOT!" Same thing, only smaller.
    - slg 6y ago
      Ok, let's try an example in which this issue is further heightened. Would you be comfortable displaying a swastika in the western world today? That symbol didn't originate with the Nazis. Most people simply don't care about the origin. Also I am not saying every use is racist or anything that extreme, but it is clear that in some instances there is a connection between this symbol and white supremacy.
      - kazinator 6y ago
        That symbol is associated with mass murder of millions and a world war. Previous to that, it was not a common, everyday symbol used in western culture. It's not a dumb little joke from 2017 from 4chan. The Nazis had a hand gesture: the raised arm Roman salute. You can use that salute today without being dubbed a supremacist or Nazi. Just maybe don't shout heil anything while doing it.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- user-the-name 6y ago
  Yes, that is how a dog whistle works. Why are you taking the words of 4chan trolls at face value?
  - Out_of_Characte 6y ago
    I have to give 4chan credits where it's due, the weakness of the human mind is fully exploited like what happens when nations use massive propaganda machines. A complete non-issue of people "accidently" making a hand gesture has turned into a full-blown conspiracy theory that validates itself by groups willfully coopting part of the ruse. Whats the use of knowing the hand gesture for white supremacy? we've always had gang signs and they were similarly irrelivant outside the groups that use them. Really makes one think what I believe to be true that just aint so.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
- smoe 6y ago
  From the same section you quoted: “According to the ADL, by 2019 some white supremacists had begun using the OK symbol "as a sincere expression of White Supremacy", and many white supremacists have acknowledged using the symbol as a gesture of White Power.”
apexalpha 6y ago
You really think people now use "OK", a sign used for years, to signal they are racist? I think you're the butt of the joke here...
- limaoscarjuliet 6y ago
  A SCUBA diver here. Apparently we are all racist while submerged.
  - pygy_ 6y ago
    When you read "inflammable", you can often, from the context, determine whether it means flammable or not. Sometimes you can't. The same applies to the OK sign. Flashing it surrounded by notorious racists after the 4chan hoax leaves no doubt about the intended meaning. Also, given that's it's now been coopted by nazis, you may want to be careful when flashing it if you want to avoid embarrassing ambiguities, yes. It was probably a fad in these circles, not sure it is still used, but still.
    - hairofadog 6y ago
      I’m not disagreeing with your larger point, but FYI “inflammable” always means “easily catches fire” and never anything else.
      - lotsofpulp 6y ago
        I never thought I’d see the Simpsons Dr Nick joke in real life.
      - pygy_ 6y ago
        Not a native speaker, and I thought it was one of these words that are their own antonym... Must have crossed wires :-)
    - prepend 6y ago
      > Flashing it surrounded by notorious racists after the 4chan hoax leaves no doubt about the intended meaning. Trolling is a meaning. I think in that situation it’s even more ambiguous since the “troll power” is so much greater then. I think it’s unambiguous that the user is a shit-stirrer certainly, probably an asshole. But not necessarily racist. Or no more so than your average run of the mill “everyone is racist subconsciously” racist. I think what’s hard is that it’s a negative thing to do that brings more chaos and harm into the world. It could be racist/white power that is super bad, let’s say 100 on the bad-o-meter. Or it could be trolling the pearl clutchers that is mildly bad, let’s say 11 on the bad-o-meter. And for scale, punching someone in the face is 200 and murdering someone is 1000.
Udik 6y ago
My issue with the term "dog whistle" is that it's being abused to attribute nefarious meaning to just anything you want irrespectively of the actual content of the message- by definition the "dog whistle" is something that the message doesn't obviously contain. It's a free interpretation license card. I think out-of-context interpretation is the major issue of our times: we got used to the idea that it's perfectly fine to report the most damning combination of words in a sentence as if it were the original full sentence; that a joke made on twitter is the same as a political manifesto sent to the press; and that a hand gesture can get the meaning it would have in its worst possible case. This has to stop.
- pygy_ 6y ago
  Getting photographed smiling next to two notorious white supremacists is already fishy. The picture was taken after the sign became a notorious rallying sign for racists. Do you really think that Luckey is aloof to the point of not not knowing what he's doing there? If you borrowed Occam's razor, you may need to sharpen it a bit before using it.
  - Udik 6y ago
    The "ok sign is a white power symbol" thing started as trolling on 4chan. It doesn't mean anything apart from being useful to infuriate other people. You're being trolled.
    - pygy_ 6y ago
      Notwithstanding its origins, it was subsequently adopted by racists as a rallying sign. Context matters.
      - refurb 6y ago
        Not going to lie but it’s apparent you will see racism wherever you want to despite the evidence.
        6y ago
coldtea 6y ago
"Dog whistle" is a term bat-shit-crazy people and opportunists use to mark whoever they like on anything they can drum up. "You think what he said was inoffensive? That's because it's a dog whistle!". It's not that some dog whistles don't exist (e.g. upon secret societies, etc). It's that it's used as a weapon with the flimsiest of excuses. It's the 2020 version of "Have you stopped beating your wife?" question.
- rendall 6y ago
  To believe that dog-whistles exist as an actual thing used effectively, one would also have to believe: a) A group of people (e.g. white supremacists) do not already know that the dog-whistler (e.g. a politician) is a member or sympathizer of their group b) That this person who sympathizes with this secret group wants to signal sympathy with this secret group, but cannot do it directly (that is, by email or letter or direct contact), and so must somehow signal through public words and deeds c) This signal will somehow, hopefully, be invisible to everyone who is listening except for members of the secret group The prototypical example is politicians talking about "thugs" and "welfare queens" as dog-whistling a racist contempt for black people. I can definitely accept that using such language could be such a signal, especially with the context of aligned policy pronouncements, but it's pretty blatant and not a dog-whistle.
  - spacemanmatt 6y ago
    I disagree on a), b), or c) being requirements of dog-whistles. That just feels superficially wrong.
- tomp 6y ago
  Exactly. The only reasonable use of the word “dog-whistle” is ”’dog-whistle’ is a dog-whistle used to signal support of political correctness and belonging to the left-wing elite and/or an unwillingness to engage in rational argument”.
refurb 6y ago
The reason you believe so strongly it’s a white supremacy symbol is because it fits, no reinforces, your political views.
gus_massa 6y ago
We can't let trolls and white supremacist steal the ok symbol. We must fight back. The problem is that whoever makes the the first step will get called a white supremacist, so nobody want to volunteer.
- rendall 6y ago
  No, I'll volunteer. It's a stupid conspiracy theory, and I have nothing but contempt for it. I use it all the time, and always will, regardless of context or the presence of gullible idiots around me.
  - Larrikin 6y ago
    Why do you insist and insult the people who are agaisnt the racist people who call out the symbol. If the symbol is so important to you then your fight should be with the actual white supremacists who have co-opted the symbol and not the people who don't let racists get away with recruitment/trolling/owning the libs by flashing their co-opted gang sign. It's like you being furious at black people because your great grandparents used to always win their Halloween contest with their pointy hat ghost costume and you're not going to let stupid guillable people keep you from wearing it at parties.
    - rendall 6y ago
      > Why do you insist and insult the people who are agaisnt the racist people who call out the symbol. Because they aren't against racist people. They are pro-idiocy. They're only pro a good thing (being non-racist) by an accident of history and circumstance, certainly not because of sober reflection and empathy. These are the same idiots who would be all in on bullying the Satanic Panic preschool teachers in the 80s, or burning witches ye olden days, or hunting Communists in the 50s
      - Larrikin 6y ago
        I think it's a little telling that you're calling out historically conservative movements and trying to conflate them with a very progressive movement of not letting white supremacists use their favorite recruitment tool of "it's just a joke bro... unless you actually believe it"
flippinburgers 6y ago
Supposed dog whistles and the extreme desire to immediately label people based on innocuous gestures/words is the new norm within certain parts of the puritanical left. I never thought I would see the day. It is shocking that what was once the bastion of liberal thought and open-mindedness has become this hyper-judgemental, crucify-all-that-don't-bow-to-our-will movement. Gems of the left: Do you want to be on the wrong side of history? Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences! Acknowledge your privilege! And other deeply manipulative threats/concepts.
- Loughla 6y ago
  Okay, I'll bite. >Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences! How is that false? You can say what you want, outside of threats and the like, but you also get to live with the outcome of saying whatever it is. I don't see how that's puritanical. It's a statement of fact. I can tell my boss to go f** himself. I can also get fired for doing that.
  - prepend 6y ago
    I had to read the Scarlet Letter in high school. Hester Prynn had to live with the outcome of saying whatever it was. It was literally puritanical to make her wear a red “A.” as the outcome of her speech (v-a-v extramarital sex). I think the point isn’t that speech should have no impact, but that the response to speech should be proportional and what proportional means. The Puritans in Hawthorne’s novel thought that making someone a pariah was a proportional response. They were wrong, I think. But the lesson, I think, is not that we should be more precise in meting out moral judgement, but that we should judge less.
  - flippinburgers 6y ago
    It is a trite stick hung above arguments that people want to silence before they even happen which makes it intellectually uninteresting and shallow. And more than anything it is used to further attempt to shame people. There is no compassion in the phrase.
  - unishark 6y ago

The white supremacy sign is a white power sign because white supremacists use it to signal each other. It is called a "dog whistle" because people like you cannot hear it accurately.

kazinator 6y ago

Whoa there, Roofus; have a Milk-Bone of information: "In 2017, users on the message-board site 4chan[40][41][42] aimed to convince the media and other people that the OK gesture was being used as a white power symbol. According to The Boston Globe, users on 4chan's /pol/ ("Politically Incorrect") board were instructed in February 2017 to "flood Twitter and other social media websites...claiming that the OK hand sign is a symbol of white supremacy," as part of a campaign dubbed "Operation O-KKK".[37] Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OK_gesture https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OK_gesture O-KKK? ... mmmmkay, whatever. You've been taken for a ride ... a wild-eyed ride with your head sticking out of a rolled-down passenger window.

slg 6y ago
These are such weird arguments. The origins are irrelevant because it wasn't just a trick pulled on normies; white supremacists also fell for the joke. Once they started genuinely using the gesture it did become a symbol of hate. The Wikipedia article you linked says exactly that a few paragraphs below the paragraph you quoted.
- rendall 6y ago
  > white supremacists also fell for the joke. Once they started genuinely using the gesture it did become a symbol of hate. [citation needed]
  - WickyNilliams 6y ago
    https://nypost.com/2019/03/15/suspected-new-zealand-shooter-appears-in-court/ https://nypost.com/2019/03/15/suspected-new-zealand-shooter-... The Christchurch shooter, whilst likely in on the "joke", made the gesture in court. At that point, the difference between it being a joke made by a white supremacist, or a symbol of white supremacism evaporates. It is a symbol used by a white supremacist, therefore it is a white supremacist symbol. Context matters of course, but I don't feel you can truly deny it has taken on meaning outside of the original joke
    - rendall 6y ago
      Context matters of course, but I don't feel you can truly deny it has taken on meaning outside of the original joke Oh I do deny. Nearly every example ever shown is indistinguishable from accident or people using it for other purposes. Mexican workers "flashes" it while driving around: fired. West Point cadets goofing off, punching each other: sanctioned. Random individuals in photos: obviously white supremacist. to inflate this non-issue, and then use the very fact of its inflation as justification for its further inflation is reprehensible, and then get actual innocent people labeled as racist. Truly despicable
      - WickyNilliams 6y ago
        You asked for an example, so I gave a particularly egregious example of exactly what you asked for. You suddenly switch your position to "nearly every example" and do not address the very specific and relevant example I gave at all. /shrug
        rendall 6y ago
        I was very clear elsewhere what it would take to convince me that there is something to this nonsense. One guy using it in a courtroom ain't it. Did anyone interview him about it? Ask what it was, where he heard about it, what our who he was trying to signal, if he was? Or, did the journalist make up the association on their own?
        WickyNilliams 6y ago
        I'm not here to read your entire comment history. I replied to a specific request of yours with a relevant example. You go off on a mostly irrelevant screed. Come on. Does it really need to be speculated on? That "one guy" is a white supremacist who killed 50+ people - I think it's pretty clear what his intentions were. On top of that, his written manifesto was a) steeped in 4chan memes and winks to those in the know, b) released on either 8chan or 4chan itself. So it is clear he would know the origins and was playing it up
  - kazinator 6y ago
    White supremacists didn't "fall" for the joke; they were obviously instantly infatuated with the idea of hijacking a thoroughly familiar, positive hand gesture for their purposes.
    - rendall 6y ago
      Let's talk about what's really going on here. Certain factions of society would like to present white supremacy as more prevalent than it is, and these include white supremacists, but upsettingly, also include organizations and political stances that "fight" white supremacy. These "opposing" factions would love to hijack the OK symbol as a white supremacist symbol, so that each can claim that white supremacy has more support than it does. Each of these factions will feel satisfaction of fighting their fight, as they point at pictures of West Point cadets, Mexican truck drivers, Japanese tourists, college kids having fun and say "See! White supremacy is everywhere!" I have contempt for all of these people, who insist that "OK" is white supremacist. They promote white supremacy, irrespective of whether they are for it or against it. They turn a stupid joke into a battle cry, because they want to. This is despicable. Reprehensible. Awful. If you actively insist that OK is white supremacist, you are a bad person and I have zero respect for you. Noam Chomsky talks about how the most violent of two opposing factions gain prestige within their factions by escalating drama and violence with the other faction. That's you. You "fight" white supremacy by promoting it. Contemptible.
  - slg 6y ago
    The very next sentence of that comment referred to the previously linked Wikipedia article with its own citations. You were one click away from being able to answer your own snarky comment.
- kazinator 6y ago
  The origins are totally friggin' relevant. Firstly, the OK gesture is a deeply entrenched, familiar, everyday gesture—at least in North American culture. Only a complete moron could think that it suddenly has to do with white supremacy, and accept it for such use to the point of believing that it is a white supremacist symbol and not the OK gesture any more, so that anyone using it is a racist. Secondly, anyone who has any doubts about it whatsoever can search for it, and learn about the 2017 4chan campaign in seconds. Therefore, thirdly, the situations in which the gesture refers to the hoax-induced meaning are very narrow, like someone pulling the gesture on camera behind a black man's back or something like that, or a known white supremacist pulling it in courtroom. Then we know "oh, he's referring to that 4chan meme". Where by "we" I mean that minority of people who are informed about this. And that's all it is; some damned Internet meme, and a minor one. Nobody will remember it in 5, 10, 15 years. Do you know Dancing Baby? 1996 3D video meme of a 3D rendered dancing baby: probably the world's first viral video. Do you remember people saying a delayed "...not!" at the end of a sentence to negate it? "I wanna be your friend ... NOT!" Same thing, only smaller.
  - slg 6y ago
    Ok, let's try an example in which this issue is further heightened. Would you be comfortable displaying a swastika in the western world today? That symbol didn't originate with the Nazis. Most people simply don't care about the origin. Also I am not saying every use is racist or anything that extreme, but it is clear that in some instances there is a connection between this symbol and white supremacy.
    - kazinator 6y ago
      That symbol is associated with mass murder of millions and a world war. Previous to that, it was not a common, everyday symbol used in western culture. It's not a dumb little joke from 2017 from 4chan. The Nazis had a hand gesture: the raised arm Roman salute. You can use that salute today without being dubbed a supremacist or Nazi. Just maybe don't shout heil anything while doing it.
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
user-the-name 6y ago
Yes, that is how a dog whistle works. Why are you taking the words of 4chan trolls at face value?
- Out_of_Characte 6y ago
  I have to give 4chan credits where it's due, the weakness of the human mind is fully exploited like what happens when nations use massive propaganda machines. A complete non-issue of people "accidently" making a hand gesture has turned into a full-blown conspiracy theory that validates itself by groups willfully coopting part of the ruse. Whats the use of knowing the hand gesture for white supremacy? we've always had gang signs and they were similarly irrelivant outside the groups that use them. Really makes one think what I believe to be true that just aint so.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
smoe 6y ago
From the same section you quoted: “According to the ADL, by 2019 some white supremacists had begun using the OK symbol "as a sincere expression of White Supremacy", and many white supremacists have acknowledged using the symbol as a gesture of White Power.”

apexalpha 6y ago

You really think people now use "OK", a sign used for years, to signal they are racist? I think you're the butt of the joke here...

limaoscarjuliet 6y ago
A SCUBA diver here. Apparently we are all racist while submerged.
- pygy_ 6y ago
  When you read "inflammable", you can often, from the context, determine whether it means flammable or not. Sometimes you can't. The same applies to the OK sign. Flashing it surrounded by notorious racists after the 4chan hoax leaves no doubt about the intended meaning. Also, given that's it's now been coopted by nazis, you may want to be careful when flashing it if you want to avoid embarrassing ambiguities, yes. It was probably a fad in these circles, not sure it is still used, but still.
  - hairofadog 6y ago
    I’m not disagreeing with your larger point, but FYI “inflammable” always means “easily catches fire” and never anything else.
    - lotsofpulp 6y ago
      I never thought I’d see the Simpsons Dr Nick joke in real life.
    - pygy_ 6y ago
      Not a native speaker, and I thought it was one of these words that are their own antonym... Must have crossed wires :-)
  - prepend 6y ago
    > Flashing it surrounded by notorious racists after the 4chan hoax leaves no doubt about the intended meaning. Trolling is a meaning. I think in that situation it’s even more ambiguous since the “troll power” is so much greater then. I think it’s unambiguous that the user is a shit-stirrer certainly, probably an asshole. But not necessarily racist. Or no more so than your average run of the mill “everyone is racist subconsciously” racist. I think what’s hard is that it’s a negative thing to do that brings more chaos and harm into the world. It could be racist/white power that is super bad, let’s say 100 on the bad-o-meter. Or it could be trolling the pearl clutchers that is mildly bad, let’s say 11 on the bad-o-meter. And for scale, punching someone in the face is 200 and murdering someone is 1000.

Udik 6y ago

My issue with the term "dog whistle" is that it's being abused to attribute nefarious meaning to just anything you want irrespectively of the actual content of the message- by definition the "dog whistle" is something that the message doesn't obviously contain. It's a free interpretation license card. I think out-of-context interpretation is the major issue of our times: we got used to the idea that it's perfectly fine to report the most damning combination of words in a sentence as if it were the original full sentence; that a joke made on twitter is the same as a political manifesto sent to the press; and that a hand gesture can get the meaning it would have in its worst possible case. This has to stop.

pygy_ 6y ago
Getting photographed smiling next to two notorious white supremacists is already fishy. The picture was taken after the sign became a notorious rallying sign for racists. Do you really think that Luckey is aloof to the point of not not knowing what he's doing there? If you borrowed Occam's razor, you may need to sharpen it a bit before using it.
- Udik 6y ago
  The "ok sign is a white power symbol" thing started as trolling on 4chan. It doesn't mean anything apart from being useful to infuriate other people. You're being trolled.
  - pygy_ 6y ago
    Notwithstanding its origins, it was subsequently adopted by racists as a rallying sign. Context matters.
    - refurb 6y ago
      Not going to lie but it’s apparent you will see racism wherever you want to despite the evidence.
      - 6y ago

coldtea 6y ago

"Dog whistle" is a term bat-shit-crazy people and opportunists use to mark whoever they like on anything they can drum up. "You think what he said was inoffensive? That's because it's a dog whistle!". It's not that some dog whistles don't exist (e.g. upon secret societies, etc). It's that it's used as a weapon with the flimsiest of excuses. It's the 2020 version of "Have you stopped beating your wife?" question.

rendall 6y ago
To believe that dog-whistles exist as an actual thing used effectively, one would also have to believe: a) A group of people (e.g. white supremacists) do not already know that the dog-whistler (e.g. a politician) is a member or sympathizer of their group b) That this person who sympathizes with this secret group wants to signal sympathy with this secret group, but cannot do it directly (that is, by email or letter or direct contact), and so must somehow signal through public words and deeds c) This signal will somehow, hopefully, be invisible to everyone who is listening except for members of the secret group The prototypical example is politicians talking about "thugs" and "welfare queens" as dog-whistling a racist contempt for black people. I can definitely accept that using such language could be such a signal, especially with the context of aligned policy pronouncements, but it's pretty blatant and not a dog-whistle.
- spacemanmatt 6y ago
  I disagree on a), b), or c) being requirements of dog-whistles. That just feels superficially wrong.
tomp 6y ago
Exactly. The only reasonable use of the word “dog-whistle” is ”’dog-whistle’ is a dog-whistle used to signal support of political correctness and belonging to the left-wing elite and/or an unwillingness to engage in rational argument”.

refurb 6y ago

The reason you believe so strongly it’s a white supremacy symbol is because it fits, no reinforces, your political views.

gus_massa 6y ago

We can't let trolls and white supremacist steal the ok symbol. We must fight back. The problem is that whoever makes the the first step will get called a white supremacist, so nobody want to volunteer.

rendall 6y ago
No, I'll volunteer. It's a stupid conspiracy theory, and I have nothing but contempt for it. I use it all the time, and always will, regardless of context or the presence of gullible idiots around me.
- Larrikin 6y ago
  Why do you insist and insult the people who are agaisnt the racist people who call out the symbol. If the symbol is so important to you then your fight should be with the actual white supremacists who have co-opted the symbol and not the people who don't let racists get away with recruitment/trolling/owning the libs by flashing their co-opted gang sign. It's like you being furious at black people because your great grandparents used to always win their Halloween contest with their pointy hat ghost costume and you're not going to let stupid guillable people keep you from wearing it at parties.
  - rendall 6y ago
    > Why do you insist and insult the people who are agaisnt the racist people who call out the symbol. Because they aren't against racist people. They are pro-idiocy. They're only pro a good thing (being non-racist) by an accident of history and circumstance, certainly not because of sober reflection and empathy. These are the same idiots who would be all in on bullying the Satanic Panic preschool teachers in the 80s, or burning witches ye olden days, or hunting Communists in the 50s
    - Larrikin 6y ago
      I think it's a little telling that you're calling out historically conservative movements and trying to conflate them with a very progressive movement of not letting white supremacists use their favorite recruitment tool of "it's just a joke bro... unless you actually believe it"

flippinburgers 6y ago

Supposed dog whistles and the extreme desire to immediately label people based on innocuous gestures/words is the new norm within certain parts of the puritanical left. I never thought I would see the day. It is shocking that what was once the bastion of liberal thought and open-mindedness has become this hyper-judgemental, crucify-all-that-don't-bow-to-our-will movement. Gems of the left: Do you want to be on the wrong side of history? Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences! Acknowledge your privilege! And other deeply manipulative threats/concepts.

Loughla 6y ago
Okay, I'll bite. >Freedom of speech does not mean freedom from consequences! How is that false? You can say what you want, outside of threats and the like, but you also get to live with the outcome of saying whatever it is. I don't see how that's puritanical. It's a statement of fact. I can tell my boss to go f** himself. I can also get fired for doing that.
- prepend 6y ago
  I had to read the Scarlet Letter in high school. Hester Prynn had to live with the outcome of saying whatever it was. It was literally puritanical to make her wear a red “A.” as the outcome of her speech (v-a-v extramarital sex). I think the point isn’t that speech should have no impact, but that the response to speech should be proportional and what proportional means. The Puritans in Hawthorne’s novel thought that making someone a pariah was a proportional response. They were wrong, I think. But the lesson, I think, is not that we should be more precise in meting out moral judgement, but that we should judge less.
- flippinburgers 6y ago
  It is a trite stick hung above arguments that people want to silence before they even happen which makes it intellectually uninteresting and shallow. And more than anything it is used to further attempt to shame people. There is no compassion in the phrase.
- unishark 6y ago