3 ms·
that's exactly why you should rethink the concept of a 'dog whistle'. 1 ) painting an individual politically by extrapolating a single opinion across their ent
by serf 5y ago
that's exactly why you should rethink the concept of a 'dog whistle'.
1 ) painting an individual politically by extrapolating a single opinion across their entire persona is irresponsible and over-simple.
2 ) 'conservative' is over-generalized to the point of uselessness and ambiguity.
it's a concept (dog whistle) that is used strictly for generating rage and calling other individuals to arms so that the crowd picks up torches and pitchforks and follows your lede in attacking an individual's opinion with as little prompting or individual thought as possible.
the classification and announcement of a 'dog whistle' makes civil conversation near impossible afterwards, even if those who announce it are dead-wrong or working in poor faith against an individual.
- lp0_on_fire 5y agoIn my experience the people who announce 'dog whistles' are rarely arguing in good faith.
- dTal 5y ago>it's a concept (dog whistle) that is used strictly for generating rage and calling other individuals to arms so that the crowd picks up torches and pitchforks and follows your lede in attacking an individual's opinion with as little prompting or individual thought as possible. It is not used strictly for that, indeed would be ineffective for that purpose were it not also a useful word. It means "warning, this seemingly innocent reference/argument/line of argument has historically been used by people with questionable motives, and warrants extra scrutiny".