U.S. Jews blame Republicans more than Democrats for anti-Semitism, see far right as bigger ‘threat’ than liberals and Islamic

[JimZipCode]

So calling someone there Jewish name is anti Semitic. Bwhahahaha.

You're so confident the alt-right dog whistles are completely inaudible to us dumb libtards. You worship plausible deniability.

Whatever.

[JimZipCode]

Trump moved the US embassy to Jerusalem.

So – ?

[darb72]

So – ?

That, combined with the fact his favorite daughter, his son-in-law, and his grandkids are all Jewish makes me think that Trump isn't exactly the anti-Semite you're trying to portray him as.

[darb72]

You're so confident the alt-right dog whistles are completely inaudible to us dumb libtards. You worship plausible deniability.

Whatever.

Maybe if y'all would quit using made up terms like "dog-whistle" and instead focus on actual cases of racism we wouldn't think of y'all as dumb libtards.

[JimZipCode]

Maybe if y'all would quit using made up terms like "dog-whistle" and instead focus on actual cases of racism we wouldn't think of y'all as dumb libtards.

Nope. You would anyway.

Also, turning a blind eye (deaf ear?) to alt-right dog whistles would only make us dumber, less informed and weaker. Which of course is exactly what your side wants.

[JimZipCode]

made up terms like "dog-whistle"

??

Isn't every term a "made-up term"?

[darb72]

Nope. You would anyway.

Also, turning a blind eye (deaf ear?) to alt-right dog whistles would only make us dumber, less informed and weaker. Which of course is exactly what your side wants.

Okay, fair point, I would. But only because your policies are absolute garbage, yet y'all continue to vote for them. On an unrelated topic, how long has Baltimore been under democrat control?

When you start accusing of people of racism without actual evidence of racism, you cheapen the word. Take the okay hand symbol for instances. A few years ago, 4Chan trolled liberals into thinking it was some sort of racist sign. It's not, nor has it ever been, racist.

We'll also look at a completely innocuous insult. You damned pen-tumper. I have a lot of pens on my desk. Now you get all offended because some pens have, pause for dramatic effect, black ink in them and you're a black guy! The horror. And to make things worse, tump is what the slaves did with the basin after being forced to wash clothes. I'M A MONSTER!!! Obviously I'm conflating your blackness with washing clothes because of racism!!! Or, more likely, you're the asshole that knocked over my pens and didn't pick them up. But now every time a liberal here's the word tumper, it's gonna be a dog-whistle despite it not being the least bit racist.

And yes, I made up pen-tumper when I started this post not really sure how it was gonna go, which just proves how easy it is to find racism where there isn't any if you look hard enough. There's actual racism out there and it's disgusting. We can fight that if you'll stop tilting at windmills.

[darb72]

??

Isn't every term a "made-up term"?

Yeah, but dog-whistle is completely meaningless. Nefarious intentions can be ascribed to nearly anything if they don't have to be proven.

[JimZipCode]

When you start accusing of people of racism without actual evidence of racism, you cheapen the word.

Who's "you", kemosabe?

Take the okay hand symbol for instances. A few years ago, 4Chan trolled liberals into thinking it was some sort of racist sign. It's not, nor has it ever been, racist.

Three fingers down on the belt, which is easiest to do from an inverted Ok sign, signalled KKK more than 50/60 years ago.

Anyway 1: if a group deliberately tries to make it seem like it's a racist sign, then why blame the people who are targets of the trolling?

Anyway 2: Southern Poverty Law Center takes some issue with your "not ever", which at the very least seems overly sweeping:

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/...ght-wing-troll

We'll also look at a completely innocuous insult. You damned pen-tumper. I have a lot of pens on my desk. Now you get all offended because some pens have, pause for dramatic effect, black ink in them and you're a black guy!

I zoned out in bewilderment somewhere around here, or just after.

[JimZipCode]

Nefarious intentions can be ascribed to nearly anything if they don't have to be proven.

I agree that in general assertions have to be disprovable to be useful / carry meaning / communicate something of value.

However, when a group is gleefully cackling about how plausible their deniability is, it is reasonable not to grant them the benefit of the doubt. A teenager might claim "You don't KNOW I was smoking pot! You didn't SEE me!" The protestations about dog-whistles are about as juvenile; and about as convincing. The Beavis & Butthead snickers from the alt-right don't help carry the argument.

Yeah, but dog-whistle is completely meaningless.

"Completely"?

https://www.merriam-webster.com/word...itical-meaning

a coded message communicated through words or phrases commonly understood by a particular group of people, but not by others.
...
it is only within the past 20 years or so that it [the term] has seen this figurative sense take hold. And it is primarily used to describe political speech.
...
Dog whistle appears to have taken on this political sense in the mid-1990s; the Oxford English Dictionary currently has a citation from a Canadian newspaper, The Ottawa Citizen, in October of 1995, as their earliest recorded figurative use: “It's an all-purpose dog-whistle that those fed up with feminists, minorities, the undeserving poor hear loud and clear.”

The recent appearance of the figurative use does not mean that dog whistle has not been used previously to describe the habit that politicians occasionally have of sending coded messages to a certain group of constituents. In 1947, a book titled American Economic History referred to a speech by Franklin Delano Roosevelt as being “designed to be like a modern dog-whistle, with a note so high that the sensitive farm ear would catch it perfectly while the unsympathetic East would hear nothing.” However, saying that speech is like a dog-whistle (which is a simile) is not quite the same as saying that it is a dog whistle (which is a metaphor), and this subtle distinction is what causes us to judge the phrase as having originated in the 1990s, rather than the 1940s.

[darb72]

Who's "you", kemosabe?


Three fingers down on the belt, which is easiest to do from an inverted Ok sign, signalled KKK more than 50/60 years ago.

Anyway 1: if a group deliberately tries to make it seem like it's a racist sign, then why blame the people who are targets of the trolling?

Anyway 2: Southern Poverty Law Center takes some issue with your "not ever", which at the very least seems overly sweeping:

https://www.splcenter.org/hatewatch/...ght-wing-troll

I zoned out in bewilderment somewhere around here, or just after.

Liberals, genius. Not you specifically.

The SPLC? The same SPLC that accused a Muslim man of Islamophobia? That said Ben Carson was a white supremacist? Yeah, no.

And now you know how we feel when liberals start talking about racism with no evidence to back it up except for "dog whistle".

[darb72]

I agree that in general assertions have to be disprovable to be useful / carry meaning / communicate something of value.

However, when a group is gleefully cackling about how plausible their deniability is, it is reasonable not to grant them the benefit of the doubt. A teenager might claim "You don't KNOW I was smoking pot! You didn't SEE me!" The protestations about dog-whistles are about as juvenile; and about as convincing. The Beavis & Butthead snickers from the alt-right don't help carry the argument.


"Completely"?

https://www.merriam-webster.com/word...itical-meaning

Yes, completely. The use in Canada described is a perfect example because they provide no evidence that it (whatever "it" was) was intended to be derogatory, instead relying on external suppositions in place of actual proof. It's completely subjective.

Liberals think that all Republicans are racist. So whenever a Republican says something, they automatically interpret it as racist, and expect everybody else to agree with 'em despite the glaring lack of anything remotely racist in the phrase. That's a problem because then we're fighting personal interpretations, not racism. Show me actual examples of racism and I'll either condemn or fight them depending on proximity. Recently that old lady cussed out the black kid because he dropped his gum-wrapper on the ground. That's disgusting and someone should've gave her a dose of her own medicine. Holding up the okay sign is not racism.