In a previous blog post I commented on how a term, "gaslighting", which had a rather clear and unambiguous meaning in the past, has been co-opted by the regressive leftist feminist academics as, essentially, a tool for the leftist masses to discredit all criticism of their ideology. "Do not listen to them. They are just trying to make you doubt your convictions. They are gaslighting you. Ignore everything they say. It's nothing but deception."
Relatively recently they have come up with another fancy academic-sounding term, which is once again being used for the exact same purpose. In this case, it's the term "dogwhistling".
Originally, this word means some kind of word, sentence, expression, gesture or action which all in itself sounds innocent, but is a covert signal to likeminded people, people with the same ideology, people who know what it means. Like a codeword, or an euphemism invented among the people holding that particular ideology. Regular people don't pay attention to this "whistling", but the people in the know, the "dogs", will pay attention to it, and know what it means. It may also be an attempt to introduce a reproachable ideology into mainstream by "softening it up" with innocent-sounding euphemisms and alternative expressions (which, again, are understood by the people inside the ideology, but not necessarily outsiders).
But, of course, like always, feminist academics love such terms, and thus they have co-opted also this one, just to discredit their critics and what they are saying. "He's just dogwhistling. He's really an extremist right-winger / fascist / nazi, trying to cover up his ideology and message with euphemisms and platitudes, but people in his camp really know what he's really about."
So, once again, it's just another "don't pay attention to what he's saying. Don't believe it. Ignore it. It's just the rhetoric of the enemy. Discard everything he says."
One of the crucial tactics in cult ideology is to make cult members ignore and shut out all criticism, and all information that goes contrary to the teachings of the cult. To make the cult members afraid of even hearing the dissenting points of view, lest they be deceived and led astray.
Relatively recently they have come up with another fancy academic-sounding term, which is once again being used for the exact same purpose. In this case, it's the term "dogwhistling".
Originally, this word means some kind of word, sentence, expression, gesture or action which all in itself sounds innocent, but is a covert signal to likeminded people, people with the same ideology, people who know what it means. Like a codeword, or an euphemism invented among the people holding that particular ideology. Regular people don't pay attention to this "whistling", but the people in the know, the "dogs", will pay attention to it, and know what it means. It may also be an attempt to introduce a reproachable ideology into mainstream by "softening it up" with innocent-sounding euphemisms and alternative expressions (which, again, are understood by the people inside the ideology, but not necessarily outsiders).
But, of course, like always, feminist academics love such terms, and thus they have co-opted also this one, just to discredit their critics and what they are saying. "He's just dogwhistling. He's really an extremist right-winger / fascist / nazi, trying to cover up his ideology and message with euphemisms and platitudes, but people in his camp really know what he's really about."
So, once again, it's just another "don't pay attention to what he's saying. Don't believe it. Ignore it. It's just the rhetoric of the enemy. Discard everything he says."
One of the crucial tactics in cult ideology is to make cult members ignore and shut out all criticism, and all information that goes contrary to the teachings of the cult. To make the cult members afraid of even hearing the dissenting points of view, lest they be deceived and led astray.
Comments
Post a Comment