Thanks Ken. I am glad you drew attention to Fear's claim that dog-whistling is more of the left than of the right: unlike most of his comments, this one was poorly thought through.

Also unconvincing is the assumption that dog-whistling is always malevolent. Note Rudd's 'clanging gong' nod to Christians in his speech of apology to the Stolen Generations (13 February 2008).

BTW, about your view that the term 'dog whistle' starts during the 1996 election campaign: do you have a particular source in mind? I have been trying to track the term's origins myself. Textor was obviously putting the approach to work in the Northern Territory even earlier than that, but of course doing it is not the same as naming it.

Giving people the benefit of any doubt is an important part of being tolerant. If you cannot quote specific comments and explicitly explain why they are racist or otherwise immoral then you cannot make these claims. The whole idea of being so rightous that one cannot detect racism that others pick up on is a complete wank.

The expression “dog whistling” is one of the silliest ones bandied around. I doubt that any of its users could really explain how whistling a dog has anything to do with anything but whistling a dog. It is not “now understood world wide.” It is certainly “covert”; so much so that its meaning is a total mystery. People claiming to know what it means, and how it pertains to politics or political action, are just kidding themselves – they are slaves to nonsensical ‘word fashion’ and fads.

We all understand ‘wedge politics’ and other terms use in an attempt to belittle people we disagree with, but ‘dog whistling’ – no!

This character brands himself politically with: “Following the success of Pauline Hanson and the One Nation Party, the Howard government employed dog-whistling to appeal to voters with racist attitudes while evading criticism from those opposed to prejudice.” Howard might have used Hanson to help appeal to certain voters, but there is no way that Macnab can know whether or not voters took any notice, whether, if they took notice, they were automatically ‘racist’ (that stupid, misused word again) or, in fact, anything about voters other than himself. I don’t even know how my wife votes, and Macnab is unable to read other peoples’ minds or what they do when they go into to a box for a SECRET vote.

As for his bleating about criticism of “chattering classes”, “chardonnay set” etc. it’s quite OK for him to criticise people by calling them ‘racists’. He can give it, but he can’t take it!

As we progress further through Ken Macnab’s article, we find that he believes ‘dog whistling” encapsulates all of the phrases people used to use to criticise others. The loony Left must get worn out with their non-stop criticism of moderates and people they call conservative, so they resort to two words of abuse to cover everything, even if the words are as meaningless and yawn-making as the word ‘racist’.

.....

.......

But, the Left has never been articulate, relying on abuse to attempt intimidation and silencing of views they don’t like. Even Clive Hamilton is used! If Clive has written a book on ‘dog whistling’, it’s not surprising that normal people are not au fait with the term.

Someone called Josh Fear (very appropriate name) is cited as claiming that this ‘dog whistling’ undermines democracy. These people who parade themselves as elite and superior to the ‘ordinary’ folk are the ones undermining democracy by telling you that you don’t have the brains to make up your own minds; that you respond, like a dog, to a politician’s whistle.

You are being insulted by the likes of Clive Hamilton and his sycophantic followers.

Moving along, we see that the wonderful, balanced and understanding character, John Pilger also gets a gurnsey. We know we are la la land when Pilger gets a mention. There is not a thing about the West that Pilger doesn’t hate. Pilger is said to have uttered the incredibly stupid comment that the Australian navy is sent AGAINST illegal boats. What utter rubbish! The navy merely escorts them to Christmas Island for processing and eventually residency in Australia.

This over-long article struggles on to a finish in the same tired old theme: moaning, groaning and criticising Australia, and telling us how dumb and nasty we are

A timely article. I find the unstated appeals to prejudices and fears disturbing and it's not confined to the Right.

Of course the insincere language of inclusivity tends to conceal underlying prejudices; it glosses over and allows to go unchallenged a lot of entrenched bigotry and xenophobia.

... Er, pardon a typo. I should have said Josh Fear claims that dog-whistling is more of the right than of the left. That is what he claims, but without really thinking through the evidence.

Instead, though, I said the opposite. I think that makes him and me both wrong.

Once again, Ken, I would be very grateful for a 1996 source if you know of one.