In politics, dog-whistling is the use of words that are likely to be interpreted by certain segments of the population in ways that others wouldn’t get.
Penetrating insight into the obvious warning: It comes from the idea of the whistle that is pitched high enough such that only one species of mammal can hear it and react.
In his scrum yesterday, the Premier said something which might be a dog whistle, what with all the anti-Confederate comments being tossed around since last week:
We’re resilient, we’re survivors, ah, y’know, we basically prepared for this day. When, y’know, over the course of the last few years, you’ll notice from our Throne Speeches, we’ve talked about being self-reliant, we’ve talked about being Masters of Our Own Destiny. And we have been building up a war chest for when the feds come at us again, quite frankly. [Emphasis added]
War chest for when the feds come at us again.
Curious.
It wouldn’t be the first time that some incongruous phrases have turned up in Newfoundland and Labrador politics over the past five years or so.
-srbp-
1 comments:
It's extremely difficult to take this bombast seriously, but it might be useful to parse the prattle in this instance:
"And we have been building up a war chest for when the feds come at us again, quite frankly."
Observations:
1) It's not if but "when" the next casus belli will be rolled out for the media.
2) It's endless war of "us" against "them." Since DW has publicly invoked the term "race" to describe Newfoundlanders, this distinction can be taken as culturally and politically absolute.
3) Them are the "feds," not the Harperites, and it matters not a whit who is in power in Ottawa.
4) The war will be fought with a taxpayer-funded "war chest" siphoned from the public treasury to wage battles against the federal state.
Questions:
1) What public revenue source do these funds come from?
2) Who oversees the funds and where do they appear in the public audit?
3) What does DW mean by "war"? If he is not, in this instance, insinuating actual violence (as Duffgate reveals, violent threats are publicly acceptable but sexual innuendo is verboten), what is the end-game? What will, in fact, end this war -- separation or some lesser constitutional variant? If the goal involves a referendum of some sort, will Dangovt respect the Clarity Act?
4) If public funds are going to be used for pay for this war, what are they going to be spent on, aside from the Man in the Blue Line Cab? Given the carpet bombing campaign on the television networks, with folk-nationalist ads appearing around-the-clock on everything from TSN to the Weather Network, what's the war chest actually for? For a Nixonian dirty-tricks unit to works its way down the Enemies List? Does this unit use the same coloured folders as the secret media surveillance files?
Post a Comment