• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Left Wing "virtue signaling"?

angrysoba said:
Virtue signalling could just be a form of tribalism.

Pretty much everyone signals to their tribe in one form or another.
Click to expand...

This is exactly how I see it.

An intellectually superficial act, that helps blend in and be part of something bigger. And, as someone said above (maybe you said that), not necessarily hypocritical.
 
The thread on left wing violence has dribbled to a stop. Now leftie virtue signaling is going the same way. What next? Crypto leftism? Camouflaged commieism? Who Was That Masked Marxist?

How about ersatz extremism, i.e., phony fascism, where the tiki torch and swastika crowd aren't REALLY nazis, they're secret socialists?

Why, the possibilities are semi-endless.
 
Darat said:
I know what you mean but I do think virtue signalling does have some actual truth behind it, even if as psionl0 mentions it is most often used as a modern version of claiming someone is only “paying lip service” to something.
Click to expand...

https://www.dictionary.com/browse/virtue-signaling

the sharing of one's point of view on a social or political issue, often on social media, in order to garner praise or acknowledgment of one’s righteousness from others who share that point of view, or to passively rebuke those who do not​

I suppose it's not technically a synonym for lip service, because there's nothing to prevent one from also doing something that actually matters (e.g., actually go give to a charity for Ukraine, instead of just making a brow-beating show about Kyiv vs Kiev) but I also think there's a massive overlap on that Venn diagram, shall we say. It's long been my impression that the loudest on any issue are those who don't contribute anything else. And I don't mean just left or right wing, nor even just political or social. E.g., on gaming sites it routinely turns out that the most rabid fanboy, the one trying to run you out of town if you even report a bug, didn't actually buy the game.
 
smartcooky said:
Because heaven forbid that anyone should show solidarity with team-mates and others who are members of an oppressed class :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Empty displays of solidarity are empty. Virtuous deeds of real worth may signal the virtue of the doer as a side effect.

These are distinct from deeds of little or no worth other than to send a (false) signal of virtue.

Virtue signaling is a kind of pandering.
 
Robin said:
Is "virtue signalling" actually a thing?

I thought it was one of those random phrases that right wingers blurt out when they are out of ideas (ie all the time).

A bit like "woke".
Click to expand...

Yep, you're on to it. Like "woke", its a term predominantly (not not exclusively) trotted out by the right when trying to justify their untenable positions on certain aspects of society.
 
theprestige said:
Empty displays of solidarity are empty. Virtuous deeds of real worth may signal the virtue of the doer as a side effect.

These are distinct from deeds of little or no worth other than to send a (false) signal of virtue.

Virtue signaling is a kind of pandering.
Click to expand...


They did have real worth though didn't they.

Players taking a knee got under the skin of certain racist members of the right, forcing them to show their true colours, and especially, it really, really pissed off The Fat Orange Turd - and I'll take that as a win all day, every day!
 
bruto said:
I think if we were to unload the phrase (not that we can, these days - that ship sailed) we could use it to describe an expression of ideology that is not necessarily fraudulent or hypocritical, but lacking depth, passion or productivity. What does a "Free Tibet" bumper sticker do except announce your position?



But what I think is a mistake is the assumption that most people using the term make, which is that it is hypocritical, that people don't have a right to make their position clear unless they're manning the barricades. I don't think there's much point in a bumper sticker declaring your position on Asian affairs, but it's also not a sign of hypocrisy or wrongness by default. Similarly, I see a lot of "Black Lives Matter" flags and signs here in Vermont, where very few Black people are to be seen. They represent a real opinion, and one can at least hope they represent a trend toward real action. They do not require that the people flying the flags drop what they're doing and march on Washington.



It's become a right wing catchword phrase, like "social justice warrior," and the like, and I think it should be abandoned entirely, especially because everybody who has an opinion voices it, and any fool can call it virtue signalling. Wear a cross necklace? A flag lapel button? A bumper sticker? The people these days who are most wont to shout "virtue signaling" seem mostly to be the very people who see no contradiction in declaring the flag a holy icon, while at the same time displaying black and white and blue travesties of it, waving Bibles, and lecturing us all about sin in between sleazy affairs and secret abortions.



In other words, I think virtue signaling is pretty universal. Jesus told us we should practice our virtue in secret, but that he had to say it suggests that it has always been an issue. And certainly damned few Christians these days remember, as they loudly mouth the Lord's prayer, or seek to have it engraved in the public squares, the back story.



But unlike the thing itself, the use of the term is almost always, if not always, right wing code for what they see as hypocritical posturing of people they don't like, espousing things they don't like. Which of course means that for me, when I hear the term, I automatically assume that the utterance comes from a right wing hypocrite, arguing catchphrases in default of substance, and am likely to tune out whatever follows.
Click to expand...
Well said.

Sent from my SM-G991U using Tapatalk
 
bruto said:
I think if we were to unload the phrase (not that we can, these days - that ship sailed) we could use it to describe an expression of ideology that is not necessarily fraudulent or hypocritical, but lacking depth, passion or productivity. What does a "Free Tibet" bumper sticker do except announce your position?

But what I think is a mistake is the assumption that most people using the term make, which is that it is hypocritical, that people don't have a right to make their position clear unless they're manning the barricades. I don't think there's much point in a bumper sticker declaring your position on Asian affairs, but it's also not a sign of hypocrisy or wrongness by default. Similarly, I see a lot of "Black Lives Matter" flags and signs here in Vermont, where very few Black people are to be seen. They represent a real opinion, and one can at least hope they represent a trend toward real action. They do not require that the people flying the flags drop what they're doing and march on Washington.

It's become a right wing catchword phrase, like "social justice warrior," and the like, and I think it should be abandoned entirely, especially because everybody who has an opinion voices it, and any fool can call it virtue signalling. Wear a cross necklace? A flag lapel button? A bumper sticker? The people these days who are most wont to shout "virtue signaling" seem mostly to be the very people who see no contradiction in declaring the flag a holy icon, while at the same time displaying black and white and blue travesties of it, waving Bibles, and lecturing us all about sin in between sleazy affairs and secret abortions.

In other words, I think virtue signaling is pretty universal. Jesus told us we should practice our virtue in secret, but that he had to say it suggests that it has always been an issue. And certainly damned few Christians these days remember, as they loudly mouth the Lord's prayer, or seek to have it engraved in the public squares, the back story.

But unlike the thing itself, the use of the term is almost always, if not always, right wing code for what they see as hypocritical posturing of people they don't like, espousing things they don't like. Which of course means that for me, when I hear the term, I automatically assume that the utterance comes from a right wing hypocrite, arguing catchphrases in default of substance, and am likely to tune out whatever follows.
Click to expand...


I concur with phiwum.. well said.

ETA: I would just expand on this.... "Jesus told us we should practice our virtue in secret,"

The problem with this approach is that it plays right into the hands of racists, homophobes, bigots and other far right scumbags, who will be only too happy for their worldviews to remain publicly unchallenged. IIRC my Sunday School classes (the few that I had before I was kicked out) Jesus also said "So whoever knows the right thing to do and fails to do it, for him it is sin", and especially "Take no part in the unfruitful works of darkness, but instead expose them"

I guess if I were to say that this last one is a philosophy that have pretty much held to most of my life, and that I believe evil requires darkness in order to thrive, posters like theprestige, and d4m10n would say this is virtue signalling. I prefer to think of it as making sure the people I debate with understand that I will brook no bull-****.
 
Last edited:
Carrot Flower King said:
If you want to see non-left, non-liberal virtue signalling, come to the UK, especially England, in a week or 2 in the run up to Remembrance Day and see how much flak non-poppy wearers or white poppy wearers get...
Click to expand...
Never encountered any reaction to someone not wearing a poppy. I buy one then usually find I've dropped it pretty well immediately. Never so much as a raised eyebrow.

Then again I don't remember seeing white poppies around mors than once or twice, though I know they're a thing. Wearing one of those is more of a statement and presumably puts people's backs up if they take the statement to be "I'm a better person than you because you glorify war".

I suppose that's why the phrase virtue signalling is intended as a pejorative; if you take any endorsement of a cause you don't support as a signal the individual thinks they're better than you, and combine that with humans' striking inability to believe others hold opposing views sincerely, anything you don't agree with looks like an attack.
 
Jack by the hedge said:
Never encountered any reaction to someone not wearing a poppy. I buy one then usually find I've dropped it pretty well immediately. Never so much as a raised eyebrow.

Then again I don't remember seeing white poppies around mors than once or twice, though I know they're a thing. Wearing one of those is more of a statement and presumably puts people's backs up if they take the statement to be "I'm a better person than you because you glorify war".

I suppose that's why the phrase virtue signalling is intended as a pejorative; if you take any endorsement of a cause you don't support as a signal the individual thinks they're better than you, and combine that with humans' striking inability to believe others hold opposing views sincerely, anything you don't agree with looks like an attack.
Click to expand...
Many years ago I did a round of media interviews around remembrance day and as part of the setup with mic and a bit of powder a poppy was attached in all of the TV spots I did. To me that was an example of virtue signalling.
 
Darat said:
Many years ago I did a round of media interviews around remembrance day and as part of the setup with mic and a bit of powder a poppy was attached in all of the TV spots I did. To me that was an example of virtue signalling.
Click to expand...
Yes, that's self-defense by the broadcasters as having live contributors not wearing a poppy would be taken as a statement by people waiting to take offence.
 
Does printing a land acknowledgment statment on a supermarket till receipt count? In Australia the Coles supermarket chain has started doing this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom