3 ms·
As a single individual, it's probably more effective to work on local ethical issues than to try to do something about global villainy. There are a few people
by towaway1138 8y ago
As a single individual, it's probably more effective to work on local ethical issues than to try to do something about global villainy. There are a few people in very special places and times who have the ability to make a global effect (Wikileaks comes to mind), but that's quite rare.
Yes, we can denounce villainy that occurs on the global stage. But in truth that's almost entirely virtue signaling. We look good, but there's no difference effected in the world.
Do something that makes a difference. Despising Churchill is useless, even if he deserved it (which is dubious).
- landryraccoon 8y ago> But in truth that's almost entirely virtue signaling. We look good, but there's no difference effected in the world. This isn't true at all. The collective fiction that makes up civilization depends on this. Saying you believe in free speech, even though free speech is a national policy decision, is not virtue signalling if enough people do it. Saying you're against racism isn't virtue signalling if that makes the community as a whole more loudly against racism. If everyone becomes cynical and refuses to "virtue signal" as you pejoratively call it, it swings the door wide open to the government ignoring our rights since the people have collectively already decided to give up.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]