4 ms·

> ranking virtue signalling over monetary gain I'll cop to not being completely au fait with current right-wing rhetoric, but I thought a core part of "virtue

> ranking virtue signalling over monetary gain I'll cop to not being completely au fait with current right-wing rhetoric, but I thought a core part of "virtue signalling" (insofar as it might actually exist beyond "position I disagree with", which your post suggests it might not) was that it was low-effort / low-cost. In other words, no action where the alternative is non-trivial monetary gain could be virtue signalling. Between this and Bray's arrest for environment activism previously, I'd propose that this is not "virtue signalling" but simply being virtuous.

DagAgren 7y ago
In pretty much every case, "virtue signalling" is code for "this person is being virtuous, and I don't like it".
- bryanrasmussen 7y ago
  right but there is a rhetorical undercurrent of this person doesn't really believe in this virtuous thing they are doing, and is thus a hypocrite. Because being a hypocrite is one of the top sins of our culture. Of course it is weird because the person doing the accusation of hypocrisy is actually against the virtuous act, and is thus for people not believing in the virtue. It's a weird rhetorical trick that sounds sort of unhinged the more you hear it.
  - munchbunny 7y ago
    I've heard the same accusation being made by minorities, LGBT, women, etc. especially in the context of someone else, typically not from the less privileged group in that context, who is abusing the moral concern to shut down discussion rather than actually trying to help. One of my friends, as somewhat of an activist on these issues (I'm purposely staying vague for anonymity), has gotten exactly that type of vitriol from people who obviously see themselves as "woke". They got hit with some pretty nasty stuff that was pretty transparently moralistic character assassination rather than an honest attempt at disagreement. I'm impressed that they're able to continue working on these issues despite the crap they put up with from people who are supposedly on the same side of the issues. To put things into context, I hear/see the above issue orders of magnitude less often than people parroting right wing talking points, but in the cases where I think the accusation is well-founded, I don't think it's about hypocrisy at its root. I think it's about being disingenuous. Then again we may be using two words to mean the same thing.
    - DagAgren 7y ago
      What "same accusation", exactly?
- thelibrarian 7y ago
  Also "I don't know what I'm talking about".
- gowld 7y ago
  One side uses "virtue signaling" like another uses "Russian bot".
  - DagAgren 7y ago
    Russian bots are a thing, you know.
ben_w 7y ago
> I thought a core part of "virtue signalling" … was that it was low-effort / low-cost Huh. I’m sure I was introduced to the idea with the exact opposite. It was described as the moral equivalent of Rolex watches: pointlessly expensive if considered as a timepiece, and ownership of a fake has negative consequences. But I agree with the general point that most of the people who use the phrase — and all who use it as an insult — do so without self awareness. It’s pretty much universal in human behaviour.

DagAgren 7y ago

In pretty much every case, "virtue signalling" is code for "this person is being virtuous, and I don't like it".

bryanrasmussen 7y ago
right but there is a rhetorical undercurrent of this person doesn't really believe in this virtuous thing they are doing, and is thus a hypocrite. Because being a hypocrite is one of the top sins of our culture. Of course it is weird because the person doing the accusation of hypocrisy is actually against the virtuous act, and is thus for people not believing in the virtue. It's a weird rhetorical trick that sounds sort of unhinged the more you hear it.
- munchbunny 7y ago
  I've heard the same accusation being made by minorities, LGBT, women, etc. especially in the context of someone else, typically not from the less privileged group in that context, who is abusing the moral concern to shut down discussion rather than actually trying to help. One of my friends, as somewhat of an activist on these issues (I'm purposely staying vague for anonymity), has gotten exactly that type of vitriol from people who obviously see themselves as "woke". They got hit with some pretty nasty stuff that was pretty transparently moralistic character assassination rather than an honest attempt at disagreement. I'm impressed that they're able to continue working on these issues despite the crap they put up with from people who are supposedly on the same side of the issues. To put things into context, I hear/see the above issue orders of magnitude less often than people parroting right wing talking points, but in the cases where I think the accusation is well-founded, I don't think it's about hypocrisy at its root. I think it's about being disingenuous. Then again we may be using two words to mean the same thing.
  - DagAgren 7y ago
    What "same accusation", exactly?
thelibrarian 7y ago
Also "I don't know what I'm talking about".
gowld 7y ago
One side uses "virtue signaling" like another uses "Russian bot".
- DagAgren 7y ago
  Russian bots are a thing, you know.

ben_w 7y ago

> I thought a core part of "virtue signalling" … was that it was low-effort / low-cost Huh. I’m sure I was introduced to the idea with the exact opposite. It was described as the moral equivalent of Rolex watches: pointlessly expensive if considered as a timepiece, and ownership of a fake has negative consequences. But I agree with the general point that most of the people who use the phrase — and all who use it as an insult — do so without self awareness. It’s pretty much universal in human behaviour.