3 ms·

What's wrong with signalling your virtue? As long as you follow through on your virtue signalling with actions, what's the problem?

objectivetruth 3y ago
Good point. I feel people who use the phrase "virtue signal" are usually signaling something themselves. "Well, I think all XYZ people are bums, and I bet everyone secretly agrees with me and just doesn't have the guts to say it!" I've never heard anyone decry "vice signalling" and surely humans do that at least as much.
darthrupert 3y ago
Good question! A few reasons: this can be done only when the virtue being signalled is the same as one the majority holds in that clique. It's easy in the worst way. It makes complicated issue shallow, and it is divisive instead of constructive as a method of affecting. Most importantly, the goal is moral grandstanding, i.e. lifting yourself above others, possibly without any merit.
unconed 3y ago
They're pretending to safeguard objective knowledge, and that Basecamp is following some kind of sinister "playbook", while blatantly singing from the woke songsheet, and following the established woke playbook. - Call it a "discussion" when it's a unilateral demand with only one acceptable, pre-determined outcome - Give favorable treatment to some groups based on race, demand that others do the same, and adjust language rules and writing style to enforce this top-down - Try to control the frame of a political event ("mostly peaceful protests") instead of acknowledging the plain reality of arson, looting, crime and murder. - Completely misrepresent and misunderstand the very real critique that people have against the DEI movement as a parasite on and disruptor of tech companies. - Pretending to be even-handed and objective while accusing others of "mendacious language of extremists" to refer to a riot as a riot. It is just never ending projection with these people. They are intellectual midgets who don't understand the first thing about the enlightenment they pretend to defend. They think of themselves as empathetic, well-informed listeners, but they are surrounded by an ideological bubble that runs on gossip epistemology, bullying, forced consensus and shoddy social "science" that isn't. And it all gets heaped and mashed together into one big pile of crud where race, tech, climate and god knows what else is claimed and defined by them as Good, whereas the other people are doing Evil. At best they will grant you are "unknowingly" or "naively" collaborating with it, in which case they regard you with self-assured pity and a sense of moral superiority. The possibility of being wrong does not occur to them and they think they are on the side of civilization. What cunts.

objectivetruth 3y ago

Good point. I feel people who use the phrase "virtue signal" are usually signaling something themselves. "Well, I think all XYZ people are bums, and I bet everyone secretly agrees with me and just doesn't have the guts to say it!" I've never heard anyone decry "vice signalling" and surely humans do that at least as much.

darthrupert 3y ago

Good question! A few reasons: this can be done only when the virtue being signalled is the same as one the majority holds in that clique. It's easy in the worst way. It makes complicated issue shallow, and it is divisive instead of constructive as a method of affecting. Most importantly, the goal is moral grandstanding, i.e. lifting yourself above others, possibly without any merit.

unconed 3y ago

They're pretending to safeguard objective knowledge, and that Basecamp is following some kind of sinister "playbook", while blatantly singing from the woke songsheet, and following the established woke playbook. - Call it a "discussion" when it's a unilateral demand with only one acceptable, pre-determined outcome - Give favorable treatment to some groups based on race, demand that others do the same, and adjust language rules and writing style to enforce this top-down - Try to control the frame of a political event ("mostly peaceful protests") instead of acknowledging the plain reality of arson, looting, crime and murder. - Completely misrepresent and misunderstand the very real critique that people have against the DEI movement as a parasite on and disruptor of tech companies. - Pretending to be even-handed and objective while accusing others of "mendacious language of extremists" to refer to a riot as a riot. It is just never ending projection with these people. They are intellectual midgets who don't understand the first thing about the enlightenment they pretend to defend. They think of themselves as empathetic, well-informed listeners, but they are surrounded by an ideological bubble that runs on gossip epistemology, bullying, forced consensus and shoddy social "science" that isn't. And it all gets heaped and mashed together into one big pile of crud where race, tech, climate and god knows what else is claimed and defined by them as Good, whereas the other people are doing Evil. At best they will grant you are "unknowingly" or "naively" collaborating with it, in which case they regard you with self-assured pity and a sense of moral superiority. The possibility of being wrong does not occur to them and they think they are on the side of civilization. What cunts.