2 ms·

I love the phrase "virtue signaling," because someone non-ironically using it is openly admitting that the behavior question is virtuous, thus implying that the

I love the phrase "virtue signaling," because someone non-ironically using it is openly admitting that the behavior question is virtuous, thus implying that the opposite behavior is wrong. This seems to be lost on most people.

lazide 2y ago
That isn’t the actual usage. The actual usage is doing something to ‘appear virtuous’. Usually in the context of actual actions being non-congruent with the actual underlying virtue. Otherwise the person is just a (perhaps in a small degree) a saint. Do you think this Lawyer is a saint? If they do literally nothing, or the opposite of what they are doing then it is purely performative. It doesn’t have to be purely performative though. For example, if a city spends a lot of time and effort showing how they are doing recycling and end up putting it into a landfill without further processing? That is purely performative virtue signaling. If they sort it, and sell it to someone (at a loss), but that company ends up producing more waste/emissions while doing the processing, then it’s virtue signaling, it is at least not purely performative virtue signaling. They are putting some money where their mouth is. Either way, it doesn’t actually solve any real underlying problems though (probably). And frankly, what are the odds the attorney actually just got fired?
- angoragoats 2y ago
  > That isn’t the actual usage. Yes, it is, at least in the way I see it used the majority of the time. All of your examples prove my point: the person calling recycling “virtue signaling” is admitting that the idea of recycling is virtuous. When people say this attorney is virtue signaling, they’re admitting that him firing FB as a client for being neo-Nazis is virtuous. > what are the odds the attorney actually just got fired? Low.
  - lazide 2y ago
    The point is, the idea is virtuous. The reality often isn’t. So going on and on about the idea can often cause more harm than good. And almost no one goes on a loud rant when the split was amicable/voluntary.
    - angoragoats 2y ago
      I believe that we should all rant, loudly and often, against racists, misogynists, homophobes, etc.
      - lazide 2y ago
        And where do you think there is evidence of Zuck actually being those things?
        angoragoats 2y ago
        In every single action he’s taken with respect to the incoming administration over the last several weeks.

lazide 2y ago

That isn’t the actual usage. The actual usage is doing something to ‘appear virtuous’. Usually in the context of actual actions being non-congruent with the actual underlying virtue. Otherwise the person is just a (perhaps in a small degree) a saint. Do you think this Lawyer is a saint? If they do literally nothing, or the opposite of what they are doing then it is purely performative. It doesn’t have to be purely performative though. For example, if a city spends a lot of time and effort showing how they are doing recycling and end up putting it into a landfill without further processing? That is purely performative virtue signaling. If they sort it, and sell it to someone (at a loss), but that company ends up producing more waste/emissions while doing the processing, then it’s virtue signaling, it is at least not purely performative virtue signaling. They are putting some money where their mouth is. Either way, it doesn’t actually solve any real underlying problems though (probably). And frankly, what are the odds the attorney actually just got fired?

angoragoats 2y ago
> That isn’t the actual usage. Yes, it is, at least in the way I see it used the majority of the time. All of your examples prove my point: the person calling recycling “virtue signaling” is admitting that the idea of recycling is virtuous. When people say this attorney is virtue signaling, they’re admitting that him firing FB as a client for being neo-Nazis is virtuous. > what are the odds the attorney actually just got fired? Low.
- lazide 2y ago
  The point is, the idea is virtuous. The reality often isn’t. So going on and on about the idea can often cause more harm than good. And almost no one goes on a loud rant when the split was amicable/voluntary.
  - angoragoats 2y ago
    I believe that we should all rant, loudly and often, against racists, misogynists, homophobes, etc.
    - lazide 2y ago
      And where do you think there is evidence of Zuck actually being those things?
      - angoragoats 2y ago
        In every single action he’s taken with respect to the incoming administration over the last several weeks.