3 ms·

I prefer cruelty signaling, because there is profound difference between the impact of the two on the world. Insisting on naming things so that "bad thing" and

by watwut 11mo ago

I prefer cruelty signaling, because there is profound difference between the impact of the two on the world. Insisting on naming things so that "bad thing" and "good thing" are undistinguishable is not neutral, it is biased and favors bad actors.

nxor 11mo ago
[flagged]
- ndsipa_pomu 11mo ago
  Can you be specific about when this has happened?
- watwut 11mo ago
  1.) Overwhelming majority of political violence is by right wing. 2.) About Kirk specifically, liberals signaled "murder is bad" hard and frequently. Meanwhile Kirk himself signaled hatred. 3.) Meanwhile, Trump, Vance and Hegseth are constantly signaling "murder is good actually, if we are doing it" and "bullying is manly thing to do". And that is exactly why it is userful to distinguish between "good thing signal" and "bad thing signal". ----------- Conservatives have the option to signal good things. They make different choice.
  - rootusrootus 11mo ago
    > About Kirk specifically I notice that people are largely staying pretty quiet about the politics of the Kirk murder since shortly after it happened. I assume it is because, to the extent there is evidence of any ideology, groyper fits as well as leftist. Maybe better, even.
oneeyedpigeon 11mo ago
Sure, but that's immaterial to this context, which seeks an apolitical term for "says things they don't believe to curry favour".
- watwut 11mo ago
  It is material exactly here. The preference for "ideology signaling" comes from desire to frame both sides as the same. "Cruelty signaling" is very accurate descriptor. It does not even suggest right wing only thing, if someone on the left signals cruelty, they would engage in cruelty signaling. And if someone on the right performatively helps poor, they are engaging in virtue signaling. The trouble is, if the things are called as what they are, you cant say "both sides are the same". Because one side is promoting cruelty and the other is not. > says things they don't believe to curry favour If you do not believe that trans people should be beating up, but say so to look manly to your boss, you still promoted beating of trans.

by watwut 11mo ago

nxor 11mo ago

[flagged]

ndsipa_pomu 11mo ago
Can you be specific about when this has happened?
watwut 11mo ago
1.) Overwhelming majority of political violence is by right wing. 2.) About Kirk specifically, liberals signaled "murder is bad" hard and frequently. Meanwhile Kirk himself signaled hatred. 3.) Meanwhile, Trump, Vance and Hegseth are constantly signaling "murder is good actually, if we are doing it" and "bullying is manly thing to do". And that is exactly why it is userful to distinguish between "good thing signal" and "bad thing signal". ----------- Conservatives have the option to signal good things. They make different choice.
- rootusrootus 11mo ago
  > About Kirk specifically I notice that people are largely staying pretty quiet about the politics of the Kirk murder since shortly after it happened. I assume it is because, to the extent there is evidence of any ideology, groyper fits as well as leftist. Maybe better, even.

oneeyedpigeon 11mo ago

Sure, but that's immaterial to this context, which seeks an apolitical term for "says things they don't believe to curry favour".

watwut 11mo ago
It is material exactly here. The preference for "ideology signaling" comes from desire to frame both sides as the same. "Cruelty signaling" is very accurate descriptor. It does not even suggest right wing only thing, if someone on the left signals cruelty, they would engage in cruelty signaling. And if someone on the right performatively helps poor, they are engaging in virtue signaling. The trouble is, if the things are called as what they are, you cant say "both sides are the same". Because one side is promoting cruelty and the other is not. > says things they don't believe to curry favour If you do not believe that trans people should be beating up, but say so to look manly to your boss, you still promoted beating of trans.