Left Wing "virtue signaling"?

[Hercules56]

Is virtue signaling a real phenomenon, and is it specifically unique to left-wing AKA liberal and progressive people?

I believe the idea that people or expose outward symbols of their commitment to certain beliefs or ideas but they aren't really committed by actual efforts or constructive activities. Or they are a truly committed but they still engage in unnecessary signaling to the world of how wonderful they are due to their commitment to whatever cause.

Thoughts? Ideas? Prayers?

I think virtue signaling is a real phenomenon a little bit more on the left. BLM and "We Stand with Ukraine" and "Bigotry has no place here" signs are all the rage in suburban communities throughout the USA. In the '90s people used to wear red ribbons to show the world how committed they are to ending the AIDS crisis. There is even a Seinfeld episode about getting criticized for not wearing a red ribbon which is the epitome of this issue.

On the flip side there are many right-wing people who accuse anyone of ever expressing any commitments to a belief of simply virtue signaling by which they are suggesting that all such comments of support are fraudulent and dishonest, and they are just trying to get brownie points for being such a wonderful person even though they don't truly have any meaningful commitment to the issue. I believe the concept of virtue signaling is a mixture of legitimate and also dishonest feigned commitment so it's complex.

 

[Jim_MDP]

"... more on the left." Really?
I'm not saying it isn't, just that it's so prevalent across all of human behavior I don't know if it could be fairly assessed.

I mean... what the hell do you think American flags on the porch, and crufixes on the living room wall are?

 

[Shalamar]

MAGA hats are an excellent example of virtue signaling on the right.
I'll also note the prevalence of the American Flag with the Blue stripe.
NRA stickers on cars.

Virtue Signaling is not a Left thing, nor a right thing.

It's a human thing.

 

[bruto]

I think if we were to unload the phrase (not that we can, these days - that ship sailed) we could use it to describe an expression of ideology that is not necessarily fraudulent or hypocritical, but lacking depth, passion or productivity. What does a "Free Tibet" bumper sticker do except announce your position?

But what I think is a mistake is the assumption that most people using the term make, which is that it is hypocritical, that people don't have a right to make their position clear unless they're manning the barricades. I don't think there's much point in a bumper sticker declaring your position on Asian affairs, but it's also not a sign of hypocrisy or wrongness by default. Similarly, I see a lot of "Black Lives Matter" flags and signs here in Vermont, where very few Black people are to be seen. They represent a real opinion, and one can at least hope they represent a trend toward real action. They do not require that the people flying the flags drop what they're doing and march on Washington.

It's become a right wing catchword phrase, like "social justice warrior," and the like, and I think it should be abandoned entirely, especially because everybody who has an opinion voices it, and any fool can call it virtue signalling. Wear a cross necklace? A flag lapel button? A bumper sticker? The people these days who are most wont to shout "virtue signaling" seem mostly to be the very people who see no contradiction in declaring the flag a holy icon, while at the same time displaying black and white and blue travesties of it, waving Bibles, and lecturing us all about sin in between sleazy affairs and secret abortions.

In other words, I think virtue signaling is pretty universal. Jesus told us we should practice our virtue in secret, but that he had to say it suggests that it has always been an issue. And certainly damned few Christians these days remember, as they loudly mouth the Lord's prayer, or seek to have it engraved in the public squares, the back story.

But unlike the thing itself, the use of the term is almost always, if not always, right wing code for what they see as hypocritical posturing of people they don't like, espousing things they don't like. Which of course means that for me, when I hear the term, I automatically assume that the utterance comes from a right wing hypocrite, arguing catchphrases in default of substance, and am likely to tune out whatever follows.

 

[angrysoba]

It’s absolutely not confined to the left.

Think of extreme forms of patriotic exhibitionism or ostentatious religiosity. Are those left-wing things?

Also, is Ukraine solely a left-wing concern? I mean, it seems to me that most people whether they are moderately left wing or moderately conservative are supporters of Ukraine in the face of Russia’s invasion. Those that are either against sending arms to Ukraine or those who argue that Putin is justified tend to be on the far right and far left, and their support of Ukraine is itself often a kind of narcissistic virtue signaling as they like to claim they “think for themselves” while promoting the same Greenwald-Mearsheimer-Taibbi talking points.

 

[Thermal]

I think if we were to unload the phrase (not that we can, these days - that ship sailed) we could use it to describe an expression of ideology that is not necessarily fraudulent or hypocritical, but lacking depth, passion or productivity. What does a "Free Tibet" bumper sticker do except announce your position?

But what I think is a mistake is the assumption that most people using the term make, which is that it is hypocritical, that people don't have a right to make their position clear unless they're manning the barricades. I don't think there's much point in a bumper sticker declaring your position on Asian affairs, but it's also not a sign of hypocrisy or wrongness by default. Similarly, I see a lot of "Black Lives Matter" flags and signs here in Vermont, where very few Black people are to be seen. They represent a real opinion, and one can at least hope they represent a trend toward real action. They do not require that the people flying the flags drop what they're doing and march on Washington.

It's become a right wing catchword phrase, like "social justice warrior," and the like, and I think it should be abandoned entirely, especially because everybody who has an opinion voices it, and any fool can call it virtue signalling. Wear a cross necklace? A flag lapel button? A bumper sticker? The people these days who are most wont to shout "virtue signaling" seem mostly to be the very people who see no contradiction in declaring the flag a holy icon, while at the same time displaying black and white and blue travesties of it, waving Bibles, and lecturing us all about sin in between sleazy affairs and secret abortions.

In other words, I think virtue signaling is pretty universal. Jesus told us we should practice our virtue in secret, but that he had to say it suggests that it has always been an issue. And certainly damned few Christians these days remember, as they loudly mouth the Lord's prayer, or seek to have it engraved in the public squares, the back story.

But unlike the thing itself, the use of the term is almost always, if not always, right wing code for what they see as hypocritical posturing of people they don't like, espousing things they don't like. Which of course means that for me, when I hear the term, I automatically assume that the utterance comes from a right wing hypocrite, arguing catchphrases in default of substance, and am likely to tune out whatever follows.

/thread.

 

[Hercules56]

MAGA hats are an excellent example of virtue signaling on the right.
I'll also note the prevalence of the American Flag with the Blue stripe.
NRA stickers on cars.

Virtue Signaling is not a Left thing, nor a right thing.

It's a human thing.

A MAGA hat doesn't suggest commitment to any specific social issue, if anything it expresses commitment to being more insular & selfish.

 

[angrysoba]

A MAGA hat doesn't suggest commitment to any specific social issue, if anything it expresses commitment to being more insular & selfish.

Vice-signaling then.

Another way of saying “virtue signaling” is just to claim membership of a tribe. It could be “look at me, I’m one of the lib triggerers!” You might be right that they are actually evil rather than good, but they might think they are good. Might do… although I suppose it would be fair to say that some MAGA people revel in how ****** they appear to others.

 

[smartcooky]

Is virtue signaling a real phenomenon, and is it specifically unique to left-wing AKA liberal and progressive people?

I believe the idea that people or expose outward symbols of their commitment to certain beliefs or ideas but they aren't really committed by actual efforts or constructive activities. Or they are a truly committed but they still engage in unnecessary signaling to the world of how wonderful they are due to their commitment to whatever cause.

Thoughts? Ideas? Prayers?

I think virtue signaling is a real phenomenon a little bit more on the left. BLM and "We Stand with Ukraine" and "Bigotry has no place here" signs are all the rage in suburban communities throughout the USA. In the '90s people used to wear red ribbons to show the world how committed they are to ending the AIDS crisis. There is even a Seinfeld episode about getting criticized for not wearing a red ribbon which is the epitome of this issue.

On the flip side there are many right-wing people who accuse anyone of ever expressing any commitments to a belief of simply virtue signaling by which they are suggesting that all such comments of support are fraudulent and dishonest, and they are just trying to get brownie points for being such a wonderful person even though they don't truly have any meaningful commitment to the issue. I believe the concept of virtue signaling is a mixture of legitimate and also dishonest feigned commitment so it's complex.

Virtue signalling is a fiction. Its just a made up term like "woke" predominantly used to demean those who have a fully functioning moral compass.

 

[d4m10n]

Virtue signalling is a fiction.

Here is an opposing view.


http://cloud.tapatalk.com/s/63532e56b4a4f/s11229-020-02653-9.pdf

 

[angrysoba]

Virtue signalling is a fiction. Its just a made up term like "woke" predominantly used to demean those who have a fully functioning moral compass.

Not sure what it means to say that it is a fiction. It's a concept with a somewhat fuzzy definition. I think it is clear that some people like to present themselves as being Extremely Good People, and sometimes their commitment to portraying themselves that way is stronger than their commitment to actually doing good deeds.

What about the Biblical story of the rich man and the widow? The rich man makes an ostentatious donation and the poor widow gives away what little money she has. One is done with fanfare and the other is not. Is the rich man not engaging in a kind of virtue signalling?

 

[angrysoba]

I also consider the wearing of an over-sized poppy to be virtue signalling.

Link

 

[The Atheist]

A MAGA hat doesn't suggest commitment to any specific social issue, if anything it expresses commitment to being more insular & selfish.

Which are considered virtues by MAGA people.

What you're saying is, people play to the crowd, just like tools with screen names that scream their philosophy.

 

[Hercules56]

Virtue signalling is a fiction. Its just a made up term like "woke" predominantly used to demean those who have a fully functioning moral compass.

That's ridiculous. Clearly some people care more about looking like a good person than actually doing good things.

 

[angrysoba]

Virtue signalling could just be a form of tribalism.

Pretty much everyone signals to their tribe in one form or another.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

With almost no exceptions, all public displays and invocations of Christianity in US politics, local or federal, are Virtue Signaling - with the actual virtue being absent.

 

[d4m10n]

With almost no exceptions, all public displays and invocations of Christianity in US politics, local or federal, are Virtue Signaling - with the actual virtue being absent.

Not to mention all the Jesus fish on business placards.

Sent from my SM-G996U using Tapatalk

 

[Venom]

Regarding the last paragraph of your OP, awareness and messaging matters.

I'll take lip service over honest total noncommitment in most cases. Because people still mostly just absorb stuff they hear from their favorite information sources. Like you mention, now literally every empathetic gesture can be smeared as virtue signalling by the anti-empathy crowd.

I can't measure how effective it is on your audience to simply pretend to care about something vs doing something about it, but I have a feeling it's more effective than not expressing your opinion at all or being actively against it.

 

[smartcooky]

That's ridiculous. Clearly some people care more about looking like a good person than actually doing good things.

Not sure what it means to say that it is a fiction.

By "a fiction" I mean more that it is a made up term for things that already have terms, such as....

....Is the rich man not engaging in a kind of virtue signalling?

where the rich man is just being a conceited arse-hole.

The only times I have ever been accused of "virtue signalling" (at least on this forum) has been by our resident racists, and bigots, usually when they have felt impugned or threatened by me calling out their racism/bigotry.

When someone gets all poutraged and accuses me of virtue signalling, or woke, I wear that as a badge of honour because I now know that person is a snowflake, and I have succeeded in getting under their skin or triggering them.

Here is an opposing view.


http://cloud.tapatalk.com/s/63532e56b4a4f/s11229-020-02653-9.pdf

 

[d4m10n]

Probably my fav virtue signal is when Xn's pray in very public settings, despite Jesus' advice to the contrary.

Sent from my Nagasaki Shinobi using Tapatalk