[durkie]

how is it a "virtue signal"? what are they signalling?

i'm curious where morality fits in to anything in your worldview if telling the (well-documented) history of a forcible displacement of a people is "virtue signalling" and "getting the morality into it".

[dijit]

Virtue signaling is the expression of a conspicuous, self-righteous moral viewpoint with the intent of communicating good character. It doesn't actually have to be virtuous, it only needs to signal virtue to others.

Virtue signalling usually does not genuinely solve anything anyway it's merely supposed to impress upon you that "this person is good", that's the entire goal. Whether it's meaningful or not doesn't enter into it.

[fnordpiglet]

On the other hand, the article could also just be the expression of a strongly held personal belief about some injustice in the world.

The virtue signaling meme tends to be a way of denigrating strongly held beliefs that conflict with the person calling “virtue signaling” in some way, and frankly is a virtue signal of its own. There’s literally no need to call people out for “virtue signaling” other than to stand up themselves for other like minded (often conservative) folks.

Frankly I read this as more a strongly held personal belief that something was wrong and they are doing their small thing against it. They could have just done their actions in silence, but that’s not nearly as effective as enlisting your fellows in the cause you identify.

I personally didn’t know any of the history, and while I take the stated facts with a grain of salt. But I found it an interesting read, and if it is largely true, what happened is outrageous. I’m not divesting my TLD, but it definitely sickens me to know this happened and my country is complicit and actively a part of it.

[hurrdurr56]

Oh, oh yeah? W-well I am just so upset about historical injustice that I am boycotting ALL the TLDs. I just care so much more than the rest of you I guess. Yeah that's right, get on my level, shirtlords. I'm not "virtue signaling", I really care, like totally.

[undersuit]

That was always allowed. What's your IP?

[hurrdurr56]

IP Addresses are very problematic as they were developed primarily by White Male Cis-Het Oppressors who undoubtedly incorporated their implicit biases into the system in order to cyber-colonize marginalized persons. They were developed in the United States which literally had legalized slavery for much of its history. If you use an IP Address you are literally supporting slavery and systemic racism. Wow just wow.

[Apocryphon]

There should be a term to describe those who hurl accusations of virtue signaling as an act of virtue signaling. Virtue countersignaling, if you will.

[u32480932048]

The phrase "strongly-held beliefs" brings to mind XKCD's "clinically-studied ingredient"[1]: flat-earthers, neo-nazis, and GWB's CIA strongly believe(d) in all kinds of things. I'm not sure being "strongly held" makes a belief undeserving of denigration.

I think most people (including myself) find virtue signaling annoying for two reasons: first, it's usually conveyed in a smug, self-righteous, and even accusatory attitude, and second, because it rarely contributes anything or furthers discourse. In fact, it almost always stifles it. It's useful to call it out for the discourse-limiting technique it is, right up there with whataboutism, sealioning, etc.

Secondly, there's a belief hinted at in your justification that one must have an opinion on everything - that "silence is violence". You're either for (or sometimes against) the Current Thing, or else you're a fascist puppy-kicker who wants the terrorists to win. There's no in-between, no nuance, no additional considerations allowed. (See also: "That's a [republican|democrat|communist|nazi] talking point!") Virtue signalers communicate in talking points, betraying their tenuous grasp of a subject they have (ostensibly) strongly-held beliefs on.

Furthermore, in my personal experience, the loudest virtue signalers always seem to be the worst humans, so there's a kind of stomach-turning hypocrisy when (e.g.) you see someone who you know kicked puppies all through high school and college never shuts up about what a dog person he is (because dogs are good and people who don't like dogs are Bad; therefore, they are Good because they like dogs). Or the dirtbag who creeps out girls constantly posting feminist memes, illustrating that women can definitely feel comfortable around him. That is, it's not the dogs or feminism that's disgusting.

The way that "wokes" (where "woke" = "shitlib", shifted left) employ virtue signals is distinct from leftists engaged in debate, starting with the complete lack of dialectics. The conversation exists not to exchange information, reach an agreement, elucidate facts, or any of the normal reasons people discuss and debate things. Instead, it appears only to serve the external image projected by the speaker/author, whether erudition or to assert they're a Good Person™.

Part of it can be blamed on "eternal September" of sorts, where each year, a new group of freshmen are learning for the very first time that the world isn't as simple as their parents and high school teachers taught them. That sometimes, what's written was written for political and ideological rather than factual purposes (e.g., Columbus). It should engage a healthy dose of skepticism or criticality - even outrage - but the trend here in America seems more contrarian than critical, and it manifests in daft conclusions[2].

To further illustrate my point, I have many friends and family that are Spanish-speaking-born-outside-the-USA hispanic. Many of them work with other immigrants from all over the world, and I've sat around with people who each speak a different language and had totally reasonable conversations on all kinds of hot-button issues. We share, we learn, we shake our heads at each others' misunderstandings, and sometimes even call each other names. It only becomes a hostile shitshow when a white, liberal, middle-class, college-educated dork shows up and starts trying to rank Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, Dominicans, Nigerians, Ugandans, Albanians, etc on their overly-simple oppression ranking scale, or shitlibsplaining to a native Spanish speaker about how they should use "Latinx" because Genders Bad. Usually, they just get laughed at, but it's devolved into some pretty heated situations that could have been avoided simply by shutting up and listening, instead of explaining to Ugandans and Haitians that their struggles are basically the same.

Another anecdote was a local in town who routinely inserted themselves into things that didn't concern them, often with a great sense of moral superiority. One day, they appointed themselves in charge of telling homeless people which side of the street they should be on. After lecturing the homeless white lady on race and that she needs to give up her spot to the black homeless man, she informed him that he assaulted her and took her spot, and that's why she was cry-screaming on the corner. He let out a literal shriek and tried to back out of it with a feeble "can't we all just get along" before the homeless guy assaulted him for interfering at all.

It was "her" spot. She sat there damn near every day. The dude was acting erratically and ended up going to the hospital - but the facts didn't matter - his mental health didn't matter - her physical safety didn't matter - only this simple, stupid, binary scale of oppression (to be created and enforced by you-guessed-it: overeducated and underemployed upper-middle-class white kids), and - presumably - the ability to go home and post on social media about what a Good Person™ he was to teach this homeless lady about her privileges he just learned about last semester.

Their blatant ignorance and racism shows through when they start generalizing about these peoples' countries, cultures, languages, etc through their own distorted lens; they expose their colonizer parts by lecturing South Americans on how they should change their language to match The Correct Idea of Gender; flaunt their internalized white supremacy by asserting themselves as the ad-hoc police, etc, etc, etc. On the bright side, at least they understand they're not allowed to call the cops if they get punched in the face by anyone with darker skin or a thicker accent than they have.

In short, it's so often transparently performative and done with such a repulsive attitude that their lectures are frankly beneath contempt, even if some of their talking points are occasionally correct/agreeable.

  [1] https://xkcd.com/1096/
  [2] https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2023/10/29/the_disfiguring_prism_of_oppressor_and_oppressed_149977.html

[Turing_Machine]

A prime example: "Acknowledging that you're on Comanche (or whoever) land".

This "acknowledgment" never seems to involve paying any rent to the Comanche for being on "their land", nor doing anything else that actually benefits the Comanche.

Taking the 15 seconds to add this to your social media profile means you can signal to everyone what a Good Person you are without ever having to actually do anything.

[pookha]

I like your example. The Comanche were imperialists that almost exterminated the Apache....Raided a thousand miles into Mexico and into Tropical environments. Killed everything in sight. Wiped out thousands of naive white settlers. And when they killed it wasn't quick. Many accounts of them skinning people alive (some children). US was only able to get a handle on the Comanche by killing off their food supply, and that was deep into the 1870's. After they surrendered the war chief (who was psychotic) became a successful rancher and would go on hunts with US presidents. Which just goes to show how small the line between full blown raider and adjusted law abiding member of society is. And maybe that's why people feel the need to virtue signal. subconscious hedge.

[pseudalopex]

Some indigenous people believe land acknowledgements are a good 1st step. Some believe they are a waste of time. But the 2nd group don't claim the 1st group don't exist.

Voluntary land tax programs exist.[1] They seem to benefit from land acknowledgements.

[1] https://nativegov.org/news/voluntary-land-taxes/

[Turing_Machine]

It doesn't matter what they "believe". They get little or no tangible benefit from someone posting that bullshit (and it is bullshit) on their Facebook or Twitter profile.

> Voluntary land tax programs exist.

I'm not seeing any actual dollar figures there, nor in any of the linked examples, except the Duwamish site which mentions some guy paying $18/month. The mean rent for a one bedroom apartment in Seattle is around $2,000/month.

Paying a token amount like that doesn't make it any less virtue-signaling.

[pseudalopex]

Is it inconceivable their stated goal of enabling the Chagossians to profit from .io sales was even part of their motivation?

[PhasmaFelis]

Mind you, plenty of people blithely dismiss any stated belief that they disagree with as "virtue signalling." Basically implying that their opinions are so objectively correct that no one could sincerely disagree, only fake it to appeal to malcontents, who are presumably also faking it.

[Hizonner]

That's too charitable. People's usual motivation to complain about "virtue signaling" is that they personally are amoral pieces of garbage, and would prefer that other people not punish amoral-piece-of-garbageness in any way, because they would find that inconvenient.

[javajosh]

I think you ably demonstrate the all or nothing fallacy that powers this type of bully advocacy. My way or the highway is used to get people on the same page at first. Then it's used to make more and more tenuous assertions about morality, assertions which coincidentally conform very specifically and in great detail to the needs wants desires and worldviews of the bully.

The sooner the victim rejects the entire program, the better. Morality is not and has never been a simple issue easily resolved by dogma. In fact, I'd argue the the worst periods of human misery are dominated by dogmatic thinking and righteous bullying. It is bitterly ironic that people who enjoy the fruit of freedom willfully seek to undermine that progress. It is everyone's right to be stupid if they so choose but so too. Is it my right to judge them self-destructive and contemptible.

[riffic]

a signal of competence, by fundamentally understanding how domains work.