Hacker News Reader

Comment by peter_retief | Hacker News Reader

We are in the age of "virtue signalling" people pretend to hold what they believe are popular virtues. Is it possible to mention "Donald Trump" and not cause an uproar of virtue signalling?

View on HN

Virtue signalling is only a subset of this problem. It's an important one because of the way it interacts with human psychology, but it's not the whole story. This goes into things like "not being able to post those photos of me getting blasted last weekend", being unable to partition one's identity such that you might be able to keep your sexual orientation details away from people you may not want to know them, and all sorts of other things well beyond the political issues of the day. (Sexual orientation may be a "big political issue" too, but in this case I'm referring to the personal dimensions of those issues.)

I absolutely agree with you about the subset however the fear of being different is huge and I believe that plays into what people say online. People have lost jobs with inappropriate online rants, sometimes racial or religious discrimination sometimes being negative toward an employer or even looking for another job. Wrong signals can cost you a lot. I am really glad it is been debated/discussed

"Virtue Signaling" is the most asinine, mean-spirited concept invented since about the middle ages. Its only ever used as a blanket dismissal of others' opinions, even going so far as to blatantly use the moral strength of an argument as a weapon against that argument.

Sure, my wife would mostly agree with you, I don't totally disagree either but try and see the context in why it has become widely used I am going to give you with a quote from Antifragile by Nassim Nicholas Taleb - “Never listen to a leftist who does not give away his fortune or does not live the exact lifestyle he wants others to follow. What the French call “the caviar left,” la gauche caviar, or what Anglo-Saxons call champagne socialists, are people who advocate socialism, sometimes even communism, or some political system with sumptuary limitations, while overtly leading a lavish lifestyle, often financed by inheritance—not realizing the contradiction that they want others to avoid just such a lifestyle. It is not too different from the womanizing popes, such as John XII, or the Borgias. The contradiction can exceed the ludicrous as with French president François Mitterrand of France who, coming in on a socialist platform, emulated the pomp of French monarchs. Even more ironic, his traditional archenemy, the conservative General de Gaulle, led a life of old-style austerity and had his wife sew his socks.”

That's pretty asinine too. You're not allowed to advocate a different life than the one you're leading? It's like the people saying you can't promote a greener environment if you still own a car. It's just another way of shutting them up by creating ridiculous moral standards and acting like you've 'caught them' at an inconsistency. Life is full of inconsistencies.

It's also too simple to equate advocating wealth redistribution with needing to give away your money. Giving away your fortune is probably not the best angle for wealth redistribution. Certain rules of fairness for the wealth redistribution may be needed. For example, it may be useful to fight for rules that get all relatively rich people to join in (aka taxes), which will create a much more powerful push for equality.

Yes, there are people who use their wealth and influence responsibly for the betterment of others, this is the opposite of "trading in virtue"

It's a perfectly coherent political position to advocate for higher taxes, including oneself, without being willing to unilaterally give away money. In fact that's the basis of all taxation. And there are many on left, including lots with money, who are advocating for higher taxes for themselves, Warren Buffet being the obvious example.

I agree but I must also point out that in some parts of the country not being a Trump supporter could have serious social consequences. The entire country is not San Francisco.

As much as I love this site and what it provides, the last sentence of your comment should be an all-caps sticky message on the front page at all times... :)

Hah.

It's not just HN. When I talk to other companies I often get asked "are you in the Valley or the city?" Answer: we are in SoCal, so keep going South. Sometimes they are surprised, though they seem to find it reassuring that we're still in California. If we were in Texas or North Carolina I could see that being disorienting to some people.

We're in an era of accusing other people of "virtual signaling" instead of actually discussing what people say.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com