Episode 18 - The Rise of Vice Signaling

Vice signaling has overtaken much of modern discourse - but what is it? How does it differ from, and share similarities with, virtue signaling? How do we stop it? Should we stop it? Evan answers these questions and also talks about a couple of additional "DLC topics" during this show.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Wiktionary definition of vice signaling 

Urban Dictionary definition of vice signaling 

Link to the Parliamentary debate over Vladimir Putin jumping the shark

https://theenglishchronicle.com/News/12155/ 

https://www.salon.com/2026/01/29/vice-signaling-explains-trumps-enduring-appeal/

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2026/feb/11/vice-signalling-how-hatred-poisoned-politics?CMP=oth_b-aplnews_d-1

A conservative article about why vice signaling is bad

https://www.firstpost.com/explainers/iran-war-embassies-trolling-us-trump-memes-saracasm-13997076.html

https://www.cbc.ca/radio/frontburner/iran-and-the-propaganda-war-9.7150601

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Come join our community on Discord! https://discord.gg/dpXe9p5Nkf

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If you enjoy the show, and wish to help defray costs, feel free to give a tip on Ko-Fi, or on Buzzsprout.

https://ko-fi.com/evanextemporaneous

https://www.buzzsprout.com/2554066/support

Any such contribution is never necessary, but greatly appreciated. Thank you. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Intro music: Groovy Trip Hop/Marcolaieh/Tribe of Noise

Outro music: You Make Me/VBEBeats/Tribe of Noise 

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:00

A lot of the most profound movements that have helped shape and form society as we see it today came at great personal cost to their advocates, to their proponents. This country, the United States, would not have been able to exist. The greatest country on the face of the earth could not exist. If all the founders did was virtue signal. Or if they spent all of their time, you know, making propaganda that was dunking on King George and and the British military. They needed to go pick up their guns. They needed to go and fight for our freedoms. I'm your show host, Evan Buck, and always remember, the buck stops right here, because we are looking out for you. Today I'm going to be talking about the rise of vice signaling and its effects on the modern political landscape. Now, in order to understand what vice signaling is, I think it's important for us to first take a look at what the opposite term means and kind of where vice signaling came from. And that's the idea of virtue signaling. Virtue signaling is essentially performative behavior. It's meant to indicate to an audience, to the public, especially on social media, it these are actions that are taken that are meant to show your support for some sort of great cause or something or other without actually meaningfully taking action or getting involved in what is actually going on and actually producing real change. One of the most common examples of this that I could think of was is this idea of greenwashing, which is where companies are very much incentivized to just completely blow up their positive environmental impacts. And you know, there's a lot of reasons for this. It can be done for tax subsidies, it can be done for good public relations material, especially with environmentally conscious consumers. So they can, you know, take some pictures of them going out and planting some trees at the local park and be like, oh hey, we're helping to remove, you know, two tons of carbon dioxide every year just by planting these trees, and meanwhile, they're polluting the local river. You know, they're not really actually doing much of anything to really positively benefit the environment. Virtue signaling, I would say, kind of reached its peak with the social media age and kind of with like the first uh Trump administration. Uh this is just kind of my broad perspective from me observing, you know, politics and that sort of and current events, you know, over the last couple decades. Um, you know, the concept I'm sure has been around and has been seen well before that time period, but I would say this sort of performative virtue signaling um, or, you know, and it even continues to this day, I would say one of the greatest examples in recent memory is of uh Billy Eilish. Um, I forget what award show it was, and quite frankly, who gives a rip? I don't care. It was probably the Grammys, but like, yeah, nobody cares about what award show it was at. And Billie Eilish basically was talking about and just screeching about how, you know, oh, we're on stolen land, and wore some sort of pin or something about like Native American rights or whatever. And I just thought it was hilarious that a local tribe which used to own the land or you know, be on the land for Billy Eilish's Malibu Mansion, I'm pretty sure, and maybe this is fake news or something, but I I'm pretty sure like a representative from the tribe was just like, okay, Billy, you you know, you really believe that? Give us your mansion, you know, give us the keys, walk away. You know? And that I think was one of the best examples and most humorous examples of virtue signaling in recent memory. And I think, you know, virtue signaling is pretty easy to understand as a concept. I don't I don't have to belabor the point too much. Now, let's get into what vice signaling is. Vice signaling can be seen as somewhat of the inverse concept of virtue signaling, as I'll be getting into in a little bit. Some writers actually don't think it's helpful to see vice signaling as the exact converse, but for purpose of simplicity and brevity, I'm just gonna define the term here as being the inverse concept of virtue signaling. I actually have a couple definitions up from very strong, credible online sources, Wiktionary and the Urban Dictionary. I hope you guys understand how tongue-in-cheek I'm being with the credibility of those sources. But actually, that does present a really funny, interesting uh story. I used Urban Dictionary one time in a parliamentary debate round in high school. Parliamentary debate, for those who don't know, is a form of debate where you have two people against two people. One side is affirming the topic or the resolution, they're called the government team, and the other side is opposing the resolution or the opposition team. And it's meant to somewhat reflect uh like British parliamentary proceedings. And you don't know the topic until 15 minutes before your debate round begins, and you know you know the side that you'll be on, but you don't know what the topic will be on until you're given it, or you're given like three choices, and then you whittle down the one that you both teams want to debate, and then you go. So the topic was uh something like resolved Vladimir Putin has jumped the shark. And this was back in like 2014 or something like that, and so well before the Ukraine war and all those sorts of things. Um although I do believe Crimea, the annexation of Crimea happened at that point. And so we my partner and I we were affirming the resolution, we were government, and so in order to best define what Jump the Shark meant, we thought it was useful to actually use Urban Dictionary because Urban Dictionary is an online repository of user-based submissions that is often a very useful way to figure out what idioms and figures of speech and expressions actually mean in common colloquial speech. And we also, you know, gave a background point on where the term Jump the Shark actually came from. Uh came from, I believe it was a show called Happy Days, uh, where towards the end of that show's run, you know, in the last couple seasons, it wasn't really as good of a show as it used to be, and there was an episode where I believe one of the main characters uh was drawn by a jet ski and uh or you know, had on skis and you know was jet skiing on a boat and flew over a pen of sharks. And, you know, that was uh you know a way to get people to be interested in the show and tune into it. But uh suffice it to say, that of course kind of showed that the show was running out of ideas, and so jumping the shark, of course, meant that you're kind of over the hill, you know, you your time's up, like there isn't really uh you know, it's all downhill from here, basically. Like you you're kind of past your prime. And so we didn't end up winning that round. Um, but we had a really fun time. Um, it was a good round. And um I actually might put that in the show notes. I I have that on uh my old YouTube channel where I uploaded a lot of my old speeches and debates and stuff. So yeah, that was a good time. But anyway, so you know, very tongue-in-cheek, obviously Urban Dictionary is not an actual credible scholarly source, but for purposes of that debate and for the art and I think we had a strong argument that using Urban Dictionary to define a pop culture term, you know, a common colloquialism, a common idiom, you know, I I think we actually had a good point there. So let's look at what Wiktionary says. Wiktionary defines vice signaling as the practice of expressing a particular opinion or performing a particular action that is immoral, hateful, or cruel, but popular with the social group that one is signaling to to signal allegiance to or seek popularity with that group. And Wiktionary notably lists virtue signaling as the antonym for this. There's the antonym meaning the opposite. And then Urban Dictionary defines vice signaling in this way. The other side of the coin to virtue signaling. Rather than angling for praise by performatively proclaiming their support for certain causes, vice signaling involves attempting to show off their good person credentials by performatively approving of harm or other bad things that have befallen others. Like virtue signaling, vice signaling is largely a tribal act, a way for the speaker to associate themselves with certain other groups, causes, or ideals. Also like virtue signaling, vice signaling is a means of doing this without actually showing any follow-through or doing any tangible anything tangible for the cause it apparently supports. Much like adding a filter to your Facebook profile to support group X doesn't actually accomplish anything, tweeting your support for violence against group Y serves to gain edgy clout without actually taking any meaningful action. The definition goes on a little bit, but I feel I have read enough to kind of get the overall essential point across as to what vice signaling is. So, with the terms defined, this leads us to an important question. A very fundamental premise to work through. Can virtue, and conversely vice, only be demonstrated by action, or can it also be demonstrated by words as well? I think a central premise of the rightful critiques against both virtue signaling and vice signaling is that neither of them really actually accomplished anything meaningful in the real world. I think a great example of virtue signaling is uh Twitter users putting different countries' flags in their Twitter bio to indicate support for or against like a different side in a war, like the Israel flag or the Palestinian flag, you know, for those sides of the war, the Ukraine flag, the Russian flag. Um, you know, it doesn't accomplish anything in the real world. It doesn't help a single hurt soldier, it doesn't help bring any resolution to the conflict. But it's just their way of show of performatively proclaiming to everybody on the internet, hey, look at me, I support this side or that side. It doesn't really accomplish anything. However, I do think that it is erroneous to say that virtue signaling and vice signaling have no impact whatsoever, or that our words are not, in fact, important. I'm gonna read a quote from the English Chronicle, and I'm gonna put all the links to everything that I'm citing in the show notes, by the way, um, because there's a lot of you know good material that I've looked up in preparation for this episode. The concept, uh, meaning the concept of vice signaling, developed as a counterpoint to the older idea of virtue signaling in public political debate. Virtue signaling described low-cost moral positioning that projected decency without demanding serious personal sacrifice from advocates. Vice signaling operates differently, because it rewards provocation and hostility instead of courtesy or inclusive social language. Experts in discourse studies explain that it functions through shock value and repeated boundary violations. Each breach resets expectations and makes harsher statements appear less extreme over time. Observers often trace the modern breakthrough of this style to campaign-era political messaging after 2015. High profile campaign launches included unscripted remarks targeting migrants and minorities using emotionally charged generalizations and claims. Those moments drew intense criticism, yet generated enormous media exposure and voter recognition for their authors. Communication scholars say this demonstrated how outrage can convert directly into visibility and political brand strength. The method soon spread beyond one country and appeared across several right-leaning movements internationally. So this presents an interesting point which I'll be getting into later on in this show, but it's this idea of can we just tie virtue signaling to the left wing of the political spectrum and vice signaling to the right wing of the political spectrum? I am not going to get into that now, because I think that's something that we'll be getting into later, but I do want to tackle the central question that I have presented here is can virtue only be demonstrated by action or by words as well? Well, in order to answer this, I think one of the best resources we can consult is God's Word. And it says, for example, in the book of James, that faith without works is dead. But Jesus also says that it is not what goes into a man that defiles a man, but rather what comes out of a man. And, you know, scripturally speaking, the heart is where we as humans process, meditate, think about, and is the source of all of our, you know, moral decision-making. And that's why it says in Proverbs, to guard your heart, from out of it springs forth the issues of life. So obviously, intent is important, and thinking is important in terms of determining moral actions, and therefore the words that we say do have a lot of impact and do matter very much. And James, again, also talks a lot about how the power of the tongue, and you know, uses a lot of very stark analogies like deadly poison or a rudderless ship or setting a forest on fire, to talk about the potentially terrible negative impacts of an untamed tongue. So I think that it's too far an argument to say that virtue signaling and vice signaling do absolutely nothing to public discourse and don't really actually do anything at all. I do think that it can be part of shifting the Overton window, the con the Overton window being the concept of what is defined as acceptable or unacceptable as possible or impossible in terms of public discourse and in terms of the political climate, things that are able to be accomplished. I do think that there is, I guess to a certain degree, some measure of value in virtue signaling. Because, hey, even if it is maybe hypocritical, or if it is, you know, performative and it's meant it has bad motives behind it, it's not really actually doing anything positive, it's at least a positive message, or hopefully a positive message that is going out. Now, a lot of times, perhaps these are causes that are, you know, problems in search of a solution, um, or sorry, solutions in in search of a problem, or they are the wrong solution to the two and our actually existing problem. But I do think it's somewhat similar to, I forget what book this is in, but Paul talks about how there are some people who preach Christ, and they're doing it for the wrong reasons. They're doing it to gain credibility, to gain clout, to gain money. He's like, hey, I don't think they're good guys, I don't think they're good people, but at least they're preaching the name of Jesus. Right? At least they're preaching the right gospel. That's of course not ideal, it's not certainly not a good situation, but like it's better to have, you know, the gospel being preached than for it to not be preached at all. Vice signaling, of course, can also accomplish the opposite, and it can help degrade the public discourse and make certain previously unacceptable things that should stay unacceptable, come back into the limelight and, you know, be accepted again. But I think it also can be useful, even a little bit, in terms of course correction, in terms of bringing some sense of balance after having gone through and lived in a world where there was intense political correctness, um, to where it was very difficult to be able to say anything of real substance without being accused of being a racist or a misogynist or a homophobe or any of these things. So I think to answer the question, yeah, virtue can can and often is demonstrated first primarily by how we conduct ourselves in terms of our actions, but also by how by what we say. And, you know, do as I say, not as I do, that's you know, hypocrisy. Do our actions line up with what we say? And do do we live a life that seems to be consistent with the value system that we have claimed for ourselves and construct for ourselves? I think those are important questions that help us as we talk about this whole idea of vice signaling. This then leads us into a little bit of a discussion about what makes virtue signaling so irritating and ineffectual, and why it may force people, I don't want to really want to say force people, but it it may incentivize people to turn to vice signaling as a result. Virtue signaling is very irritating, I think, to a lot of people, because it's easy to say something from, you know, from a high perch, from an ivory tower, right? It really speaks to this idea of elitism and this idea that, you know, the people who are commenting or, you know, more going on these moralistic crusades don't actually have to do anything of real world impact to be able to impact the cause that they are talking about. Virtue signaling really just illustrates how performative. Our society has become it, I mean, nothing's new under the sun. Like a lot of times people have been seeking clout and seeking influence and very safe ways to be able to preach against bad things or you know be on the popular side of an argument. You know, yeah, politicians have done this forever, so like it's nothing new per se. But it's just something that I think so the age of social media has really turbocharged and accentuated. And so it reminds people of just all of these yucky tendencies, the the the inauthenticity of people. And something else that makes virtue signaling just so annoying is that there could be a good cause that is actually being signaled. There could be something that is genuinely good that is now being lumped in with these hypocritical, inauthentic movements or choices. And it just yeah, it just really makes things a lot more difficult for people who who are actually affecting change in the real world. I think of the verse in, I want to say it's in Matthew 6, where Jesus talks about how the Pharisees, you know, go about and trumpet their good works on the street corners, you know, or they disfigure their faces to show everyone that, oh, I'm holy and righteous, and I've been fasting and all this stuff. So again, not a new concept. But you know, the Lord knows the thoughts and intents of our hearts, and even back then, you know, things have not changed all that much. Human nature has fundamentally stayed the same for thousands of years. So why do people vice signal? Ultimately, I think people vice signal in a somewhat weird, twisted, perverse way, for a lot of the same reasons that people virtue signal. I think people vice signal in large part to gain acceptance, to become part of a in crowd. Now the methodology is completely different, of course. The methodology is to is like a race to the bottom to become more brazen, more perverse, more profane, breaking social norms and taboos in order to show that you're a tough guy or a tough girl, or that you're able to fight political correctness. You're not woke, you know? So again, this is this is a lot of stuff that you oftentimes see on the right-hand side of the political spectrum. But I don't think it's purely a right-wing issue. I do think that vice signaling also happens on the left. Case in point, a lot of the online discourse that I see um in certain communities with people actively hating, openly hating, on those that they deem homophobic or transphobic, um, you know, people that they see, you know, that work for ICE, immigration and customs enforcement, and they're demanding that they be unmasked and you know that they dox them, and uh doxing those of you who are unfamiliar is basically the um online revealing of personal private information about individuals who you know wish to keep that information private. Things such as their full name, their job, their you know, where they live, and is primarily for the purpose of you know shaming them and you know getting them fired from their job and things like that. So I don't think vice signaling is only a right-wing issue. I think oftentimes people on the left often also vice signal in order to show that they are tough, that they're willing to fight against the current administration, you know, resist and all that. And I do think that virtue signaling can also happen on the right as well, like what I mentioned earlier. You know, a lot of times it's the left that puts, you know, the Ukraine flag or the Palestinian flag or the Iranian flag or whatever in their Twitter bios. But like, I see conservative uh people put the American flag and uh the Israeli flag and some of the more extreme, you know, conservative people put Russian flags or whatever. Like, that's not very common, of course, but I have seen it happen. And so I don't think this is an exclusively a right or left issue, one or the other. But I will say, I do think just psychologically, uh the left-hand side of the spectrum, of the political spectrum, is more inclined to virtue signal. And the right, I would say, as a reaction, because of their anti-wokeness and their, you know, all of this stuff, anti-DEI, they kind of want to outdo that, and they swing to the other side of the of the spectrum. The pendulum swings the opposite direction into vice signaling. But again, that's a tendency. That's not 100% one way or the other. So I kind of already went through this, but why do people vice signal? People, I think, and you know, I started talking about this, vice signaling, to me, really just mainly seems to be about tribalism and acceptance, and really seeking to push the argument or push the narrative into places that perhaps Virtue Signalers, or the more woke, you know, politically correct side of the political spectrum, would rather keep off limits. Now there is one article from Ceylon, which by the way, most all of these articles that I have seen about vice signaling tend to be from left-of-center publications, and they tend to deride Trump and other forces like in Argentina or the UK as you know, whipping up this sort of vice signaling hysteria. Regardless of, again, what you believe politically, um, I do think this is an issue that applies to both sides, but just keep in mind, you know, for those of my listeners who are on either side, you might be thinking, why why do you have just left-wing sources? Isn't that a you know biased thing? Oh, let me tell you, it's kind of hard to find conservative sources that talk about this. I'm sure they're out there, and in fact, I might do a little more research and put one or two in my show notes afterwards, but again, just keep in mind. The tendencies for either side mean that you're going to find more sources from one side of the aisle talking about it in a disparaging manner. But there is a quote that I'd like to read from Salon, and they actually quoted an author who I am sorry, I am not good at reading. I believe this uh person, is this a gentleman or is this a or is this a lady? Like I don't I don't know these names. Um this is an African name. Um it's a gentleman. Okay. Um so I'm just gonna read this name and leave it at that. Um just know I'm trying to do my very best. Um Salon quotes a philosopher and writer by the name of Olufemi Otaiwo. He says, A virtue signaler is trying to look good, and a vice signaler is trying to look bad, but not to everyone. A vice signaler typically violates moral or other standards of an out group precisely in order to look good to the fellow members of some in-group. Vice signaling, then, is typically a version of virtue signaling rather than an alternative to it. But there's an important catch. When we virtue signal, we are appealing to our tribe's own values, however shallow or hypocritical such appeals might be. It is the fact that our in-group treats supporting a charity or using those pronouns as a demonstration of kindness and respect that allows one to try to gain clout by adhering to the rules, despite having less savory motivations in one's secret heart. But when one vice signals, the out-group's values take center stage, in order to be shirked rather than lived up to. The moral commitments of the in-group are basically irrelevant. All that matters is owning the enemy. In Trump's case, the libs. And the more one relies on vice signaling as a style of action and communication, the less relevant and powerful the in-group's moral compass is as a practical constraint on anyone's behavior. And then I'm that's the quote, that's where that quote ends, and I'm gonna read another sentence from Salon. In other words, vice signaling is about naked corrupt power and the ability to impose it on others with impunity. The message says I can do what I want when I want, for whatever reason I want, and you have to take it. So I think that that is a very interesting way of looking at vice signaling and both comparing it to virtue signaling in the end, but also showing that there's really a different dimension or component to it. And after this quick little break for a couple of DLC topics, or what I you know, I refer to them as DLC topics, they're basically extra topics that I like to throw in to kind of change pace a little bit, get us thinking about other issues or or other things going on in the world, take a little mental break from this the main topic of the podcast. After we look at those DLC topics, um we'll talk about how to solve for this issue. Is it really is virtu is virtue and vice signaling really something that should be stamped out? And if so, how do we go about getting rid of it? And calling it out when other people do, in fact do these things. But with that out of the way, let's get into the DLC topics for today. I only have two, and they both deal with relatively recent current events, so they're gonna date this episode quite substantially, but if the timestamp on this episode's upload date already didn't date this episode enough, I don't know what will. I do try to keep these episodes on topics that are, you know, relevant, salient, cogent, but also I'm not the evening news. I'm not something I'm not just a news show and I just breathlessly report on every single little thing that happens every day or every week. It's not really my vibe. But I do think there are two events that are very much worth noting, and things that it'll be interesting to look back on. Um my central topic of this show anyway is more timeless, so having the DLC be a little bit more current events is uh well, I don't think I'm stepping too out of line for that. I mean it's my show after all. I can I can do what I want with my own show. But anyway, the Artemis II mission from NASA has so far been a resounding success. And for those who are unfamiliar with what's going on there, Artemis II is basically a spaceflight mission that has sent four astronauts on a flyby around the moon. And I believe it's uh three American astronauts and one Canadian space agency astronaut that has been on this flight. And it mirrors, I believe, very closely the original intended flight path for Apollo 13, I want to say, the failed one with, you know, Houston we have a problem. Uh great movie, by the way. Apollo 13. Solid movie, really enjoyed it. Um But I I do believe in in practicality it's more like uh what happened with Apollo 8. Um essentially it's it's it's a fly around to the moon using the moon's gravity to kind of yo-yo or sling back uh the spacecraft back to Earth after a flyby of the dark side of the moon. And it's very inspiring to see this happen. And they're I believe they're actually gonna splash down somewhere close to San Diego. Um so that's pretty cool. But that today, uh the time of this recording, uh they actually broke the record for the furthest that any human beings have flown or traveled outside or away from Earth. And you know, they've gotten a lot of stunning photographs. Um, the crew has done a lot of observations and gotten a lot of photographs, and is really laying the groundwork for the next manned mission to the moon, which I believe is gonna be happening uh Artemis III is going to be another like preparation one, and then Artemis IV wanna say is happening in some time in 2030. Um so if all goes according to plan, uh the United States is going to be back on the moon in fairly short order. So it's a pretty inspirational story, and I and one of the astronauts uh actually like extensively quoted the Bible and talked about how his faith matters to him in light of this incredible achievement. Always great to see, always very inspirational. And um I also I should have looked this up before I hopped on the air, but there was a an astronaut who was involved with, I want to say it was one of the last Apollo missions. He m uh passed away sometime last year, and he recorded a message that was meant to be given to the Artemis II crew. Um very touching, very inspirational message, and of encouragement and optimism and and hope. So. Anyway, it'll be interesting to see where things go from here, and in case you've been somehow living under a rock, um this is just a really incredible achievement on the part of the Artemis crew of of NASA, and of course the Canadian Space Agency, and I eagerly look forward to seeing what will happen in the coming years. The last DLC topic is going to be one very specific element of a profoundly controversial topic. It's gonna be uh a specific element of that, and that is the of the United States-Israel-Iran War. Um some are calling it I like the Second Gulf War, or I don't know, you know, some people are calling it part of World War III. Honestly, we don't really know what's going on at this point. I'm not gonna comment on it extensively. Um I mean, it can have a whole episode devoted just alone to it, and I honestly don't know if I am going to cover it because it is such a fast-moving topic, and it is one that I think would be better appreciated as a retrospective as opposed to in the middle of the conflict, with my current show's format, um, how things are going. And it's not that I lack opinions on it by any stretch, but again, I just think it's best for me to handle broader issues and broader topics as opposed to something that's more like the nightly news. However, I did want to comment on one particular aspect of this war, and that is the propaganda. I think it's really fascinating how the United States and Trump and you know a lot of government officials have been using like AI-generated videos and um, you know, just very I'm just gonna say very odd, you know, kind of boomer sorts of memes and videos and pronouncements and threats and all these things to try and win like online public opinion. And regardless of what how you feel about Iran and their government, they have produced some very fascinating AI-generated propaganda of their own, mainly depicting the the war in their terms with AI Lego videos. Yeah, you heard me right. A artificial intelligence Lego videos. And those, to me, I honestly am not very impressed by, being perfectly frank. But what I do find interesting is that Iranian embassies on social media have kind of taken the like the Wendy's approach. You know, the i if you don't know Wendy's the Burger Chain is very famous for having a very sarcastic, um, you know, kind of smug sort of online social media account presence. And uh they're really good at roasting people. So Iranian embassies around the world have been kind of have been basically like replying to Trump on Twitter and kind of and just casually roasting him and some of his, you know, more extreme pronouncements. And again, whatever you feel about the government and what they're doing and the war and what's going on, I will say, those tweets are absolutely hilarious, and I really do think in in terms of perception, like in like a in a lot of things in life, the side that is appearing to have fun and is more relaxed and like actually enjoying themselves, that tends to be the side that is winning the PR campaign, winning the PR war. And I uh just you can just look up some of these tweets, and I'll leave a link to uh a couple articles about this in the show notes. You can see what you know how they're they're responding. I definitely think they have at least a better grasp of of Twitter, for sure, and how to and how to poke fun at some official US statements or pronouncements or some of Trump's 1am tweets. It'll be very interesting seeing how that also plays out moving forward, not just on the battlefield, the literal battlefield, but also on the battleground of online public discourse and opinion. Okay, so we're now done with the DLC topics, and I want to spend a few minutes talking about how to solve for the issues that virtue signaling and vice signaling produce. Like I mentioned before, I think the principles that we can draw from Jesus and Matthew chapter 6 readily apply here. Do not do public acts of penance or you know these performative acts of righteousness, so others can see just how righteous you are. Whether that extends to both virtue or vice signaling. I think the principle is the same. It's not helpful to do these things for the purpose of being seen. Whether that is a primary motivation or a secondary or more hidden motivation, it really shouldn't be something that enters into our calculus whatsoever. I think that in terms of vice signaling as well, one should really check their heart and check their motives and understand that the words that they say do in fact have a profound impact on other people. And we should be using our words to build, to edify, to encourage one another towards good works. You know, speak see speaking in psalms and hymns and spiritual songs, think on what is just, think on what is good, think on what is lovely, what is pure, you know, all of these things. I think those are some good broad principles to kind of help combat them and and really um neutralize the motivations and the negative effects of vice signaling at the Core at their root. It's hard to deny that controversy and negative attention are still attention, and especially in this eyeball economy, you know, driven by clicks, driven by likes, social media algorithms. It can admittedly be very hard to get a start, and, you know, really be able to climb above the ranks and get attention. I should know for myself, this podcast doesn't really have a big audience. Not that I necessarily particularly care about that. I'd rather have quality over quantity. But, yeah, be that as it may, I get it, I understand. You want to be seen, you want to be heard, you want to be known. It's really a core cry of the human heart, is being loved, being accepted, and being seen as valued and understood. So if you understand that we that you are made in the image of God, that you have a creator that loves you and cares for you, and he sees you and he knows your name, even if you feel like nobody else sees or understands, that's going to ground you. That is going to give you a lot of motivation to keep going, keep persisting, and doing as you are led. Whether that means you get famous or not, ultimately really shouldn't matter. Because if you really do care about the message that you're saying, whether it's a positive or negative one, should be even you should be invested in a cause that's greater than yourself. Something that extends beyond just the likes and, you know, possibly making a living or at least having some sort of material physical benefit from taking a certain stance or cause. Should be principle-based. Shouldn't be because you are going to get a lot of ten of benefit out of it. In fact, a lot of the most profound movements that have helped shape and form society as we see it today came at great personal cost to their advocates, to their proponents. This country, the United States, would not have been able to exist. The greatest country on the face of the earth could not exist. If all the founders did was virtue signal. Or if they spent all of their time, you know, making propaganda that was dunking on King George and and the British military. They needed to go pick up their guns. They needed to go and fight for our freedoms. And that does lead to an interesting question, though. Is there absolutely no use for virtue signaling or vice signaling? One could argue that vice signaling can actually be done in a way that can highlight and bring attention to important causes. Can be used as a satirical tool. Many people would argue that the Genesis, the beginning of satire, was in a little pamphlet, I believe it was a little pamphlet, called A Modest Proposal. And you know what, I'm before I keep talking about this, I'm actually going to look this up. I remember a modest proposal being a pretty outrageous, ludicrous, um ludicrous little pamphlet written by Jonathan Swift, yes. Um he he wrote this in 1729, and his proposal, his modest proposal, was basically saying that Irish poor people could sell their children to become food for wealthy people that that would help alleviate their economic plight, their economic uh troubles. It's a slim little pamphlet, it's a satirical essay, obviously Swift was not actually seriously proposing this, he was trying to make a point. The point that Swift was trying to make, of course, is that the you know rich, wealthy people are not doing anywhere near enough to help the plight of the poor. And there is still a lot of argument about, you know, the actual intention of this pamphlet, but I I think just a a straight reading of it kind of makes it pretty obvious that Swift is, at the very least, wanting to change what is going on in Ireland. And so that brings us back to my question here. Is vice signaling something that could actually be in a certain way beneficial? I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say I don't think so. Because I think there's a difference between satire and like lampooning, you know, your opponent or uh a opinion or a cause or whatever. Verbal jousting, I guess you can say, in a sense, versus just pure vice signaling. Vice signaling, I think the difference is not so much in the words themselves, although they can be different. I think it's mostly an intention. I think the intention behind vice signaling is pretty clear. Vice signaling is meant to rile people up. Vice signaling is meant to draw attention to yourself, whether that's negative or positive, it's usually mostly negative. And the human psyche, the human brain, is wired much more towards receiving and dwelling on and meditating on negative news than it is on positive news. So I think if you are intending to cause trouble, stir things up, try and make a name for yourself, then there really isn't a use for what you're about to do. But if you are meaning to highlight attention to a certain cause, you know, lampoon an opponent in a humorous way, to be able to to, and yeah, it'll raise your profile, but like your primary motivation or intention is greater than yourself, then yeah, I think there's value to it. But I based on how I define the terms. Based on how I define the terms, I don't really see there to be much of any positive benefit from vice-signaling. I see. part of vice signaling as well is this is a German word, and I'm gonna pronounce butcher the pronunciation of this. I think it's pronounced uh Schadenfreud. Let me Schadenfreud. Yeah, that that's I at least that's how it looks upon my my reading of it. This idea of you get pleasure from the misfortune of other people. Um, and this is something that I think is very much spoken against in the Book of Proverbs, where it talks about, like, hey, you should not be gaining, you should not be happy when other people stumble, when other people, you know, fall down. I think I think really, as we kind of draw this episode to a close, making the distinction between actual constructive feedback and political debate and speech versus just, you know, intention behind virtue signaling or vice signaling, I think it's important. Ultimately, we can't judge the thoughts and intents of the heart. Only God can do that. We can probably follow the money in a lot of ways, though, and you know, we can probably, and I think it's fair to point out, if there may be financial incentives behind what certain individuals are posting or saying, I think uh pointing out hypocrisy is certainly a very fine thing. Um this idea of like a champagne socialist, for example, or like a bleeding heart liberal, you know, uh these these concepts of like, okay, you're preaching against inequality, or you're an environmentalist preaching against, you know, like rising ocean levels, and then you buy B Trump property in Miami, like doesn't really make a whole lot of sense. You know? So on a free speech level, like, yeah, people should be able to be free to make as big a fools of themselves as they want to. Like, I'm certainly not proposing a modest proposal of like banning vice signaling or virtue signaling or whatever, because it's it's hard to judge intention sometimes. What I do think would be beneficial, though, for society as we move forward is critically evaluating and understanding the role and degree to which social media has warped online discourse, and you know, trolls, I would say, and troll farms, like they often, I would say, operate on the basis of vice signaling, and just getting people ticked off and confusing them, fake news, false information, whatever. I think it's important to think about how social media magnifies the worst of both extremes, virtue signaling and vice signaling, and being more reflective about ourselves and how we choose to engage with news stories, and how we choose to engage with people of opposing opinions and beliefs and views. I think that for aspiring people in politics or or law or fields that are largely dependent on name recognition or getting your name out there. Do you really want to be known for the crazy things that you said and did in order to get to where you wanted to be in life? That's a question that only you can really answer for yourself, and some people seem to you seem to be perfectly content with being seen as and being known for being provocateurs. I myself would rather be seen as and known for and remembered for leaving positive contributions to the world, and not having to rely upon any degree of performative vice or performative virtue to get wherever I'd like to be in life. I mean, it's easy for me to say right now, but sometimes actions can betray deeper motivations. And so as a result of this, I'm I'm gonna be trying to hold myself to higher standards and really think about what I say and what I do. I've mentioned him before, but like I don't want to be the next Nick Fuentes, you know. I I would say Fuentes is like the poster child for vice signaling, like in the modern political commentary landscape. Like, yeah, no thanks. We need more people at principal, and we need less people like Nick Fuentes. Anyway, guys, that's about all I have to say on this subject. I hope you found it very interesting, and I'd love to hear your thoughts on this. If you have anything else you want to add, um, any agreement or disagreement, feel free to let me know. I have my Discord that you can join. Um I also have you can in the show notes you can you can text me if you want to reach out. And also, I have my Ko-Fi link, and you can also donate directly to through BuzzSprout if you wish to help defray the costs of publishing this show. I hope you found this interesting and entertaining, and I look forward to hearing you all in the next installment of the show. As always, remember that the buck stops right here because we are looking out for you.