The Absurdity of ‘Virtue Signaling’

Absurd virtue signaling

Most Americans don’t realize that the term “politically correct” was originally used in recurring sketches on “Saturday Night Live” back in the 1990s. What was once fodder for absurdist comedy has now become the backbone of our increasingly distasteful culture.

By Donald Jeffries

In late May, stories broke all over the mainstream media, asking breathlessly whether weddings are “too white.” Evidently, a heretofore obscure Nigerian-born British woman, Assumpta Vitcu, was looking through some wedding magazines, in preparation for her upcoming wedding. As her white Romanian fiancée scrutinized the photos in the magazines, he became alarmed that there were no black faces.

Vitcu became more infuriated after she went to a wedding show that featured hundreds of firms marketing their products and services, and “felt almost invisible.” She claimed to have stood at one stand while a jeweler waited on a previous customer. “He didn’t acknowledge me once,” she complained. “Then two Caucasian women walked over and he immediately said, ‘Please give me a moment and I’ll be right with you.’ ”

Such is the predictable world of identity politics. Many questions arise about this particular story. First, how did this previously unknown Nigerian immigrant attract the interest of the biggest mainstream media outlets in the UK, including the BBC? To no one’s surprise, the wedding industry instantly genuflected before Vitcu, with an editor for huge online wedding site “Confetti” issuing the standard apology. “There’s been a long overdue awakening,” Zoe Burke explained. “For a long time there’s been a growing consciousness that the industry as a whole hasn’t been reflective of the society that we live in.”

What followed was a brief explosion from the usual suspects, with further allegations of various discriminations against black brides and ridiculous statements about there being a “bizarre silence” surrounding them. One black woman, Nova Reid, blasted wedding shows that hand out tanning products, exclaiming, “It was as if these shows were not expecting black women to be coming through the door, not expecting us to be getting married.”

It is impossible to spoof the virtue signaling “left” at this point. The term “virtue signaling” refers to actions taken or statements made intended to “signal” to others one’s moral correctness or “virtue.” In recent years, charges of “racism” have been leveled at bandages and brown paper bags. A few years ago, ESPN actually fired an Asian announcer because someone complained about his birth name—Robert Lee. The BBC stopped using the terms “B.C.” (Before Christ) and “A.D.” (Anno Domini, meaning “In the Year of Our Lord”) years ago.

A school in Seattle renamed offensive “Easter eggs” as “spring spheres.” As far back as 2016, American school systems began instructing their teachers to cease using the terms “boy” and “girl” to describe their students. This has been increasingly happening not only in the United States, but in countries all over the Western world. In 2014, a feminist campaign began getting traction in the mainstream media, whereby it was claimed that the term “bossy” was an unacceptable slur against little girls. Celebrated females such as Condoleezza Rice, Beyoncé, Jennifer Garner, and the Girl Scouts organization jumped on this bandwagon.

Once the term “hate speech” was introduced into our lexicon by the establishment, it was inevitable that free speech would be endangered. Indeed, just one of the putrid byproducts of the Patriot Act was the creation of “free speech zones,” which permit befuddled Americans to be ushered into an enclosed area where they can express their increasingly restricted right to free expression.

Most Americans don’t realize that the term “politically correct” was originally used in recurring sketches on “Saturday Night Live” back in the 1990s, which starred the late Phil Hartman. What was once fodder for absurdist comedy has now become the backbone of our increasingly distasteful culture.

Free Expression Foundation

It was bad enough that many blacks, when a dog barks at them, have suggested that the white owner somehow instilled “racism” in them. Now, one Ben Faulding, of The Washington Post, has taken the next step and simply declared that dogs themselves are “racist.” Faulding utilized his best social warrior lingo by concluding man’s best friend is a “tool of white supremacy and gentrification.”

Faulding went on to explain: “That’s not just my opinion. There is research that shows how white newcomers dog-walking routes stake out territory. And white owners use their pets to socialize with other white owners excluding minorities.”

Someone replied to this on Twitter with a reference to students at traditionally black Washington, D.C. Howard University feeling “disrespected” by whites cutting through the campus while walking their dogs. Alicia Sanchez Gill, of Safe Spaces DC, tweeted “White folks, I don’t care how nice your dog is, dogs have been used as a tool of white control, dominance and violence, from slavery, through civil rights to police dogs today.”

Even 10 years ago, such virtue signaling terms as “body shaming” and “gender neutral” would have been scoffed at by most Americans. It is now being seriously claimed that biological men can give birth. Identity politics is incompatible with a free society. Someone has to have the courage to point out the emperor is wearing no clothes.

Donald Jeffries is a highly respected author and researcher whose work on the JFK, RFK and MLK assassinations and other high crimes of the Deep State has been read by millions of people across the world. Jeffries is also the author of two books currently being sold by the AFP Online Store.

1 Comment on The Absurdity of ‘Virtue Signaling’

  1. This Mr. Jeffries is a good writer, and seems to be a relatively smart man, which is why it was so jarring to come across this complete non-sequitur, and leading candidate for the Most Moronic Thing You’ll Read All Year award…”Identity politics is incompatible with a free society.”

    Now, perhaps he’s trying to get across the idea that multi-racialism destroys liberty, by prejudicing freedom of speech and association, which is entirely correct, but the sentence, as written, is ham-handed and bizarre. His skill as a writer, generally, means he can’t be let off the hook for this one. Freedom is entirely compatible with a homogeneous society without the incredible burdens and weaknesses of multi-racialism and the cult of diversity.

    An accurate alternative statement, which shows far more insight, would be to say that racial conflict only comes from racial diversity, racial diversity always brings racial conflict, and Whites need non-Whites for nothing at all…so all the absolute-complete-suck that racial diversity brings is likewise unnecessary to put up with. Whites can keep the freedoms that they invented and gifted to the world…we just need to get the non-Whites who make them impossible out of our territories, and live for ourselves and our own purposes again.

Comments are closed.