Signaling Virtue (#420)
If you believe in the righteousness of your cause, you shouldn’t abandon it in the face of criticism
This past week, Alexei Navalny, a lawyer, anti-corruption activist and prominent critic of Russian President Vladimir Putin, passed away in a remote Siberian prison under mysterious circumstances. Many, including journalists and government officials, have expressed their belief that Navalny may have been assassinated at Putin's behest.
Navalny had been the target of an assassination attempt in the past, likely in retaliation to his relentless anti-corruption campaigns and his vocal criticism of Putin and the Kremlin. In August 2020, he was poisoned with a Novichok nerve agent frequently used by the KGB, an attack that nearly cost him his life. He was airlifted from Siberia to Germany, where he spent several months undergoing treatment and recovering.
Despite being fully aware of the grave risks, Navalny shocked the international community by returning willingly to Russia in January 2021 to continue his activism against Putin’s administration. He was immediately detained by Russian authorities in Moscow for allegedly violating a suspended sentence from a 2014 embezzlement case, which Navalny consistently claimed was politically motivated.
Navalny believed so deeply in his cause that he was willing to risk his life for it and paid the ultimate price. Contrast this with the common practice today of virtue signaling, especially on social media.
Virtue signaling is the act of expressing opinions or sentiments publicly to demonstrate one's good character or moral correctness on a particular issue. This is often done with the underlying intent of gaining social approval or standing, rather than expressing genuine conviction.
Common acts of virtue signaling include adopting a profile picture template supporting a popular social cause or reposting a popular social media message to echo others’ support. While many people who do this have genuine passion for the cause they are supporting—and give their time and effort to making a difference in those areas—I suspect the majority who do this are simply following the crowd and attempting to score social points.
Virtue signaling is often disingenuous; it involves taking stances more for appearances and social approval rather than commitment to action. Most importantly, there is often no risk or cost to virtue signaling online--there is no need to spend hours volunteering, donate money to a cause or risk retaliation for standing up for what’s right.
Conversely, having values and standing by them often comes with a cost; it might cost you followers, your job, your friends, or, as in the case of Navalny, even your life. I frequently see many young people today stridently taking a stance on an issue, only to be surprised by—or unwilling to face—the associated consequences that come with that stance. They want all the glory without the risk, downside, or even the work.
Companies fall into the virtue signaling trap as well.
Too many companies have recently taken certain social or political stances, only to walk things back at the first sign of discontent from customers, employees or investors. In these cases, leaders must recognize that sticking to one's belief system despite negative public opinion is what truly signals character or strength of conviction.
If you believe in the righteousness of your cause or viewpoint, then you shouldn’t shift it in the face of criticism. Otherwise, you probably shouldn’t step up to the microphone in the first place.
Authenticity and conviction are central to any public stance, whether it is a personal belief or a corporate policy. Individuals and organizations should be prepared to face the consequences of sticking to their values, rather than shifting stances for the sake of appeasement or reputation. This is what Navalny did in returning to Russia; we could all benefit from even a fraction of his courage.
In the end, transparency and genuine commitment are far more compelling indicators of character than shallow displays of virtue. These are the cornerstones of true integrity, and they seem to be in short supply today.
Where may you be signaling virtue rather than showing real conviction?
Quote of The Week
“I prefer to be true to myself, even at the hazard of incurring the ridicule of others, rather than to be false, and to incur my own abhorrence.” - Frederick Douglass
Have a great weekend!
New For Premium Subscribers
Thanks Robert. This is an important post. I think part of the issue in virtue signaling is not doing the work required to know whether or not the cause you are supporting lines up with your values. When you are publicly supporting views or causes you have not thoroughly investigated, you are more apt to be caught needing to retract them. It reminds me of a post I read recently by Shane Parrish on his Farnham Street blog called "The Work Required to Have an Opinion". In it he quotes Charlie Munger, "I never allow myself to have an opinion on anything that I don’t know the other side’s argument better than they do."
This reminds me of a book I just read by Catherine Liu entitled Virtue Hoarders: The Case against the Professional Managerial Class. Highly recommended (and quick) read.