Should Canada suspend relations with China?

[Yzermandius19]

16 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Big if there. Really really big if.

Again, one side thinking they have the monopoly on virtue, and shouting that from the rooftops, that's why the phrase exists, to make fun of those people.

Actually virtuous people don't have the pathological need to tell everyone how virtuous they are, and how unvirtuous those who disagree with them are, they just do virtuous things, they don't need a pat on the back from like minded people to feel like they are doing good, they just do it.

Virtue signalers are insecure about being virtuous and need public confirmation of their virtue to bolster their low-self esteem, actually being virtuous is less important than others viewing them to be virtuous, to the point where they often settle for popularity over virtue, usually because they are completely unable to tell the difference between the two.

Edited February 2, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[Dougie93]

1 minute ago, bcsapper said:

You did, and I didn't.  You couldn't actually be more wrong if you made it your life's work.

Circular reasoning, it is because you say it is. 

Logic declaims "in-camera" as unfounded meaningless blather, trusting politicians is a separate issue, which I addressed in good faith.

[Dougie93]

3 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Again, one side thinking they have the monopoly on virtue, and shouting that from the rooftops, that's why the phrase exists, to make fun of those people.

Particularly when the supposed virtue is the One World Government Socialist Revolution, so long ago cast upon the ash heap of history by its own pilfering mass murdering hand.

[Yzermandius19]

4 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Particularly when the supposed virtue is the One World Government Socialist Revolution, so long ago cast upon the ash heap of history by its own pilfering mass murdering hand.

Yeah, that sure does make the virtue signaling even easier to make fun of than it usually is, which is saying something.

[Dougie93]

2 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Yeah, that sure does make the virtue signaling even easier to make fun of than it usually is, which is saying something.

Government control at the threshold of making Big Brother himself blush, they published to the internet.  lolwhut?

Cuckoo.  Cuckoo.

[eyeball]

20 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

The reason we love dropping the phrase virtue signaling is, virtue signalers think that everyone who has virtue has some pathological need to tell everyone how virtuous they are and how non-virtuous those who disagree with them are, but that is not the case. The virtue signalers pretending that their side of the argument has a monopoly on virtue, that's what the phrase is making fun of.

Okay and what does any of this have what to do with stopping in-camera lobbying to prevent officials from doing something they shouldn't in the public's domain?

[Guest]

15 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

Circular reasoning, it is because you say it is. 

Logic declaims "in-camera" as unfounded meaningless blather, trusting politicians is a separate issue, which I addressed in good faith.

This response has nothing to do with what I posted.  Are you sure you're in the right thread?

 

 

Edited February 2, 2019 by bcsapper

[Dougie93]

20 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Big if there. Really really big if.

I'm simply not interested in being praised for any virtuous acts I may have undertaken, thus I don't list them when I am publishing to the internet.

 

[Yzermandius19]

24 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Okay and what does any of this have what to do with stopping in-camera lobbying to prevent officials from doing something they shouldn't in the public's domain?

Your love of good intentions, displayed by political agreement with your beliefs, over actual results, while demonizing realists as having "given up" for emphasizing the importance of results over intentions, accusing them of denigrating virtue itself through the use of the term virtue signaling, well, that is a clear example of virtue signaling.

You obviously believe that one side of the argument has a monopoly on virtue, and you seem to think it's the side constantly shouting how virtuous they are from the rooftops, over the side who makes fun of them for doing so, hence why you accused them of being virtue haters in the first place.

Edited February 2, 2019 by Yzermandius19

[eyeball]

12 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

Your love of good intentions, displayed by political agreement with your beliefs, over actual results, while demonizing realists for emphasizing the importance of results over intentions as supporting immorality, by denigrating virtue itself through the use of the term virtue signaling, that is a clear example of virtue signaling.

Yes but what does this have to do with a public policy of not allowing in-camera lobbying - concrete action as opposed to a incorporeal signal?

Edited February 2, 2019 by eyeball

[Charles Anthony]

15 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Yes but what does this have to do with a public policy of not allowing in-camera lobbying - concrete action as opposed to a incorporeal signal?

Good question.  Start a new thread. 

 

This thread is locked due to hopeless thread drift. 

Anybody who wishes to continue answering the question Should Canada suspend relations with China? is encouraged to demonstrate such intention by starting a Should Canada suspend relations with China? -- Take 2 thread. If a 2nd thread stays on track, it will be merged into this thread.

Good luck!