Every cause is guilty of empty virtue signalling and intolerance, yet these criticisms are most commonly directed at the progressive cause. Why?
A ready explanation can be found in the power and reach of the progressive movement. The more prominent the cause, the greater the number of passengers who attach themselves to it. The more prominent the cause, the greater its capacity to assert itself via cancel culture. Hence the powerful cause has higher susceptibility to empty signalling and overbearing conduct.
Of course, there are other causes which enjoy wide support. But popular does not always mean influential and the progressive cause has penetrated the corridors of power in a way that rivals have not. Let us consider the blue chip corporation, which has no inherent moral agenda beyond duty to its shareholders. Such an organisation is often patriotic, although this quality has been diminished by the globalisation of business. Such an organisation may have sporting or religious affiliations, although these must be reconciled with the increasing plurality of the customer base. But almost without exception, every mainstream corporation proclaims its commitment to diversity and social justice.
The obvious response is that these organisations are posturing. But that is exactly our point: why posture on the progressive cause and not any other? The answer is that this cause offers greater practical and reputational leverage. While every cause has a sympathetic audience, liberalism has sympathy where it counts: with mainstream business, media, academia and government. With due respect to the competition, those backing the progressive cause are usually backing the winner.
This does not mean our institutions and corporations are actually progressive. It means they feel the need to assert their progressive credentials and this is why the progressive cause is more prone to empty signalling.
Progressive cancel culture is similarly potentiated by influential support: those in power
feel the need to demonstrably ‘do their bit’ to eliminate non-compliance. The extreme element found in every cause has more capacity to assert itself.
For all these reasons, the progressive cause is more prone to empty signalling and intolerance than any other. Contrary to popular opinion, this does not mean that the cause is inherently frivolous or overbearing: any cause enjoying an elevated position would follow the same path. The cause itself is not the problem. The problem is how moral zeal interacts with power and opportunism.
Isamu Drayya, November 2022
NEXT: The future of virtue signalling and cancel culture
isamu drayya 