Masks and Distance: The Limits of Cheap Political Virtue Signaling

Today on FB, I displayed this photo of Joe Biden and made this comment:

I'm all for wearing a mask when you need to be near other people, but really? A Twitter comment (see the comments here): "Virtue Signalling knows no distance."

The post drew considerable criticism that caused me to better explain my concern. I did that as an addendum to the original post, as follows:

Biden's job is to either have Trump voters switch over to him or to convince them that they don't care enough  that they simply won't vote for Trump (I know several Republicans of this latter type). I don't want this election to be a repeat of Michael Dukakis riding in the tank. I fear that this type of image is going to be repeatedly and effectively exploited by Republicans to make the argument that Biden is not a strong and courageous leader.

The CDC has repeated and strongly warned that we maintain a distance of six feet from other people. CDC further "advises" that people wear homemade masks.  I fear that this type of image of Biden sitting 15 feet apart AND wearing a mask is going to be repeatedly and effectively exploited by Republicans to make the argument that Biden is not a strong and courageous leader.  There are many other images that will be used by Trump, including images where Biden and his wife are wearing masks where no other people are nearby.

Those of us who have the strength and courage to unplug from the political matrix instantly realize that this exploit that will certainly be used by Trump will be effective when compared to "fearless" images of Trump NOT wearing a mask. Who do you want as the leader of the United States? The man who worries about invisible germs that kill only 1% of people?  Or a courageous man like Trump?  That will be the argument and (based on the rhetoric of the clamor-to-reopen-crowd) this argument will siphon votes away from Biden.

Biden will get the votes from his base, more or less, no matter what he does between now and November, despite his many flaws. Further, his base will forgive him the "sin" of not wearing a mask while sitting 15 feet from one other person outdoors. And, as one of the commenters on my FB page indicated, Biden took off his mask for the actual interview. Good. But this image will live on in isolation from the fact that he took off the mask to conduct the interview, as will thousands of similar images of Biden. Unfortunately, there are real consequences in the balance. Should Biden be 99% safe or 99.99999% safe? It's not a decision for me to make, but while prudent mask-wearing is absolutely a good thing, mask-wearing that looks weak and paranoid will hurt Biden's chances in November. It is my concern that the cheap version of virtue signaling suggested by this image will be quickly sniffed and identified as such by all voters who aren't already for Biden. Many of the people who are already strongly for Biden might will be oblivious to this serious problem.

I'll add one more thing. We need to be sensitive to the difference between cheap virtue signaling and expensive virtue signaling. What looks impressive when done by people we believe to be on our team can look terrible when done by members of the other team. There a lot going on under the hood and it includes confirmation bias and displaying of "badges" of in-group membership.  This difference is explained by Geoffrey Miller in this definitional section from his new book, Virtue Signaling: Essays on Darwinian Politics and Free Speech (2020):

We all virtue signal. I virtue signal; you virtue signal; we virtue signal. And those guys over there, in that political tribe we don’t like – they especially virtue signal. (Just as they believe that we do.) Let’s not pretend otherwise. We are humans, and humans love to show off our moral virtues, ethical principles, religious convictions, political attitudes, and lifestyle choices to other humans. We have virtue signaled ever since prehistoric big-game hunters shared meat with the hungry folks in their clan, or cared for kids who weren’t their own.

There’s virtue signaling, and then there’s virtue signaling. This book is about both kinds. On the one hand, there’s what economists call ‘cheap talk:’ signals that are cheap, quick, and easy to fake, and that aren’t accurate cues of underlying traits or values. When partisans on social media talk about political virtue signaling by the other side, they’re usually referring to this sort of cheap talk. Virtue signaling as cheap talk includes bumper stickers, yard signs, social media posts, and dating app profiles. The main pressure that keeps cheap talk honest is social: the costs of stigma and ostracism by people who don’t agree with your signal. Wearing a ‘Make America Great Again’ hat doesn’t cost much money, but it can cost you friendships. On the other hand, there’s virtue signaling that’s costly, long-term, and hard to fake, and that can serve as a very reliable indicator of underlying traits and values. This can include volunteering for months on political campaigns, making large, verifiable donations to causes, or giving up a lucrative medical practice to work for Doctors Without Borders in Haiti or New Guinea. The key to reliable virtue signals is that you simply couldn’t stand to produce them, over the long term, if you didn’t genuinely care about the cause.

[V]irtue signaling can … be the worst of human instincts. It drives most of partisan politics, especially on social media. It drives the demands to censor, fire, cancel, and ostracize people who express the wrong opinions. It drives moral panics about satanic ritual abuse, ‘rape culture,’ and ‘porn addiction.’ It drives white nationalists to run over protesters. It drives antifa to beat up journalists. … Some of this is cheap talk, but some of it is reliable signaling. What distinguishes good virtue signaling from bad virtue signaling isn’t just the reliability of the signal. It’s the actual real-world effects on sentient beings, societies, and civilizations.

[I attempted to find the source of the photo, which I spotted on Twitter, but was unsuccessful]

Continue ReadingMasks and Distance: The Limits of Cheap Political Virtue Signaling

Let’s Apply the Drunk Driving Argument to This Pandemic Pool Party

Take a look at this crowded bar Memorial Day weekend at Lake of the Ozarks.

I’m going to assume that most of the people in this picture are drinking. I’m also going to assume that some of the people in this picture will leave this party intoxicated yet believe they’re ok to drive. I’m going to assume every single person in this picture arrived home safely.

What would your conclusion be if all the above were true? Would you conclude that because none of the intoxicated people in this crowd got into a car wreck afterward, that drunk driving is ok? Would you think that maybe we don’t need laws forbidding drunk driving? Or, would you conclude that the intoxicated drivers were damned lucky, because intoxicated driving clearly increases your chances of causing an accident and killing yourself and others?

Here’s another possible outcome: One of the men driving home was pretty hammered. After getting onto the highway, he realized that he shouldn’t be driving. He kept losing his focus and had some trouble staying in his lane. When he arrived home, he breathed a sigh of relief. No harm, no foul.  Unbeknownst to this man, a woman driving in the lane next to him on the highway was trying to get home from her shift at the hospital. She was a nurse tired from another long day. When his car drifted over into her lane, she was forced to swerve, causing her car to roll down an embankment. She is severely injured and may not survive.

The man who is breathing a sigh of relief that he got home safely, he has no idea what his actions caused. He may never know.

Now let’s look at this picture again, knowing this photo was taken during the pandemic. It’s entirely possible that everyone left this bar feeling good and that all of them continue living a healthy happy life. It’s quite possible, however, that two or three of these people at the bar were infected but had no symptoms. It’s also entirely possible that one of these asymptomatic people talked to three other women while waiting in line in the crowded ladies’ room. As they laugh about the goofy bartender, some infected droplets spray from her mouth and onto the others. After they go home, two of them get sick. Before one of them had symptoms, she visited her elderly mother a few days later. Her mother ended up on a ventilator and died a week later.

I keep hearing, “everyone is going to die of something.” That’s 100% true. A lot of people die in car accidents, with or without intoxication involved.

But the reason we enact laws for public safety is to reduce the risk of harming or killing other people. Wearing a mask in public during a pandemic is as practical and important as NOT drinking and driving, or taking the keys away from someone who drank too much.

Wearing a mask in public is like taking the car keys away from someone who drank too much.
There’s an even more compelling reason to social distance and wear a mask. The man who got home safely, may wake up the next morning and recognize how lucky he is. He may vow to never again drink and drive. Should that happen, he will never have or cause a wreck due to intoxication.

The woman who unknowingly passed the virus to the ladies in the restroom may see how quickly it’s spreading in her community and decide she’s now going to be more careful. She vows to keep a social distance, wear a mask in public, and do what she can to keep others safe. Even if she does that starting now, the people she infected last night can continue spreading the virus, exponentially. The two people she infected can spread it to four, and those four can spread it to eight and so on.

So why would we intervene to prevent death by drunk driving but not intervene to prevent death by social distancing and wearing masks in public? https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812864  In 2019, “only” about 10,000 people died as a result of drunk driving, but most of us feel compelled to strictly enforce the law to prevent those needless deaths. No one complains about the government violating their constitutional rights by enacting drunk driving laws.

As I finish writing this article, ten times as many people, more than 100,000 people, have died as a result of COVID-19 in just few months, with many other people barely hanging on. It’s far more deadly than drunk driving.

--

The above video is on Snapchat in the Lake of the Ozarks? Unreal. What are we doing?

pic.twitter.com/m0qsEQ4KLp

— Max Baker (@maxbaker_15) May 24, 2020

Continue ReadingLet’s Apply the Drunk Driving Argument to This Pandemic Pool Party

Contemplating the COVID-19 Pool Party at Lake of the Ozarks

This image of the COVID-19 era pool party in Missouri's Lake of the Ozarks is deservedly viral.These are stunning and disturbing images for me.

I'm struggling to get inside of the heads of these people. Are they extroverts suffering from living in isolation? Are they simply in denial of the danger? Are they innumerate, not appreciating the meaning of exponential? Are they succumbing to incessant pressures of their in-group. to conform. Are they doing expensive signaling to impress each other? Have they attempted any sort of moral calculus in their minds, or have they simply declared themselves to be mini-Fiefdoms, self-legislating that it's time to move on, the consequences be damned? I'm working hard to pull myself out of any Manichean matrix that might tempt me to see the world in terms of "good" people and "bad" people.

I prefer to think of these people are ordinary flawed people, just like the rest of us, except that they are making a bad decision here.

Continue ReadingContemplating the COVID-19 Pool Party at Lake of the Ozarks

COVID-19 Pulls Back the Curtain on Who We Are

"Feb. 29, 2020: 1st death reported in United States." OK, I'll use that date as my start date.

Today is Day 87 of COVID-19 here in the U.S., and it is bringing out the best and the worst of Americans. Behold who we are!

On average, it appears that we are responding to COVID-19 with the same degree of care that we display when we A) drive our cars, B) take care of our bodies C) nurture the environment and D) fill our brains with TV shows. Why would we expect anything different?

Continue ReadingCOVID-19 Pulls Back the Curtain on Who We Are

Central Park Confrontation Provokes Thoughts on Adequate Apologies

Hmmm. How would I grade these two actors?

I'd give Mr. Christian Cooper, dedicated birder, an A+. I'd give Ms. Amy Cooper (no relation), an entitled, leash-ordinance-violating, racist, hostile, COVID-endangering financial analyst, an F. It's not fun to see anyone fall so far and so hard, but I was relieved that Mr. Cooper kept his cool and kept the recording rolling to protect himself. The world now knows exactly what happened that day in Central Park. There are many good safety reasons people should keep their dogs on leashes. It's too bad that Mr. Cooper had to ask Ms. Cooper to obey the law.

Reading this article is making me think of what makes for an adequate apology. When are mere words enough?  It seems like we need some expensive signaling here, something much more than words.

Continue ReadingCentral Park Confrontation Provokes Thoughts on Adequate Apologies