International Peace Day

That's why there are more groups than the PPU, Lucky.
Campaign against the arms trade are asking people to contact their MPs and get them to support the stopping of selling arms to Saudi so they cannot use them to kill in Yemen.

Last year when South Yemen (Aden) was being bombed by rebels they were praying for intervention from Saudi Arabia.

You think they really asked for this? Cluster bombs - which are illegal now, by the way - dropped from the best planes sold to Saudi by the British killing 87% of the children?
There are nine countries in a coalition to attack Yemen, but it's only Saudi that is doing that, bombing hospitals and schools.

www.stopwar.org.uk/index.php/news-comment/2189-journalists-are-too-scared-to-come-refugees-on-the-forgotten-war-in-yemen

It is clear on this thread to see why world peace is so difficult to achieve. It seems to me that some thoughtless /unkind responses to a genuine post, aiming to undermine and demoralise, are exactly the way conflicts are maintained to serve individual/national/factional interests. The Peace Pledge Union have been around for years & support debate and action on ways to promote peace/avoid conflict. We need that today as much as ever!
I think the populist & now politically used phrase "virtue signalling" is like a comfort blanket to some people who choose not to do anything but moan & a gift to those who would prefer the efforts of those involved in "good works" to stop. There are hundreds & thousands of the population who say they want peaceful solutions to conflicts. How clear a message would that be to politicians etc. if all those had worn a symbol as a show of unity on one day. It will never have instant impact but it does gradually begin to influence thinking and behaviour if we see others taking action. I listened to refugees from Syria speaking, on Saturday, about how it does help to know that there are people in the world who want to help them and who will speak out on their behalf. I am not a pacifist as I do think sometimes the last resort has to be military but I would argue that nations jump in with weaponry too quickly and the 'jawjaw' stage is overlooked.

I never got the impression from school RE lessons that Jesus spoke about his own charitable acts. I got the impression he talked about principles of charity and goodwill and acted accordingly but that it was other people who "spread the news" of his goodness.

This is some of the reason why it troubles me when people talk about the "good things they have done" and why I mentioned the Action Not Words motto.

I have never and will never object in the slightest to people talking about ways to achieve peace, to people telling others about organisations that work for peace, or to those who give examples (without blowing their own personal trumpet) of the sorts of things they think might make a difference.

I think most decent people (and most people are decent) do things/take action to improve society when they can.

This post will not be popular but my reason for posting is to state my genuine feelings and beliefs about what appears to me to be something that could be called painting in one's own halo. There is something akin to boasting, I would feel if I did it, in making sure others know how good one is because one lists one's charitable acts.

I have tried to express this in as impersonal a way as I can. I do not mean to attack any person, but to question a certain type of behaviour, behaviour that none of my most respected teachers (including my parents) would have encouraged. My school teachers and my parents did encourage social responsibility and helpfulness.

thatbags there is clearly a difference in people boasting about charitable good works undertaken purely for personal kudos rather than those who do so for more altruistic /private reasons. However if all good deeds are done in secret there is nothing to encourage others or to show how positive actions do make a difference. And that is important. What about people raising money for charity through sponsorship..does that countas Virtue Signalling, volunteers in charity shops, shaking collecting tins etc. are publicly showing their good deeds! Where do we draw the line??

Good point Penstemmon - is it only worth doing if it is done in secret (with only God knowing, if that is your belief system...). I don't see what is wrong with saying something like "We donate every month to the RNLI" (if it comes up in conversation) because it might inspire someone to think about their own charitable giving.
I think this rather unpleasant new term "virtue signalling" is a kind of nastiness that reminds me of school bullies saying "Oo-oo teacher's pet" and the like. I was under the impression that it arose when people were showing off about how healthy their diet was or something like that. But maybe I got that wrong.
I think also in certain strands of Christianity there is a "Keep it between yourself and God - you'll get your reward for good works in heaven" tradition.
However: In Matthew 15:15, Jesus said, “Neither do men light a candle and put it under a bushel but on a candlestick.” Which would seem to indicate that he approved of sharing good deeds and thoughts.

I'm pretty sure grannyactivist isn't someone who will be too bothered by a bit of gentle teasing.

The rest of you - enjoy.

James Bartholomew claims to have invented the phrase 'virtue signalling' www.spectator.co.uk/2015/10/i-invented-virtue-signalling-now-its-taking-over-the-world/
"I coined the phrase in an article here in The Spectator (18 April) in which I described the way in which many people say or write things to indicate that they are virtuous. Sometimes it is quite subtle. By saying that they hate the Daily Mail or Ukip, they are really telling you that they are admirably non-racist, left-wing or open-minded. One of the crucial aspects of virtue signalling is that it does not require actually doing anything virtuous. It does not involve delivering lunches to elderly neighbours or staying together with a spouse for the sake of the children. It takes no effort or sacrifice at all."

Just thought I'd set the record straight

Like the virtuous person I am I shall choose to take no offense. You'll find me in the corner licking my wounds polishing my halo.

I must do a lot of virtue signalling, and I'm proud to do so.
I sign petitions to stop the war in Syria and Yemen. I sign petitions to ask the government to stop penalising the poor and to stop privatising the NHS.
I sign petitions to stop people being executed in the US or Iraq or Pakistan.
I then pass these on to my family, who put it on facebook. The message says durhamjen has signed this petition to .... Please will you.

That sounds very much like his definition of virtue signalling.

However, the reason I am proud to do so is because I know it helps. In various situations where our government can do something to help, they do not. However, the government in the country targeted quite often change their minds.

To inhibit good whether it is talking about it it or actioning it is wrong. Sneering "virtue signalling" says a lot about the sneerer and absolutely nothing about the recipient. Nothing graceful or pleasant about such a phrase.

We all if we have any humanity must be devastated when we see the children. We all because we are human think we know what should done to prevent such horror. We are all right and wrong.

But we really ought to ask ourselves if a child suffering from shrapnel wounds or other dreadful things or dying from starvation could read what we are saying to each other would feel? Pretty damned despairing I would have thought.

Isn't it strange how people interpret things differently. I assumed grannyactivist was merely trying to raise the profile of her cause.

me too Linsco56 then sat back and was kind of stunned by the onslaught !

perception is everything I guess.

What onslaught?

Nothing more than a few disagreements/agreements.

I call that a debate.

Oh dear. If that is "gentle teasing" I'd hate to experience genuine criticism.

Context is all, merlotgran. Said it before and I might as well say it again. If GN was a real space, with people having a wide range of conversations in rooms or coffee areas, then the way that you join and participate in those conversations would vary. You probably wouldn't barge into a group discussing what they are going to have for dinner and start berating them about the ethics of food production. Neither would you march into a room where people were planning a event to support refugees, say, and start accusing them of virtue signalling. However if it was a debate about nuclear power then everyone would know that it was a debate. It would be a different kind of interaction in which robust disagreement would be fine.
A bit of sensitivity to these differences on the part of members would be lovely, wouldn't it.

The OP asked a question though. Must threads now be policed to stop discussions turning into debates?

The question was does anyone else mark the day.
It didn't warrant a 'you shouldn't have told us what you have done' response.

And thanks, grannyactivist, you've reminded me I need to buy some more white poppies. I have one for me, but I need to buy more to hand out to people who ask about it, along with the leaflets about the PPU.

I agree about there being differences between "charitable good works undertaken purely for personal kudos rather than those who do so for more altruistic /private reasons", pen (08:44:42), and about the need to spread the word about charities' work.

The distinction I'm talking about is more subtle than that: it's the difference between knowing a person is charitable and does good works because they have told you themselves and knowing a person is good/does good works because other people (such as those working for a charity that has benefited) have told you.

If what one does is in the public arena already, e.g. if a charity or several charities are organising a sponsored fund-raising event, that's a different case.

My argument is that I think it's preferable to inform people of, in this case (but the principle applies to anything) work to promote world peace, and suggest ways they might be able to join in or help if they want to, without any directly personal reference: general publicity rather than personal publicity I suppose it could be called. That is the message I got from my teachers and parents, from my school motto, and from the quote by Alexander Pope.

I don't know what is the name of the feeling I have when people publicise their own goodness but it stems from a certain reticence about self-publicising of virtue that was engendered in me during and throughout my childhood including, for instance, when I was a Brownie and was supposed to do a good turn every day. We were encouraged to notice helpful things we could do and to just do them without saying anything. I guess that idea is a very important part of my psyche.

I think I also tend to assume that people are good and are charitable unless I hear otherwise because the people I know well all are and I know that without them ever mentioning it.

It's a subtle idea and I've gathered from comments on this thread that some people don't get it (not helped by its being difficult to express), but I know some GNers get it and agree with my view on the matter because they have told me.

Okay, bags, you just carry on being subtle.
In the meantime someone has bombed three of the four White Helmet depots in Aleppo.
Sorry, but I'll carry on telling people to support the White Helmets.
They have just been given a share of a peace prize, and they will need the money.
It was probably Assad who bombed them, as he did not think they did anything to support peace.

www.theguardian.com/global/2016/sep/23/the-white-helmets-syria-volunteer-rescue-workers-heroes-hope-horror

I obviously used the word 'onslaugbt' unwisely Merlot .

I don't think I'd call it a debate though...at least not much about the OPS question more debate on whether it was virtue signalling or not.

Shame really because.i thought it was a simple question of what we did to observe International peace day ( want that peaceful here was it ?)

As no-one has actually answered the question about whether they mark International Peace Day in the affirmative (other than dj), maybe all this 'debate' is to mask the fact that they feel guilty not to be doing anything (including myself in that, and ducking behind the sofa to hide from the flames)

No, I didn't wear a white poppy (have not been out anyway) and, sadly, I don't think that me wearing one is going to make a jot of difference to any of the atrocious happenings in Syria, Yemen, elsewhere, wherever we see these dreadful pictures and despair.

All we can do is pick up a few pieces, help a few people and tinker around the edges of hell and destruction.

Sorry, I am normally a glass half full person but this is all beyond belief and seems beyond the capabilities of world powers to stop it.