"Being shamed is not the same as being convicted in a court of law—a difference that those pushing back against #MeToo and other supposedly woke movements never failed to emphasize. But both can be crucial for upholding norms of decency as well as democracy."
"Successful shaming depends on someone credibly accused of misconduct being part of groups whose approval matters to them. Larry Summers might well be resigning from Harvard because it would just have been too uncomfortable to face students and colleagues who might have voiced their disapproval."
"In politics, even the most powerful find themselves subject to institutions which, as long as they remain halfway intact, can constrain them. This is a major difference between the American and the British political scenes today."
The British monarchy and establishment demonstrate greater accountability for elite misconduct compared to the United States, where impunity among powerful figures remains widespread. While shaming differs from legal conviction, both mechanisms are essential for maintaining democratic norms and decency. Effective shaming requires that accused individuals belong to groups whose approval matters to them. Some American political figures show no shame regardless of misconduct because their constituents tolerate such behavior or they avoid public accountability. Political institutions, when functioning properly, constrain even the most powerful leaders. The British press, despite its flaws, maintains stronger institutional mechanisms for accountability than American counterparts, creating meaningful consequences for elite wrongdoing.
#elite-accountability #democratic-institutions #political-impunity #social-shaming #institutional-constraints
Read at www.theguardian.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]