Who should we ask
if a system we built is a good one?
The one who is lifted up by the system
or the one who is pushed down?
I am imagining an economist having a discussion with a homeless,
uneducated street dweller. I am sure it has happened once or
twice, but usually it is not let happen. The discussion is a taboo
and it would not be allowed to surface on any peer review.
The reason the discussion will not happen is that we all who are
above those dwellers are on some level aware that we did not
deserve any of what we have. At the same time as this idea
flickers through our minds we conjure up an opposing force of
selfhood that says, at minimum, that we deserved nothing less and
even the little we have isn't all that good. "I am in pain too".
If you are in pain already
why can't you allow a reset?
The shame we carry is a cause for inertia. Stay your course and
never hurt anyone again. If a reset is triggered there will be new
kinds of crimes demanding old kinds of punishment, dealt
retroactively.
Unleashed shame is a weapon for rebellion.
Closeted shame is the weight of history.
Thing to notice: Shaming can only work withing a group. You cannot
shame me if I have not agreed to be a part of your gang. Public
shaming works because people know your alliances. The only active
stance against shaming is self-ostracism.
