I get it — let’s have shame for the things that “we” want there to be shame about. I just don’t think there is good consensus on what that is.
My whole point is that to a surprising degree of divergence, addict culture in the USA particularly has abandoned those norms in favor of overt caustic social interaction.
So what function did shame serve in that society?
Shame in third-world societies (like the one I have lived in for the last 15 years) serves many important functions.
In my case, it is a matriarchal culture. The worst thing that can happen to a person is that your mother would feel ashamed. So people go out of their way to not do shameful things like stealing, lying, being disorderly intoxicated, and other socially hostile activities. I find that it is effective at keeping social order, and one of the worst insults is to imply that someone was ill - raised.
It is also the peak of naïveté to assume any mechanism of social control will remain restricted to our pet favorite cause. Isn’t that what every discussion here about encryption backdooors ends up concluding?
Unfortunately, my writing was unclear and many people (understandably) misunderstood the context. Sorry about that.
If shifting social mores was able to change laws in some places, I see no reason to assume that the shaming system cannot.
Being ashamed of being an addict could lead to avoidance of treatment, so that might be a better example of a negative outcome of shame.
That was fear, not shame.
