Why Shame Matters in Politics

In the November 2026 American midterm elections, campaign advertisements were relentless. Across broadcast television and digital media, a record 573.2 and 500 million dollars were spent on Texas and Ohio campaigns, respectively.[1] Americans received a combined 60 billion political text messages, an average of 170 messages per person.[2]

The quantity of messages was startling, but so was their content, which frequently transgressed the bounds of decorum. Many campaigns involved insults and unsubstantiated rumors, meant to undermine the credibility of candidates.[3] These were cases of mudslinging—the exchange of personal insults or abuse, especially unjust ones, to damage the reputation of an opponent.[4] While the delivery of unsolicited messages directly to our iPhones was a novel experience, mudslinging itself is not a new American phenomenon.

For example, in the 1796 U.S. presidential election, John Adams and his supporters called Thomas Jefferson an atheist, and Jefferson’s supporters referred to Adams as “His Rotundity” and an “old, querulous, bald, crippled, toothless Adams.”[5] In the presidential election of 1828, Democrats accused John Quincy Adams of the misuse of public funds, and Whigs attacked Andrew Jackson’s military record and character.[6]

There are helpful ways to criticize a political opponent in an election. Examples include drawing attention to a poor track record of leadership or patterns of equivocation in policy statements. But personal vitriol, fabricated attacks, and ridicule are not among them. Mudslinging is often at odds with virtues such as charity and honesty. It distracts from substantive policy conversations. When a candidate campaigns in this way, he has shown himself to be undiscerning, cruel, and sometimes shameless.

Shamelessness in American Civic Life

To be shameless is to avoid moral censure or be unapologetic in wrongdoing. The shameless person intentionally flouts moral norms—doing the wrong thing, even though he knows better. Alternatively, he may be unaware of moral norms—even though he should have known better. In either case, the shameless person is blameworthy yet fails to experience the sting of a moral sanction.

I provided a recent example of shamelessness in American civic life—campaigns built around dishonesty and personal vitriol. But shamelessness is not just a problem during election cycles. It is a problem in daily governance, such as when leaders demean others or abuse power for personal gain. It is a problem on social media, where people overshare personal information and make inappropriate jokes. And shamelessness is a problem in corporate America. Examples include fraud, bribery, and flagrant violations of environmental protections.

So, why does shame matter in politics? Here are three reasons.

1. Shame Combats Shamelessness

Shame is a negative-valence, self-conscious emotion, characterized by a critical self-evaluation.[7] It construes oneself as problematic. Shame is not an emotion that people like to experience. It is popularly regarded as “guilt’s ugly sister” and a disposable emotion.[8] We would rather do away with shame entirely than feel bad about ourselves. However, it is probably not a coincidence that a culture that wishes to dispose of shame is also riddled with shamelessness. If we are not sensitive to wrongdoing, how can we be expected to act well?

A better (albeit more challenging) approach is to recover shame in healthy forms. This is the approach we take with other misdirected emotions. An example is that, when a child throws a tantrum, we do not regard her anger as disposable or inherently unproductive. We educate this emotion toward its proper end, helping the child to experience anger in fitting ways.

2. Shame Is Morally Instructive

I defined shame in terms of a global negative self-evaluation. This distinguishes shame from guilt, which attends to particular bad actions. Tangney (1998) puts it this way: Shame says, “I did that terrible thing,” whereas guilt says, “I did that terrible thing.” In some cases, shame’s self-evaluation makes it less action-guiding, since shame, unlike guilt, does not see a particular wrongdoing to repair. However, shame’s construal of the person means the emotion can better recognize patterns of bad action.

Additionally, shame attends to considerations of moral beauty or fineness—features of the moral life which are not neatly captured in terms of ‘good’ and ‘bad’.[9] Finally, shame attends to social standing and relational repair.[10] It aids our sensitivity to the feelings and expectations of others. Without shame, we lack the vision it provides, which helps us navigate the complexities of the moral life.

3. Shame Constrains Bad Leadership

Imagine you have a rule in your home: no jumping on the couches. But you don’t enforce the rule. Maybe you see the child jumping, and instead of scolding him, you turn away or smile. The child may jump on the couch tentatively at first. Eventually he will jump freely and shamelessly, unconcerned about the rule that apparently does not apply to him.

Shame matters because it holds a leader to a standard and keeps the standard emotionally salient. This is important because it reduces the likelihood of bad actions. It also reduces the tendency toward assumptions of norm-differentiation in leadership—acting as though rules, in general, do not apply.

Finally, shame matters because we are imitative creatures. We can tell young people that moral character matters, but when those in authority are uncivil and unapologetic, or shameless in how they comport themselves in public, this is the lesson that stays with them.

References

[1] Mort, E. 2026. $573M: Most Expensive Non-Presidential Race on Record. AdImpact.

[2] Meyer, M. 2026. Stop Those Aggravating Midterm Election Political Text Messages. CNET.

[3] Schwenk, K. Sep. 14, 2026. Cruz-Linked PAC Targets El-Sayed In “Death To America” Ad. The Lever; AP. Oct. 29, 2026. Controversial attack ad featuring Amy Acton's estranged mother has run its course in Ohio. 10 WBNS.

[4] OUP. (2025) Mud-slinging, n. In OED.

[5] Goodtimes, J. 2012. A brief history of campaign mudslinging from 1796 to today. Philadelphia Magazine.

[6] Hansen, W. Campaign Mudslinging: An American Tradition since (at Least) 1828. The Newberry.

[7] Tangney, J.P. 1998. How Does Guilt Differ from Shame? In Guilt and Children, ed. J. Bybee, 1–17. Cambridge. Little, S. 2023. A Case for Shame in Character Education. Studies in Philosophy and Education. 42: 283–302.

[8] Kristjánsson, K. 2014. Is shame an ugly emotion? Four discourses—Two contrasting interpretations for moral education. Studies in Philosophy and Education 33: 495–511.

[9] Jimenez, M. 2020. Aristotle on Shame and Learning to Be Good. Oxford University Press.

[10] Calhoun, Cheshire. 2004. “An Apology for Moral Shame.” Journal of Political Philosophy 12 (2): 127–244.