15. Shame, guilt and connectedness
Shame, pity and guilt in public policy
Let us look at this another way. Could shame and guilt play a role in fostering longer term connectedness with humanitarian issues? Much of this conversation shows that shame makes people withdraw and hide, and guilt prompts us into reparative action. Both emotions regulate social relations and the boundaries between self and other.
So far so good. But I suggest we leave aside for a moment the negative effects of shame and guilt and concentrate instead on the triangle of actors in humanitarian aid — the sufferer, the member of the public who wants to help and the NGOs that want to connect the two. What can we learn from these social relationships?
We found that guilt-motivated donations simultaneously reproduce the positions of generous giver in the North and grateful receiver in the South.
Inevitably, these relationships are complicated by the historical ties between the global North and global South, by the history of colonisation, by the continuing power differences. In the North we are aware of these ties, we are self-conscious about them, and we frequently feel guilty about them. As much was clear from our research into public responses to humanitarian disasters reported in our book Caring in Crisis?
Giving salves the guilt. But it doesn’t last. We found that guilt-motivated donations simultaneously reproduce the positions of generous giver in the North and grateful receiver in the South. Not surprising then that, although people still respond to guilt inducing messages in emergencies, they are increasingly resentful and resistant. They come to understand that it is a transactional model, one that dehumanises donor and recipient.
So what is the alternative? People want to give, as one of the participants in our research put it, ‘blood and tears’ through a model of helping that is based on solidarity, curiosity about the other and sharing, all this to replace guilt. They are looking for morally significant actions that connect people meaningfully and creates pride, the opposite of shame.
A transactional model of humanitarian response shames both parties, trapping them in unequal and materialistic exchanges, while a relational model returns dignity and pride to the connected parties.
Bruna Seu is a Reader in Psycho-social Studies at Birkbeck, University of London. Her book with Shani Orgad “Caring in Crisis? Humanitarianism, the Public and NGO’s” is published by Palgrave
