The forthcoming article “Race, shaming, and international human rights” by Zoltán I. Búzás and Lotem Bassan-Nygate is summarized by the author(s) below.
Human rights organizations (HROs) play a crucial role in holding governments accountable for their actions. However, debates persist regarding the unintended consequences of their methods. Specifically, there are concerns that publicly criticizing (shaming) governments might inadvertently fuel racism against diasporas or undermine HROs’ own anti-racist reputation.
In our article, titled “Race, Shaming, and International Human Rights,” published in the American Journal of Political Science, we explored the dynamics of racially charged interactions between HROs and the governments they critique. Through two U.S.-based survey experiments involving over 6,700 respondents and interviews with eleven prominent HROs, we uncovered several key insights.
First, our findings indicate that shaming can effectively influence U.S. public opinion towards foreign governments. Individuals exposed to HRO reports criticizing Israel and China held less favorable views of these nations. Importantly, this criticism did not increase racism against the respective diasporas, such as antisemitism or anti-Asian sentiments.
Second, we identify a central challenge to shaming which relates to concerns about anti-racist reputations. Our interviews highlighted a genuine concern among organizations about being perceived as biased or racist when criticizing specific countries. Our survey-data validated some of this concern — almost 60% of controlled respondents agreed that Amnesty International’s report labeling Israel as an Apartheid state is antisemitic. However, our study also suggests a remedy: incorporating explicit anti-racist messaging in their critiques can mitigate perceptions of bias.
Lastly, our research examined how governments targeted by HRO criticism employ rhetorical strategies, which we term “racial countershaming,” to rebut accusations and regain public support. We found that such countershaming tactics can partially offset the negative effects of shaming.
In conclusion, while HROs play a pivotal role in advancing human rights globally, they must navigate complex terrain to avoid unintended consequences. Incorporating clear anti-racist messaging in their communications can enhance their anti-racist reputation. Additionally, governments targeted by HROs may employ racial countershaming to recover some, but not all, of the public support lost to shaming.
About the Author(s): Zoltán I. Búzás is an associate professor of global affairs in the Keough School of Global Affairs at the University of Notre Dame and Lotem Bassan-Nygate is an Assistant Professor of Public Policy at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University. Their research “Race, shaming, and international human rights” is now available in Early View and will appear in a forthcoming issue of the American Journal of Political Science.
Speak Your Mind