Carlo Ginzburg and Patriotic Shame
Translated from Spanish, summarized and contextualized by DistantNews.
At a glance
- Historian Carlo Ginzburg, in his final essays, explored shame as a stronger bond than love, particularly concerning collective actions and national identity.
- Ginzburg argued that true patriotism involves shame for a nation's collective sins, not blind allegiance, and that shame reveals our deeper connections to entities that represent us.
- He applied this concept to contemporary issues, including the opening of Guantรกnamo Bay and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, suggesting shame is a moral compass for our affiliations.
Carlo Ginzburg, the renowned microhistorian who passed away in June at 87, explored the complex nature of shame in his final collection of essays, "Il vincolo de la vergogna" (The Bond of Shame). He posited that shame can be a more powerful connection than love, particularly when examining our ties to collective entities like nations or institutions.
Ginzburg's essay, originally written over 20 years ago in response to the opening of Guantรกnamo Bay, delves into the personal feelings evoked by the denial of rights to terrorism suspects held by the U.S. military. While indignant, Ginzburg felt no shame because he did not identify with the nation responsible for the "monstrous detention facility." He argued that shame arises when we feel personally connected to the collective sins of the entities we belong to.
Shame can be a stronger bond than love.
"The country to which we belong is the one we can be ashamed of," Ginzburg wrote. He distinguished this from blind, sectarian patriotism, suggesting that true love of country involves acknowledging and feeling shame for collective wrongdoings. This sense of shame, he implied, is a sign of a healthy moral compass and a deeper connection to our homeland, even to the point of recognizing it as a place one might one day need to flee.
The country to which we belong is the one we can be ashamed of.
In a postscript dated August 2025, Ginzburg reflected on his connection to Israel following the October 7th attacks and the subsequent Israeli response in Gaza. He noted that while Palestinians might feel shame for Hamas's violence, the "ferocious and criminal response" by the Netanyahu government, marked by civilian deaths, also evoked shame among Jews in Israel and the diaspora, including himself as an Italian Jew. He contrasted this with the often-profitable indignation directed at the wrongdoings of distant nations, suggesting that indifference to our own country's or party's sins signifies a form of abandonment.
Ginzburg's work suggests that shame serves as an intimate test of our multiple identities, ideological, religious, or national. He concluded by referencing current European Union immigration policies, which he deemed "worthy of the greatest shame," indicating that our commitment to Europeanism is currently being tested.
The horrible massacre of October 7 will have generated a sense of shame among men and women belonging to the Palestinian community who do not recognize themselves in the violence perpetrated by Hamas. But the ferocious and criminal response of the Netanyahu government, marked by the massacre of children and adults in the Gaza Strip, has also aroused a sense of shame, both in Israel and in the Jewish diaspora.
Originally published by El Paรญs in Spanish. Translated, summarized, and contextualized by our editorial team with added local perspective. Read our editorial standards.