On the harms from “scapegoating”: what I thought was an obvious point

I would have thought this was an unnecessary point to make, but a question to me by someone I didn’t know has led me to think that maybe it is a necessary point to make.

By “scapegoating,” I mean an act, typically by an institution but it could be an individual, to focus blame for a recognized wrong on a subset of those who are (roughly) equally or (at least) partially at fault. A particularly reprehensible form of scapegoating is when the people protected by the scapegoating are the more senior or prominent.

So, for example, if in a prison, conditions are so poor that an inmate dies, and everyone at the prison, including its administration, knew the conditions were so poor that inmates could die, scapegoating is targeting for discipline just the guard on duty when the inmate dies. It is particularly reprehensible scapegoating when only the guards are held to any account, and when those who supervise the guards, or set the conditions for the prison, are excluded from any accountability. The point isn’t that the scapegoat is innocent. The point is that guilt extends beyond the scapegoat.

It is my view that scapegoating should be a public issue, and not just because of any unfairness to the scapegoat. Institutions do enormous good; sometimes they do extraordinary harm. If we don’t hold all those within the institution who are responsible for the harm accountable, then we will just see more harm.