As much as I love Peter Boghossian, I don't think I agree with it. I rather live in a society that shames a poo eater than a society that elects a poo eater. It is not a matter of, if his constituents want to vote him out then they will vote him out.
What someone does in private informs a lot about what they do or support in public. For example: He would not punish other poo eaters, or find anything wrong with them. And if there are laws against it, as he is getting away with it himself and is an active participant in that activity, he would make sure others get away as well. And he would want to enact new laws or protections to support people like himself. So he can do it without shame.
And maybe there is a pocket of a variety of degenerates in his constituency, that keep voting him in. Their influence grows from one town to another, helping to corrupt the whole nation in time.
To make it clear, I am in no way implying that Peter supports such depraved behaviour of the elected individual in Spain. Or that he indulges in any such behaviour himself. I understand, he is trying to avoid an authoritative approach which can go out of hands. And also, perhaps to avoid a puritanical way of organising a society. However, for a functioning society, to be effective in its governance and social cohesion, it must have standards. And these standards don’t mean anything if they are not at least held by the society. So, not when enforceable by law, at least from a mechanism of shame by society can maintain these standards.
However, the idea of shaming, should also not lead someone to commit suicide as a result of public shaming. The idea, and approach, should be to make the person realize what they are doing is wrong, and that they should seek help to course correct. And at the same time, advocating for there to be an effective route, or multiple effective routes, where people can seek help rather than being accepted for who they are in their current state.
This is precisely how woke has spread by the way, and how the hold of Islamists have spread. How communism spread. And how every bad idea has the potential to spread. Because liberalism doesn't have in itself to preemptively de-escalate or discourage wrong and unwanted behaviour in society. "If no harm is being done to others" we often hear. "Liberalism doesn't tolerate the intolerant". Yes, but only when it has done the damage and made itself apparent to all.
It did not effectively go against woke nonsense. Because it needed children to have actually been mutilated, and a report to show how mutilating kids and adults is not good in the long term, before it activated itself against woke. Guess what, too late.
It did not activate against the dangers of Islam, and bought in the kool aid of Islam is a religion of peace. Why. And now when dangers from it are becoming apparent and they are all over in our institutions, now they want to do something. Too late.
Same with communism. Well everyone should be allowed to have any kinds of ideas and promote them to the society. They are not harming everyone. 50 years down the line, everyone sitting in the gulags. Well Liberalism doesn't support the intolerant. We are against communism and we think it should be removed from our societies. Guess what, that will be too damn late.
Sometimes, you don't need to see the dangers manifest themselves in the flesh before declaring them to be a danger and moving against them. Bad coding produces bad outcomes. We need to get better at detecting bad coding, and try to fix it rather than accept and tolerate it.
This is also the reason why I do not think Liberalism is capable of solving our current predicaments. And also why it is not a good model of thinking, going forward.
And in addition to it, this is the further down problem. Oh if its not harming anyone. Well it is. This has downstream harms that extends beyond the individual to the society. This is precisely where liberalism fails. Rights and Wrongs are not just mere concepts, to have a functioning society it is imperative to moral standards and an effective way to implement them.