Social-control remedies reproduce the structural vulnerabilities they target.

Evidence

I have argued that impersonal trust permits complex developments in social organization and exchange that create distinctive opportunities for abuse. These are responded to by new social-control strategies that unfortunately share some of the same structural properties as the original developments. Therefore, similar opportunities for violation emerge and stimulate new social-control measures that contain the structural seeds of further deviance. And so on. — Shapiro, Susan P., The Social Control of Impersonal Trust, 145

Categorization

• XREF: Echoes the reader’s Raskolnikov/Simmel work: externalized control (Porfiry’s audit, the institution-guardian) itself reinscribes the dyadic problem it was meant to resolve. — connects to: Mechanisms for controlling impersonal trust themselves create new opportunities for abuse — Shapiro, Susan P., The Social Control of Impersonal Trust, 1; Depolarization interventions can succeed while creating unintended harms.

Related

• Mechanisms for controlling impersonal trust themselves create new opportunities for abuse (similarity 0.86)
• The very mechanisms that enable trust also enable its abuse. (similarity 0.85)
• Controlling trust creates new opportunities for abuse in an inflationary spiral. (similarity 0.84)
• Controlling trust institutions increases dissatisfaction with their offerings. (similarity 0.81)
• Impersonal trust emerges where principals lose direct power to regulate agents. (similarity 0.80)
• Successful socialization replaces external control with internal self-sanctions. (similarity 0.79)
• The same factors enabling agency relationships create the opportunity for agent abuse. (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Mechanisms for controlling impersonal trust themselves create new opportunities for abuse #exemplifies (0.92) — Shapiro, Susan P., The Social Control of Impersonal Trust, 1