Political theorist Nir Eisikovits explores the political potential of embarrassment in addressing historical injustices and mass atrocities. The question is whether embarrassment (the fear of appearing inconsistent, indecent, or ridiculous) can motivate political action in unexpected ways, turning seemingly idealistic reformist commitments into practical political programs for redressing large-scale past wrongs. Eisikovits suggests that moral progress on this issue often involves the conjunction between a morally committed social movement pushing for reforms and a set of circumstances that embarrasses a polity into implementing those reforms. As Eisikovits acknowledges, in non-idealistic terms, moral progress on addressing historical injustice is rarely linear; it involves a combination of a principled commitment to rectify these wrongs and the occurrence of accidental circumstances that make it suddenly costly or embarrassing for politicians not to redress them. Eisikovits distinguishes between embarrassment and shame in politics, arguing that the latter turns on the recognition of collective guilt whereas the former springs from a gap between proclaimed and perceived political identity. This is why embarrassment has a role in both realist and moralistic account of politics, whereas shame is important primarily for the latter.