Accusations have significant interpersonal consequences, harming accused targets and substantially benefitting accusers

From Holding People Responsible for Ethical Violations: The Surprising Benefits of Accusing Others by Jessica A. Kennedy and Maurice E. Schweitzer.

In recent years, much of our political dialogue, or at least how it is reported, has devolved into accusations - You are: racist, homophobic, misogynist, islamophobic, xenophobic, intolerant, etc. We no longer argue about goals or how to achieve them. Instead, some players simply make accusations that you are unfit to participate in a discussion.

It is regrettable but understandable when you have no evidence or coherence to your argument, accusations being the last refuge of the desperate advocate.

Slowly, slowly, all those accusations are beginning to lose their traction. Part of the loss is because when everyone is a racist, then it loses meaning. Part of the loss is due to conflation - when a verbally abusive, malicious bigot is a racist and when someone who simply disagrees with you is a racist, again, the accusations lose meaning.

But there is an inherent power in making accusations and even the most constructive and civil conversation can transform almost instantaneously as soon as a hard accusation is made, regardless of whether the accusation has merit or not.

Why? Why is the momentum lost and the tenor of the discussion so immediately different? A big part of course is simply the loss of trust.

But there is more to it than just that, or at least it has always seemed to me. Kennedy and Schweitzer don't answer those questions but they do shed some more light. Apparently, as long as you are not demonstrably hypocritical, any accusation is granted a modicum of credence. Most critically, the accusation enhances the accusers moral status regardless of the merit. And the accused is inherently harmed.

From the summary.

Individuals who accuse others of unethical behavior can derive significant benefits. Compared to individuals who do not make accusations, accusers engender greater trust and are perceived to have higher ethical standards. In Study 1, accusations increased trust in the accuser and lowered trust in the target. In Study 2, we find that accusations elevate trust in the accuser by boosting perceptions of the accuser’s ethical standards. In Study 3, we find that accusations boosted both attitudinal and behavioral trust in the accuser, decreased trust in the target, and promoted relationship conflict within the group. In Study 4, we examine the moderating role of moral hypocrisy. Compared to individuals who did not make an accusation, individuals who made an accusation were trusted more if they had acted ethically but not if they had acted unethically. Taken together, we find that accusations have significant interpersonal consequences. In addition to harming accused targets, accusations can substantially benefit accusers.

The implication is that false accusations will continue to be made because the profit loss ratio is asymmetric. Your moral reputation is enhanced, your enemy is harmed and there is little cost to the accuser. As long as an accusation is all upside and little downside, they will continue to be made.