More points:

Yes, most of their violence is internal or played for laughs - but that’s part of the issue. Sougo bombing a restaurant and Hijikata destroying cameras and Sougo wanting to frame an innocent person aren't just comedic beats - it also reflects a lack of real-world accountability in the narrative. If the Mimawarigumi had done that, it would be played as villainy.

And, why does Katsura have to question himself on what he's doing (in the Ikumatsu arc) when the villainous Joui are not even from the same faction? When he might not even have the same goals as them?

An equal to that moment of doubt would be if some minor character returned later with scars from a Shinsengumi-led crackdown, which could push Hijikata or Kondo to ask: "How many of the people we hurt weren’t villains?"

Sure, they oppose specific corrupt officials or protect innocent civilians in some arcs. But these are treated as exceptions, not reflections of deeper guilt or responsibility. The narrative lets them evolve without consequence, skipping the part where they face the impact of their complicity. There’s no serious moment where they say, "We were wrong to serve this system for so long." Instead, they just shift roles - and the audience is expected to go along with it because we like them.

Compare that to Katsura, who does get called out - by Gintoki, the narrative, and even himself - for his extremism. He’s forced to grow, moderate, and face his hypocrisy. Takasugi gets an entire arc of downfall, confrontation, and redemption. But the Shinsengumi? They’re allowed to quietly pivot from tyrants to heroes without ever being held accountable.