Comments on: “Apologies for the past are due Chinese descendants”

By: Si

Si — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 10:46:48 +0000

@Tim et al.

Looks like we need to agree to disagree. Thanks for the polite debate!

By: J B

J B — Sat, 20 Jun 2009 04:39:29 +0000

I think the main problem with Si’s argument is that a lot of people out there would still deny what the US government and many Americans did to others was wrong, or that it happened or was as bad as it actually was. There is still a need for people to learn about what happened, and to acknoweldge that it was wrong. I don’t think they need to feel personal guilt, but I think it’s necessary in order to actually put it behind us, and to create real “social harmony”.

By: Tim

Tim — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 15:59:04 +0000

Well, something like this:
And the Congress “apologizes to African-Americans on behalf of the people of the United States, for the wrongs committed against them and their ancestors who suffered under slavery and Jim Crow laws.”

I bring little emotional baggage to the table when I read this statement. I take it at face value and leave guilt over the white man’s burden for a previous generation.

Litanies of past injustices lacking atonement don’t disqualify current pursuits to recognize cruelty. It’s not the nuances or complexity of the cruelty that is important. Rather cruelty is just wrong.

Sadly, a point that requires constant reminders – the point, I believe, Mr. Fong is making.

By: Si

Si — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 12:39:08 +0000

There is nothing personal about it: it’s an institution apologizing to an ethnic group.

Firstly how can an institution apologise? To paraphrase a famous line institutions don’t enslave people, people do. Secondly I think you are being disingeneous. This isn’t about an institution apologising, it is essentially one ethnic group apologising to another. It is all a part of the “white man he the devil” narrative so frequently parroted. It has cropped up today again here:

http://tinyurl.com/nuzcnx

You don’t see Manchus apologising to Hans, neither do you see African tribes or Arabs apologising for participating in and profiting from the slave trade, Mongols apologising to the Russians/Chinese/Arabs/most of the Eurasian continent and you don’t see much hay being made over the Maoris’ musket wars. The traffic appears to be in one direction and that direction imho is that it is in the service of the aforementioned narrative, whether intentioned or not. Little mention is ever made of the active collaboration of many ethnic groups in their own servitude. Instead we have this simplistic reading of history with its victims and oppressors and no real understanding of the highly complex nature of the power structures within which said groups operated. This is what I object to, and will continue to object to.

By: Tim

Tim — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 08:48:00 +0000

“Personally I do not want any apologies for WW2…”

There is nothing personal about it: it’s an institution apologizing to an ethnic group. He is asking the government to recognize that the exclusion act was wrong, which apparently it has not done. He is not asking for an apology from someone, rather from an institution.

By the way, the US senate just yesterday apologized for the legalization of the slavery and racial discrimination of African Americans and I can tell you that I don’t feel guilty. Not sure why anyone would associate me with a law that was abolished long before I was born just because my government decided to apologize.