Should states or countries apologize for slavery?

[Jo]

Virginia Assembly Apologizes For Slavery
Measure Expressing "Profound Regret" Passes Both Houses Unanimously

RICHMOND, Va., Feb. 24, 2007
(CBS/AP)

(AP) Meeting on the grounds of the former Confederate Capitol, the Virginia General Assembly voted unanimously Saturday to express "profound regret" for the state's role in slavery.
more (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/02/24/national/main2510579.shtml)

[Mary]

It would be silly for Oklahoma to apologize for slavery as it wasn't even a state when that was going on. ;)

I am not really sure what is the point. Of course people regret it now; I would hope that goes without saying. But the people in charge now had nothing to do with it so why do they need to apologize? Everyone agrees it was a terrible thing, isn't that enough? (When I say "everyone" I mean every decent human being; I'm sure there are psychopaths in fringe groups who don't think it was a bad thing but, fortunately, they are not in charge.)

Anyway, maybe this is oversimplifying but it would feel to me like someone seeking me out and apologizing to me for something bad that their great-great grandfather did to my great-great grandfather. I guess it might make some people feel better to have it acknowledged but for me it would be like, "Okaaaay....you had nothing to do with it so your apology really doesn't mean anything to me."

[Jejune]

I do think they should. I need to go make dinner, so I will need to come back to explain in full, but I just wanted to throw that out into the ether before I go cook. :giggle

[teawhisk]

Yes, I think they should.

We are all born into a situation created by thousands of years worth of decisions our ancestors made. We inherit the good and the bad. If we have no problem taking advantage of the benefits our ancestors have provided for us, we should have no problem apologizing for the mistakes our ancestors made.

Only around 10% of white males owned slaves in the South at the time of the Civil War, most of us do not descend from slave owners. But if we live in an area where slavery was practiced (and it was practiced worldwide), we are heirs to a culture that at one time condoned it. We sit here enjoying the benefits of the Western civilization, we should also apologize for the mistakes it has made.

As far as it doing any practical good, I would argue that it does. Apologizing for slavery reminds all of us that it was a Bad Thing and we ought never sit idly by and condone it -- in any form. If it was a Bad Thing for 19th century Southern plantation owners, it is a Bad Thing for 21st century Saudi Arabia.

My father's ancestors were slaves in Eastern Europe. Not only has Eastern Europe not apologized, they simply don't bother to mention that slavery even existed there to begin with. They were buying and selling slaves as late as 1914. Those same countries still persecute the racial minority they enslaved to begin with. It would do them a world of good to admit that they built their wealth on the backs of slaves, and that it was the wrong thing to do.

If a people doesn't renounce the errors its forefathers made, they will be in danger of making them again. I am sorry slavery was practiced here. I am sorry it was practiced anywhere. I wish cultures, states, and countries would also apologize.

Our understanding of the dignity of the human being has deepened over time, and slavery is unthinkable for most of us, but that hasn't always been the case.

[Jejune]

OK, I am going to try to explain what I think, but this simply can't be brief (holy moo, I wrote that word as "fried" at first) and I'm afraid I still won't be as clear as I'd like to be.

In the simplest words, an apology is owed because people in our country are still benefiting from slavery and other people are still suffering from the end results. And frankly, an apology is not enough, but it is an acknowledgment that something is owed, which, while not a lot, is something.

I'm currently taking a class in African American studies, and I'm surprised constantly at what I'm learning that I never knew before. I'm surprised because I'm someone who loves history, who actively seeks out books on history, and who is interested in the history of race relations. And yet, I never knew until two weeks ago that even after the 14th Amendment, a qualification for citizenship in the United States was that a person be white - or, after the 14th Amendment, descended from Africans. How have I gone 28 years without learning this? There were multiple Supreme Court cases in which a person's whiteness was debated and determined. And the thing is, this idea of whiteness as being a desirable thing is part and parcel of what led to slavery, what led to the Jim Crow laws, what led to redlining, and all of the other crimes our country has intentionally committed against its own people.

For all of us to be equal, we all need to have started at the same place. But slavery meant that we didn't. Ex-slaves couldn't get the same sorts of jobs as whites, didn't have possessions and skills amassed, never had the same opportunities. For years, the descendants of slaves in this country have not had the same opportunities as whites, and that has meant that the next generation has started out behind. In more recent year, the practice of redlining - a practice started by the federal government - in which property values were determined in part on the color of the property owners, meant that black people were left with less wealth than whites even when they owned almost identical property. This problem is ongoing, and it is a result, only somewhat indirectly, of the racism that slavery helped to foment.

We all have benefited and lost from slavery, monetarily and otherwise. The former slave states still benefit from slavery in some ways. They owe an apology. They owe more than an apology. They owe public policy that will help to level the playing field. By this I don't mean that all people will have the exact same abilities and same wealth, but I think we need to examine our current practices, because racist practices still exist, and eliminate them as we find them. When black and white people are compared on the basis of actual wealth (like property value) and income, and people of the same wealth are compared, the differences between success rates disappears. The current disparity is where slavery's effects are still felt.

And I know I'm not as eloquent as I could be and will probably have written some of this in a way that can be misunderstood. I apologize in advance for any lack of clarity. I'll try to explain better than I just did if anyone feels I've made any mistakes.

Edited to add: Teawhisk posted while I was writing this, and said what I wish I'd written in as simple and short a form as is possible. I am not going to erase what I wrote, but I'll say, "Yeah. What she said."

[Desirae]

I agree with Mary. ;)

[Jurgita]

It would be silly for Oklahoma to apologize for slavery as it wasn't even a state when that was going on. ;)

I am not really sure what is the point. Of course people regret it now; I would hope that goes without saying. But the people in charge now had nothing to do with it so why do they need to apologize? Everyone agrees it was a terrible thing, isn't that enough? (When I say "everyone" I mean every decent human being; I'm sure there are psychopaths in fringe groups who don't think it was a bad thing but, fortunately, they are not in charge.)

Anyway, maybe this is oversimplifying but it would feel to me like someone seeking me out and apologizing to me for something bad that their great-great grandfather did to my great-great grandfather. I guess it might make some people feel better to have it acknowledged but for me it would be like, "Okaaaay....you had nothing to do with it so your apology really doesn't mean anything to me."

Couldn't agree more!

[Kate]

I can't say that we ever "officially" had slavery here, but what we have here is a country founded on a lie of Terra Nullius...in other words, when the English arrived here, they claimed in their statutes that they arrived to an empty country.

As a result, the indigenous population were deemed to not exist, and thus were offered no rights or protections.

The plan here, like for so many other indigenous peoples was for them to be bred out of existence...and those plans were still being encouraged by our government up into the 1950's.

Up until the 1960's also, while slavery didn't formally exist, mixed blood Aboriginal children were, like my father forcibly removed for adoption if they were fair skinned, or put into missions were the girls were trained to be domestic workers, and the boys to be farm workers.

Many of these children became teenagers and once that happened, were to all intents and purposes slaves. Whoever employed them paid a sum of money to the government for employing them, and they were *supposed* to pay them too, but that rarely happened, and nobody bothered to police it...hence, they had nothing and nowhere to go, and were to all intents and purposes slaves.

Hell, Aboriginal people in Australia weren't allowed to vote until the 1960's.

Jumping forward to today, the Aboriginal population, can be likened to the African American population.

They have a higher infant mortality rate, a higher maternal mortality rate, a higher rate of illiteracy, a lower life expectancy...and there are communities living in some areas of Australia that had World Vision come in and provide them with safe drinking water because our government couldn't be bothered doing it...so even though we are a first world country, parts of our population have an equivalent standard of living as people in the third world.

So this is just one more reason I can't wait for our government to be voted out...because our current Prime Minister refuses to apologise the stolen generations because he claims it has nothing to do with that, despite the fact that when he first entered government some of these things were still government polict, and his party saw no need to bother to try and make things any better.

Anyway, I could rant about this all night, and I would probably ramble nonsensically, so I think I will come back to this later when I can make more sense...but I think, like Kristen (again) I will wind up for now with a HUGE yeah, that... to teawhisk.

[MistressAndMaid]

Excellent post, Kate and I agree with every word.

[Erika]

I agree with Kristen, Kate and Teawhisk. By apologising, we are acknowledging that slavery went on and that it still bears negative effects on the present families borne from these slaves. It is also a diplomatic effort and says to the present families that we will try and make sure that this never happens again.

The sad fact is, that there are still many people who don't think slavery was a bad thing and would welcome it back again in a heartbeat. Racism is still a huge problem in many countries, no matter how forward thinking we may like to think we are.

[gr8mommy]

An official apology? Sure. Reparations? Absolutely not.

[Lori]

I agree with Kristen and Teawhisk. Yes, states and countries should apologize for wrongs they've committed, even if they were committed in the past, especially when those wrongs still shape the present situation.

[Kristi]

I completely agree with what Mary said.

[Beka]

I guess my response would be exactly who do we apologise to? For the majority of us our heritage is now so mixed how exactly would we know who was deserving of an apology- David's sister, one of her parents is very likely decended from slaves, one is very likely decended from those either involved in or guilty of not having stood and fought against slavery- is she meant to apologise to herself on behalf of her maternal half to her paternal half?

I do agree it was extremely wrong and yes- if we apologise for atrocities in wars we should apologise for attrocities carried out in the name of trade like slavery once was, the truth is we saw people from a different culture and country as a commodity with a right to trade in them, shocking but it is how we saw it and it's only now we realise how very wrong it is that we acknowledge all people are equal.

However i don't think there is a need for reparations of a monetary or physical nature on the grounds a person in todays society is disadvantaged as a result of slavery, many people are disadvantaged - if i were to state i couldn't possibly go anywhere in life nor raise myself up because this is the state of being my father was born into i'd be told i can achieve anything if i made the effort and i am not my father. Many of my ancestors were placed in work houses which were contained slavery, their children removed from them because of nothing other than the fact they were poor or widowed in a country with no welfare system, they had no choice and worked for bed and food, no wage- their families were torn apart just the same as slavery and many died in work houses, do i expect an apology from the upper classes to the ancestors of those in the social underclass like my ancestors? No, i don't as it's the past and the biggest apology they could have made was the closure of the final workhouse which happen long ago in history.

i guess my point is none of the decendants today have to limit themselves based on the fact their forefathers were slaves or effected by it, not in England anyway (i can't speak for the usa as i am uncertain if any states do have laws, taxes etc which puts one at a direct disadvantage in the present day for their cultural heritage) In England we are now an equal society where we are actually seeing positive discrimination in favour of non-white citizens for careers, training opportunities, school places, scholarships, apprenticeships and internships so everyone has the capability to achieve in their own life time, very few people outside of the upper classes (a large % of whom in britain are from non-white groupings) inherit financially so very few people live off anything other than what they have self made reguardless of their colour and heritage in this day and age in our country, yes you will find some who will fall into a self fullfilling prophecy they attribute to their race/ancestory but you will find that in all walks of life, everyone is taxed on earnings reguardless of race and everyone is taxed on property the same, everyone is entitled to welfare etc. So in that sense i don't think financial reparations are necessary as in the present day everyone is enduring the same recessions, the same financial hardships.

However in terms of a nation we should admit how very wrong it was and hopefully it would allow moving another step forward if people could accept that apology.

[Jejune]

<snip> i guess my point is none of the decendants today have to limit themselves based on the fact their forefathers were slaves or effected by it, not in England anyway (i can't speak for the usa as i am uncertain if any states do have laws, taxes etc which puts one at a direct disadvantage in the present day for their cultural heritage) In England we are now an equal society <snip> in this day and age in our country, yes you will find some who will fall into a self fullfilling prophecy they attribute to their race/ancestory but you will find that in all walks of life, everyone is taxed on earnings reguardless of race and everyone is taxed on property the same, everyone is entitled to welfare etc. <snip>

Beka, I've taken a segment of your post to respond to. While Britain certainly IS different from the United States, since most slavery occurred not on British soil, but in British colonies, I think the best comparison is the class system. I can see where the parts of your post I quoted come from, but I have to strongly disagree.

I don't know if I'm eloquent and informed enough to say what I mean and say it correctly, but even in Britain there has been a skewed history that tends to favor certain people, and those people started off at an advantage and lent that advantage to their children.

I don't know enough about recent British history to give good examples there, but here's a recent example in the U.S. After World War II, veterans (who fought in segregated ranks) could take advantage of the GI Bill to attend college and get good jobs. But black veterans were often not able to take advantage of the GI Bill because colleges wouldn't accept them, and even if they did, blacks were often passed over for jobs even if they had college degrees. When Levittown was built, the houses were affordable and nice, but they wouldn't sell to black people, even black people who could afford the houses. Blacks had to buy or rent at inflated prices in certain neighborhoods only. This is just after WWII. So we're talking people about my grandparents' age, maybe a little younger than my grandfather. Taking a theoretical black family and a theoretical white family from that time who have similar conditions, let's say that the white veteran goes to college on the GI Bill, improves himself, gets a good job, and buys a cheap house in an all white suburb. He's not a racist, but he knows a good deal when he sees one. The house appreciates in value, and he is able to take out a mortgage to send his kid to college. The kid does better for himself, and his kids start off at an advantage in life that the grandfather didn't have. In contrast, the black solider comes back and also goes to college but cannot find a job with his skill set. Or he does, and it pays less than the same job done by a white man. He can't buy a house in a suburb, because the owners won't sell to blacks. Or he does, and the white neighbors move out and the value of the house goes down. Chances are that he bought at an elevated price, anyway, because that was a fairly standard practice - assisted by the federal government - until the '60's. So his value does not increase over his lifetime, and his children do not gain from his life, even though he did all the right stuff.

Now, I'm not saying this is the story for all white people and all black people in the United States by any means, but that for a long, long time, the odds were slanted toward white people, and while most of those barriers are being broken down, they're not gone. So my point is that history, even seemingly distant history, has an effect on subsequent generations and can make it easier or harder for the next generation depending.

Basically, even when the playing field is leveled to some degree, I believe that it doesn't mean that it's suddenly become fair, because there's a lot of catch up to do. I don't really believe in reparations as a means of catching up, but I do think there are other forms of public policy that are needed. I believe in affirmative action, though I think it needs huge reform, and should be based on wealth rather than race, because the playing field is level enough that people with the same actual wealth have the same chances at success in life.

I agree absolutely on the apology, though. It's a gesture and an acknowledgment, and an important one, but it can't be more than that. At the same time, it also means we're not just going to forget and move on without a thought.

I hope I explained myself to some degree as I hoped to. I'm finding it very hard to say what I mean, lately.

[Lori]

Kristen, I think that was a very good explanation. This is an issue that I really have difficulty articulating my feelings on. On a basic level, I guess I just think it comes down to the fact that there are still many, many problems and tensions involving race in the U.S. today, and they need to be resolved. I don't think that resolution or reconcilation are possible without an apology. Obviously it's not like the government apologizes for slavery and things are all better, but I don't think that any real, substantial progress toward reconciliation is possible until past wrongs are admitted, made public, and apologized for.

I also think it's important to distinguish between government apologies and personal apologies. It would be somewhat ridiculous--and patronizing--for me to go up to people and start apologizing to them for slavery. If my family owned slaves, and I was benefitting from the wealth they'd made off of those slaves, then I certainly think an apology to the ancestors of those slaves would be in order, but for a random white person to apologize to a random black person for slavery just seems random and not particularly meaningful (or meaningful at all). But, I see an institutional apology, which an apology from the government is, as very different. Institutions have histories, and represent larger systems, and as such I do think that institutional apologies are meaningful in a way that individual apologies just can't be this far after the fact, in most cases.

[Jo]

If my family owned slaves, and I was benefiting from the wealth they'd made off of those slaves, then I certainly think an apology to the ancestors of those slaves would be in order, but for a random white person to apologize to a random black person for slavery just seems random and not particularly meaningful (or meaningful at all).

I am not adverse to that concept Lori. But how would that open up a family that did own slaves to lawsuits? My family did and I am more than willing to apologize. But I am not willing to lose my children's future over it. I know I am being selfish here given the legacy of slavery in this country. But actually my children's current financial future is based on a legacy totally separate from slavery, ie Dave's dad who suffered from racism in ways he never imagined before he came to the US.

As for governments, I think an apology is a nice gesture. It acknowledges the wrongs that were done. I don't think that it changes matters. But I do think it is the right thing to do. Unfortunately for Virginia, I really only think it was done because of the 400th anniversary of Jamestown. If that wasn't occurring, then it wouldn't have happened. At the same time, no such apology was issued prior to the the 350th celebration and much has changed in the last 50 years. So hopefully these baby steps do continue to add up.

[Lori]

I am not adverse to that concept Lori. But how would that open up a family that did own slaves to lawsuits?

I'd still separate the apology from the issue of reparations. I don't think that reparations are owed to the ancestors of the slaves, simply because as far as I know we aren't legally owed the pay of any of our relatives, and certainly not our dead ones. If, for example, a company exploited my great-grandfather and got wealthy off of paying him next to nothing, I don't have any legal claim to the company's fortune. I think slavery is the same thing. Financial reparations would have certainly been in order right after the fact, but once you're even one generation out, then I think the issue of financial reparations becomes moot. Now, if I were really, really rich and had slaveowners in my family history, I'd consider some sort of sizeable charitable donation to go along with my apology, but if I were really, really rich, I should be making sizeable charitable donations any way.

[Jejune]

I like to think that part of how I'm contributing to an apology is by making my slave owning ancestors spin in their graves at high speed. ;) I'm being facetious, but there is some real irony to the fact that the children just a few generations down from my "ethnically English" slave owning ancestors are Jewish, black, Hispanic, Irish, and more. Mind, these "ethnically English" people were Catholic, so I have no idea what that means. I don't even know what ethnically English means. It sounds like a weird claim to make.