Political apologies are sometimes described as “acts of recognition”. What is being recognised and what political purpose does this recognition serve? Is it too late now to say sorry?
Apology as a method of addressing past injustice has become a global phenomenon, especially since the end of the Cold War (Smits 2008; Borneman 2005; Lazare 2004). Political apologies are a symbolic act that recognise an injustice or wrongdoing that occurred from one group to another, and acknowledges how it continues to affect the wronged group in the present day. It is also recognition of the regret by the apologiser for the harms caused and of the damaged dignity of the wronged group. Specifically, I will discuss injustices done to minorities and citizens …show more content…
This is partially because they are relatively cheap or easy for the state to provide compared to other tools, like reparations (Verdeja 2010). Verdeja (2010) says that the intention of some apologies could be to stop any future legitimate grievances being made by the victims. Certainly even if the apology is authentic, and given sincerely, politicians will still only apologise when it is to their political advantage to do so (Thaler 2012). One exception might be that of Kniefall, the unexpected apology made by the West German Chancellor, Willy Brandt, towards Jewish victims of WWII, where he fell to his knees (Borneman 2005). But such impromptu sincerity by an agent of the state, rather than more prepared apologies like the Apology to Australia's Indigenous peoples, is a rarity. More cynical views of the state believe that political apologies are tools used to quell victimised groups’ concerns without committing to changing the existing effects of that injustice and are “awash in self-interest and crocodile tears” (Thaler 2012, p. 260). Others argue that in periods of political transition, the State will use political apology to distinguish themselves from the crimes of the previous leadership, whilst establishing a “continuity of state authority and responsibility” (Verdeja 2010, p. 576). Borneman (2005) notes that establishing one’s self as a moral authority over its citizens, …show more content…
Perhaps the most significant reason for the state to apologise is to reconcile differences to help forge national unity and a new collective memory. Shriver (1995) discusses Solon’s views on the injustice’s ability harm the ability of all citizens to form and preserve a unified political community. Verdeja (2010) emphasises that one of the key tasks of an apology is to create more positive relations between the state and citizens. In order to recreate a united political community, the state uses apology to acknowledge and defuse grievances born from injustice and bring about reconciliation between two parties (Thompson
Apology as a method of addressing past injustice has become a global phenomenon, especially since the end of the Cold War (Smits 2008; Borneman 2005; Lazare 2004). Political apologies are a symbolic act that recognise an injustice or wrongdoing that occurred from one group to another, and acknowledges how it continues to affect the wronged group in the present day. It is also recognition of the regret by the apologiser for the harms caused and of the damaged dignity of the wronged group. Specifically, I will discuss injustices done to minorities and citizens …show more content…
This is partially because they are relatively cheap or easy for the state to provide compared to other tools, like reparations (Verdeja 2010). Verdeja (2010) says that the intention of some apologies could be to stop any future legitimate grievances being made by the victims. Certainly even if the apology is authentic, and given sincerely, politicians will still only apologise when it is to their political advantage to do so (Thaler 2012). One exception might be that of Kniefall, the unexpected apology made by the West German Chancellor, Willy Brandt, towards Jewish victims of WWII, where he fell to his knees (Borneman 2005). But such impromptu sincerity by an agent of the state, rather than more prepared apologies like the Apology to Australia's Indigenous peoples, is a rarity. More cynical views of the state believe that political apologies are tools used to quell victimised groups’ concerns without committing to changing the existing effects of that injustice and are “awash in self-interest and crocodile tears” (Thaler 2012, p. 260). Others argue that in periods of political transition, the State will use political apology to distinguish themselves from the crimes of the previous leadership, whilst establishing a “continuity of state authority and responsibility” (Verdeja 2010, p. 576). Borneman (2005) notes that establishing one’s self as a moral authority over its citizens, …show more content…
Perhaps the most significant reason for the state to apologise is to reconcile differences to help forge national unity and a new collective memory. Shriver (1995) discusses Solon’s views on the injustice’s ability harm the ability of all citizens to form and preserve a unified political community. Verdeja (2010) emphasises that one of the key tasks of an apology is to create more positive relations between the state and citizens. In order to recreate a united political community, the state uses apology to acknowledge and defuse grievances born from injustice and bring about reconciliation between two parties (Thompson