Maybe. I mean, this is a judgment call, I can't really argue with your personal judgment on the matter. You certainly don't have to apologize for anything you don't feel responsible for, even if someone else thinks you are responsible and should apologize.

But. I've thought about this, as an American, in relation to our treatment of all kinds of people. We certainly weren't very nice to our own indigenous people, or the people that we brought here in chains, or even the poor who worked (and work) the factories and the mines and the mills and so on, allowing for the prosperity of everyone (ideally).

And this really doesn't have to reflect on you at all, but in my own judgment, I feel responsible for some of that. I certainly benefit from it, even if I belong to some of those groups of exploited people mentioned above. I freely take advantage of living in America, and I think that makes me somewhat responsible for what made America.

Now, I should also mention that I choose my allegiance to America freely, also, and that choice is based partly on my own judgment that I'd rather be responsible for America than any other nation. That may sound like a strange choice to some people, at least now while America, by dint of its sheer size and energy requirements, is causing a lot of imbalance in the world. But y'know what, I don't have to live here, yet I choose to, and I think that makes me responsible to the people that are harmed, and have been harmed, by that choice.

Not a terribly coherent post, I realize. Not a terribly coherent subject.

Failure to act by someone in leadership to correct a past wrong, is in iteself a wrong. When there's good to be done, one cannot both fail to act and be good. A lack of action is in and of itself, doing a wrong.

Additionally, the person making the apology is the only one who can judge whether or not they feel they owe the apology to someone they are trying to reach out to. Whether or not you feel like they do is of no concern here. For example, if I want to apologize to Chesby for the way she's been treated by some of the users here it's my call. I get to tell if I think I owe it to her or not... not you.

If I decide to apologize to her on your behalf, that's another matter entirely. You get to dispute that.

Besides, who died and made you the dictionary?

Another point you stated was: This isn't a point of law. An apology is a simple verbal and moral transaction where one party says I'm sorry and the other either accepts the apology and forgives... or doesn't. That's where it ends. An apology doesn't mean you're bound by some sort of law or decree to pay the parties for the wrong you apologize for.

I've benefitted from oppression of Native American Indians in the past because I now own the land I'm living on. You can't repay forever, but you can attempt to make past injustices right again. You can't personally fix all that was done before you came into existence, but you can seek to make some sort of ammends without meaning that you personally have done an injustice.

__________________
"The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left."
Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV)

I think his name was Webster.......

He did - that's exactly what he said. I posted the link to his apology so people could see how it was worded. It went for a lot longer than that, and addressed many of the questions brought up here, but I wasn't going to post a 30-minute link!!

And this comment just illustrates your ignorance on the matter. He didn't apologise on behalf of the Australian people, just on behalf of the government and parliament - the ones directly responsible for the stolen generations and the ones directly responsible for the current appalling legislations with regard to indigenous people. And he made it clear beforehand that there would be no compensation. For which, again, I think he is wrong. The plight of the indigenous communities of Australia is absolutely the collective responsibility of the non-indigenous peoples of Australia, whether or not we are "personally" responsible for it.

As is the welfare of ANY who are underprivileged - no matter what their ethnic background, I might add.

Not only that - you call his act one of mental illness. The majority of Australians call it altruism, humility, generosity and a spirit of reconciliation that has been long overdue. It takes a very honorable and decent person to do what he did (something I think that you could not possibly relate to) and that is why he was applauded by everyone in that room and elsewhere - even the people who disagreed with him. For goodness' sake - the opposition leader got up straight afterwards and apologised as well.

This was a symbolic act that does not negatively affect a single person in this country for whom it was not intended, and has a very great positive affect on the people for whom it was. If you knew anything about this country's history of treating our Aboriginal people you would understand that this is a tiny drop in a huge bucket of apologies that we owe them. I would apologise myself if I knew where to do it.

It's just typical that you would call such a noble, peace-offering gesture a mental illness.

__________________
We've got rules and maps and guns in our backs, but we still can't just behave ourselves. Even if to save our own lives, we are a brutal kind. The Shins

Charitably mitigating the bad consequences of something done by a third party to someone, and apologizing for it when you aren't the perpetrator, are two completely different things - the former admirable, the latter lunatic.

Quote:

Additionally, the person making the apology is the only one who can judge whether or not they feel they owe the apology to someone they are trying to reach out to.

Absolutely wrong, in the case of the Prime Minister, who was speaking ex officio. That means he was not just implying culpability for himself (itself a nutsy idea) but all the non-ab people of Australia. Did he ask them if they wanted him to apologize on their behalf??



If you do, perhaps you can also get her to apologize for some of the vicious things she's said.


Sure, you can >>>charitably<<< help anyone you want. Or not. You don't owe anyone anything, except to the degree you personally, you, are culpable.

__________________
Blade: "more educated and literate people than Justabubba"

Justabubba: "that would include everyone"

http://politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=27847

Do you not listen? He didn't apologise on behalf of the non-indigenous people of this country. Not at all. Only on behalf of the government and parliament. He didn't `presume' to speak for everyone in Australia in the slightest.

Your argument fails entirely on that point alone, but I suppose that would be terribly inconvenient for you to acknowledge.

__________________
We've got rules and maps and guns in our backs, but we still can't just behave ourselves. Even if to save our own lives, we are a brutal kind. The Shins

I know. That's my point- that it wasn't about taking responsibility for the actions, but about expressing a sincere sorrow and regret for them.

__________________
LET ME SEE YOUR WAR FACE!!!

Last time I checked, australia was a democracy. The government isn't a free-floating independent entity, but rather a representative of the people.

__________________
Blade: "more educated and literate people than Justabubba"

Justabubba: "that would include everyone"

http://politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=27847

Nice try. Is that all you could come up with?

__________________
We've got rules and maps and guns in our backs, but we still can't just behave ourselves. Even if to save our own lives, we are a brutal kind. The Shins

Whaaaaattt???

__________________
Blade: "more educated and literate people than Justabubba"

Justabubba: "that would include everyone"

http://politicalforum.com/showthread.php?t=27847