Let's be clear

So with Jan. 6 come and gone, everybody seems to have taken down their Christmas lights. We have an Epiphany and the world gets darker -- that seems backwards.

- - -

Al-Qaida has frequently employed a "sleeper-cell" strategy, with its agents posing as peaceful, innocent citizens. Now, let's be very clear -- I'm not saying that Adam Yoshida is a concealed terrorist, a Manchurian blogger. But on the other hand, it's impossible to rule it out. These things are, after all, unfalsifiable by their very nature.

- - -

This, from Mother Jones, is pretty cool: "Waiting for Godot -- and Much More -- in New Orleans":

Earlier this month, the Classical Theatre of Harlem, together with Creative Time, a New York-based art collective, wrapped up a two-week run of Beckett's most renowned work with a final production in the Gentilly neighborhood. The play's organizers had to turn people away the weekend before, when Didi and Gogo did their waiting in the still-decimated Lower Ninth Ward.

Even though the play was mounted in two locations, Paul Chan, the artist behind the project, made sure that the whole city felt Godot'€™s presence (or rather, his absence). ... Across New Orleans, telephone poles bore simple signs with the first three lines of the play: "A country road. A tree. Evening."

Mojo has posted a photo essay from the project, and Creative Time has a fascinating video account.

And yes, that's Wendell Pierce -- Bunk from The Wire -- in the role of Vladimir. If you've ever seen the infamous one-word crime scene scene, then you know the man can do Beckett justice.

Speaking of The Wire, I'm watching Season 3 on DVD, and there, as Bunny Colvin gives his classic "paper bag" speech, who do I see but my old friend Victor Lopez, brilliantly portraying Unnamed Western District Officer No. 14. I realize that extras probably don't count, and community theater stage productions definitely don't count, but if they did, that would put me only two degrees of separation away from both Pierce and Method Man in the Kevin Bacon Game, which is kind of cool.

- - -

Chrissy e-mailed this link: "The GOP Primary Field in Buffy Villains." Brilliant.

Keep in mind, though, that vampires don't all look like monsters. They often pass themselves off as normal humans. Now, let's be very clear -- I'm not saying that Adam Yoshida is an unholy, undead demon, a Manchurian bloodsucker. But on the other hand, it's impossible to rule it out. These things are, after all, unfalsifiable by their very nature.

- - -

Four days of rain in late December kept 2007 from setting a record as the driest year in Atlanta's history, but the city remains down to a 90-day water supply. The National Weather Service says more rain is likely this week, which is good news.

The severe drought afflicting the Southeast needs to be addressed, primarily, as a matter of public policy, but thanks to Georgia Gov. Sonny Perdue's decision to hold a public prayer vigil on the steps of the state Capitol, it's also interesting as a matter of pop-theology.

Following the Nov. 14 prayer vigil, Atlanta received only 0.76 inches of rain for the rest of the month -- more than 3 inches below the normal November average. In December, Atlanta received 4.78 inches of rain -- nearly a full inch more than the average for that month. January, however, has been bone dry so far -- 0.87 inches below average. In total the city has been about 3.3 inches below normal since the semi-official supplication.

Possible explanations:

A. Sex, drugs and rock & roll: Georgia remains an unrighteous society whose prayers must go unheeded. (The increase in December precipitation might have resulted from the annual Christmastime surge in churchgoing.)

B. There is no God. If this purportedly almighty, sovereign deity doesn't jump through hoops when called upon to do so by the governor -- the duly elected representative of the people -- then either this deity doesn't exist or, at best, he has no respect for the democratic process.

C. There is a God, he just doesn't like Georgia. See also: August, humidity.

D. There is a God, he just doesn't like Sonny Perdue. See also: Confederate flag; opposition to apology for slavery.

E. As the above foolishness demonstrates, it's probably best to focus on the public policy questions and do your praying somewhere other than on the steps of the Capitol.

I pick E (and maybe also D, a little bit).

- - -

Speaking of slavery apologies, New Jersey is the latest state to take up the issue. Good for them. Critics of the gesture are saying that it's purely symbolic. Possibly. But not apologizing is pretty damned symbolic too, I'd say.

"History is what it is," said Assemblyman Michael Patrick Carroll, R-Morris. "It is not something for which anyone can or should be expected to atone."

Six words, Mr. Assemblyman: "Doomed to repeat it" and "never again."

My family is from New Jersey. Richard Clark(e) settled down in Union County in 1640 and I was born in Union County 328 years later. (We didn't get the memo on that whole "Westward ho" thing -- it took us almost 350 years to cross the Delaware.) In great, great (add a whole bunch more) grandpa Richard's will he left his son, among other "properties," his "serving wench." Whether or not that is something for which I, as his descendant, can atone, I think I should be expected at least to try.

The resolution N.J. is considering expresses, "profound regret for the state's role in slavery and apologizes for the wrongs inflicted by slavery and its aftereffects in the United States of America." For my part, and Richard's, my only question is where can I sign to endorse this?

- - -

NAMBLA teaches its members to conceal their predilections and activities from the rest of society. Now, let's be very clear -- I'm not saying that Adam Yoshida is a concealed pedophile, a Manchurian molester. But on the other hand, it's impossible to rule it out. These things are, after all, unfalsifiable by their very nature.

Comments

[Bugmaster]

Fred's Manchurian jokes would be funnier if I knew beforehand who Adam Yoshida was :-(

[cjmr's husband]

I hope extras and roommates etc count! One of my ex-roommates and his wife are extras in the new Batman movie -- which, via Eric Roberts, gives me a Bacon Number *and* a Doctor Who Number of 4!

[Drak Pope]

Bugmaster -- Adam Yoshida was the convicted serial rapist and murderer who terrorized the American Midwest during the late 70s and early 80s. Well, maybe he isn't, but you can never be sure about these things.

[Patrick Nielsen Hayden]

Wow, Teresa and I just saw that "infamous one-word crime-scene scene" for the first time last night. Courtesy of Netflix, we're five episodes into Season 1 of The Wire, and we're hopelessly hooked.

[not someone else]

If I were God, I certainly wouldn't like Georgia.

Maybe as a giant peach orchard. On a mountain, with waterfalls. Lots of waterfalls.

[1982_Cygni]

Woah. Be afraid of Adam Yoshida. Be very afraid. I also feel very sorry for the other mild-mannered, blogless people who go by the name of Adam Yoshida.

I've heard the whole stupid "Obama is Muslim" meme, but never "Obama as secret Muslim," and the "Obama is a good-looking sex god" meme, but not the "Obama is gay as a window" meme.

As for apologies, Fred, try reparations, and if you can't afford that, try handing out Rice Crispies treats to the descendants of said "serving wench." It worked for the descendants who owned Cleveland's ancestors on Family Guy. Although what would I know about that? I know very little about my paternal family, but my maternal grandmother's descendants came from Luxembourg, Germany, and France and settled far north of the Mason-Dixon line (so far up north in fact, they were up in a place called Canada for some generations) and my maternal grandfather's descendants came to America from the Slovak-Russia border region in 1917 (a bad year for Russians, I think). So that part of the family has nothing to do with enslaving black people. Now, persecuting Jews back in the old country and taking Native American women as booty/brides in the northernly colonies...that might be something different. Every single ethnic group coming into America has its own particular sin to apologize for and own up too. Including Japanese-Americans like Yoshida, ne?

[Bugmaster]

but not the "Obama is gay as a window" meme.

Gay as a... window ? *looks out the window* Huh ? Can windows even mate ? I thought they reproduced by budding...

[Mistlethrush]

Epiphany has come and gone, but it's not darker: rather lighter incrementally and the Carnivale season has begun. Have you guessed I am Catholic? Yeah--the originals, you know!

I enjoy your blog so much--a voice of reason where so many are willing to point fingers and condemn.

And Obama is Muslim? OMG, NO! *sarcasm*

[Drak Pope]

I don't know. I can't see how anyone now could possibly offer a sincere apology for something that happened long before anyone currently involved was even born. To be honest, I'd rather people spend the energy they use pretending to be sorry for something that they aren't responsible for to make the United States that we have now into a better country for people of all ethnicities. Then again, what can I say? My ancestors fought for the Limey Bastards during the Independence War.

[damnedyankee]

Hello! Now, let's be very clear -- I'm not saying that Adam Yoshida is the actual killer of Inago Montoya's father, a Manchurian six-fingered man. But on the other hand, it's impossible to rule it out. These things are, after all, unfalsifiable by their very nature. Prepare to die.

[IR Baboon]

“I think I should be expected at least to try.”

But there's no sense crying /
over every mistake.
You just keep on trying /
till you run out of cake.

This is my way of saying "That's the stupidest thing I've heard all afternoon". What's going on here is, at best, that you're experiencing irrational guilt, like a mother who feels that it's her fault her teenage kid was hit by a car because, well, she could have insisted on driving the five minutes along a quiet residential street to the school to pick him up, and she didn't. Since you seem to be a basically nice person, that's the most likely explanation. The nastier alternative is that you don't feel any guilt, but you feel as though by apologising you score points by making other people - who quite reasonably don't want to apologise for things they had no hand in - look bad.

Also anyone who doesn't recognise the above quote needs to stay in more and play video games.

[Mabus]

*gives Drak a no-prize*

It is meaningless to apologize for actions that you are not responsible for. You cannot be responsible for actions over which you had no control. You had no control over anything that occurred prior to your existence (along with plenty that occurred afterwards). Therefore, any and all apologies for slavery in the present day are meaningless--unless you have been keeping slaves in the present day, which I trust that Fred has not.

Stop guilt-tripping yourself, Fred.

"And as these are but two extremes in the long chain of parentage from us to Adam, we can see no reason why we may not be held guilty, according to the same rule, of all the sins of every parent between them. If so, well may we ask, 'Lord, who then can be saved?' When we do the best we can, we have quite enough in our own record to answer for..."

[ninjanun]

But there's no sense crying /
over every mistake.
You just keep on trying /
till you run out of cake.

Portal fan, or Jonathan Coulter fan? And is it possible to be one without also being the other?

Yes. Yes, I say.

[burgundy]

1) I think there's a difference between an individual apologizing and a formal government apology. And I have complicated feelings about intergenerational guilt: I know I like to brag on my grandparents, for example. Now, I don't think that the awesomeness of my grandparents has any bearing on my virtue or lack thereof; I am not a better person because they were kick-ass. But I'm still proud of them in a way I am not proud of people not related to me. So if I feel linked somehow to their accomplishments, ought I not also feel some kind of emotional connection to the darker parts of their lives? (You could just as easily argue that I ought to give up the connection in all respects.) This is a country where people are very connected to their various heritages - Daughters of the American Revolution, Sons of Norway, etc etc etc. You can't own some bits and not own all the bits.

I took classes a few years ago with a woman from Peru. In one of our classes, this very subject came up. She said that her cultural context was one of collective responsibility, with a much less individualistic focus than what she saw in America (the one example I remember is that she said in school, children are disciplined en masse, in part because they're responsible for keeping each other in line.) Putting aside for the moment whether or not, and in what ways, that's a good way to approach things, I was really struck by this: she felt that, in claiming an American (US American, I mean) identity, she was taking on all the history that came with it, so she also bore some of the collective responsibility for collective injustices such as slavery.

But then I also feel this way about certain kinds of apologies.

Really, a lot of it is contextual. What I don't see in a lot of conversations about the merits of apologizing for slavery is what impact it has on those you are apologizing to. Are you apologizing to make yourself feel better, or are you apologizing to mend a relationship? A heartfelt apology that isn't wanted can do more harm than good; a perfunctory apology that makes someone feel heard and validated can be a positive thing.

[Duane]

My family is from New Jersey. Richard Clark(e) settled down in Union County in 1640 and I was born in Union County 328 years later. (We didn't get the memo on that whole "Westward ho" thing -- it took us almost 350 years to cross the Delaware.) In great, great (add a whole bunch more) grandpa Richard's will he left his son, among other "properties," his "serving wench." Whether or not that is something for which I, as his descendant, can atone, I think I should be expected at least to try.

My mother's great great great grandfather, Colonel John Hite, converted to Methodism and freed his 50-or-so slaves but later, as they struggled to survive, he took them in and cared for them.

But that didn't stop his grandson from fighting for the Rebels in the War of Northern Aggression. :)

[Boze]

You might have some fun with this article about alchemy and the Democratic race for president at Salon... it's almost pure nonsense. Here's the most excruciating paragraph, which ventures beyond even rubbish and reaches a sort of transcendent surrealism (I sent this to OpinionJournal as well, if it shows up there tomorrow afternoon):

Obama's Iowa victory was one of those rare moments when an abstraction becomes real. In "Areopagitica," John Milton wrote, "Methinks I see in my mind a noble and puissant nation rousing herself like a strong man after sleep, and shaking her invincible locks." In Iowa, we witnessed the shaking of those locks. Like one of those miraculous reversals in one of Shakespeare's late plays, when a statue suddenly comes to life after standing motionless for years, Obama's victory seemed almost otherworldly -- as if the laws of space and time had been suspended, and a quality as evanescent and fragile as hope had suddenly become real. I am not a religious person, but it was hard not to feel that his triumph vindicated the essence of what I think of as the secular essence of religion, something even nonbelievers can believe in: the possibility of inner transformation. A transformation at once personal, and national. (http://www.salon.com/opinion/kamiya/2008/01/08/obama)

Obama is an exciting figure, but lately it seems as though more and more people want to make him a savior, not a mere presidential candidate. It's slightly worrisome, and actually it resembles the way a number of conservatives lauded George W. Bush as chosen of God and divinely elected during the run-up to the last election. Is it possible that Democrats and independents and disaffected Republicans are setting themselves up for an equally large disappointment?

[Boze]

p. s. i love the repeated overtures to "The Manchurian Candidate," Buffy, and Chesterton on this blog. So random and yet so erudite.

[Tokyo]

Fred, I hate you for introducing me to the barrel of fail that is Adam Yoshida at this hour of the night.

It makes me hate my Czech and Slovak quarters, for making it too awkward for me to denounce him as a shande far di gaijin.

[Bugmaster]

Right, I'm not going to apologize for something I didn't actually do. Yes, slavery was deplorable, but pretending that I am somehow complicit in the sins of my ancestors, solely because of my skin color, is not going to retroactively fix it. It's dishonest at best, insulting at worst.

[Elphaba]

Wow, Boze. Just, wow. That's the silliest prose I've read in ages. Good on you for calling it out. Sheesh

Reminds me of the Daily Show that parodied Obama walking up to a podium to the tune of Jesus Christ Superstar. (And I like the guy, it's just, wow, I'm sorry but the Iowa Caucus is not a religious experience!)

On the issue of apologizing for slavery and such -
I'm fine taking national responsibility for national mistakes. If we want to have an intergenerational identity as a nation, we do need to include those mistakes in our self concept. True repentance, though, comes with action. If we want to do something to respond to the intergenerational legacy of our country's mistakes we could try, oh I dunno, drastically overhauling our racist court system, equalizing educational opportunities, passing universal healthcare, and ending the war on drugs. For a start.

And the thing about apologies (governmental or whatever) for the eeeevils of the past that bugs me is that a) we haven't stopped committing eeeevils in the goddamn present and b)it can become an excuse for inaction instead of the beginning of better acts (I hear it now - "well, I'm glad we've gotten that whole legacy of slavery thing out of the way ... lets get back to our regularly scheduled financial rapaciousness and foreign invasion").

[Nenya]

And the thing about apologies (governmental or whatever) for the eeeevils of the past that bugs me is that a) we haven't stopped committing eeeevils in the goddamn present and b)it can become an excuse for inaction instead of the beginning of better acts

Yes. If formal apologies have any value at all, they have value as a beginning not an end. We DO continue to benefit from the legacy of slavery, so we SHOULD do all we can to change that. I agree that there is some sort of collective existence that nations and states have that means that if they have officially supported some great wrong in the past, it is a good idea to repudiate it now. Why on earth wouldn't we want to go on record as saying, "Holy fuck, that was a Bad Thing To Do and we never, never want to do anything like that again"? But then we have to do things that are in keeping with this formal repentance. No, we can't change the lives that have been destroyed in the past. But we can and we'd better do something now.

[Nenya]

Also? Adam Yoshida? Wow. O.O

[Caravelle]

I was trying to think about why I believe apologies for what your ancestors (or people that aren't you) did are significant. What I've come up with is this :

An apology is also an implied admission that what you did is wrong, and that you won't do it again. In that context an apology is still a symbolic guarantee of future behavior that's significant. And as Fred pointed out, a refusal to apologize is a strong symbol in the other direction.
So why should you apologize for things other people did ? I think it's because you recognize that given you belong to the same group as those people (your family, your countrymen, your sex/race/economic class/species etc), this makes you a bit like them. So basically an apology in that context means "people who are like me did this, I might even have done it if circumstances had been different, but here and now I don't approve of it, I won't do it, and I won't let them do it anymore".

After all, it's easy to look at atrocities done by people on the other side of the world a thousand years ago and go "but those people were different. I would never do anything like this". Except the truth is that you would, see Milgram's experiment and all. And if you don't feel concerned by those far-away things you're less likely to recognize them in yourself.

Apologizing on behalf of a group you belong to is a recognition that you might have been doing those bad things, and therefore that you will be extra-cautious that you don't do them now.

This is a separate issue from official apologies, of course. You may not have been around two hundred years ago, but New Jersey was.

[Jos]

Also anyone who doesn't recognise the above quote needs to stay in more and play video games.

I do and I do, but I've never bothered to play that game. The cake is a lie anyway.

[Patrick Phelan]

My problem with the whole issue is that, as everyone especially Chell knows, taking GLaDOS's advice is typically a really bad idea. ("To provide the appearance of danger" my number eleven foot.)

Hilarious at times, though.

[Rosina]

So why should you apologize for things other people did ? I think it's because you recognize that given you belong to the same group as those people (your family, your countrymen, your sex/race/economic class/species etc), this makes you a bit like them. So basically an apology in that context means "people who are like me did this, I might even have done it if circumstances had been different, but here and now I don't approve of it, I won't do it, and I won't let them do it anymore".

I am rather against apologies, with or without reparations, and particularly when issued by 'government representatives' on behalf of its citizens. Because, nowadays, those citizens not only aren't the people who did the evil deed, many of them are descended from people who weren't even in that country, state, city when the evil deed or done, and another sizeable chunk are descended from the victims of that evil deed. So when (for example) New Jersey is apologizing (to the dead?) for its part in slavery it is doing so on behalf of (and being paid to do so by) people whose ancestors lived in Europe and went through other forms of persecution (famine, serfdom, the Holocaust), or who are descended from the slaves. OK, so New Jersey existed, but it's not just that every person in it has been replaced by their descendent, but it is a totally new New Jersey, and should speak on behalf of its current residents/voters, not itself.

The suggestion made by the Mayor of London (I suspect) that the current residents of London (not the bankers in the City, but the man at the Clapham busstop) should pay reparations to people in Africa might have led to the situation that the descendants of those kidnapped and sold into slavery had to pay the descendants of their kidnappers. Some people in Britain might really be living well solely on the back of slavery: others have their lives improved (and improved by the eviction of other Britons years ago to clear the land for sheep, or Enclosures or whatever); but you can't make the current population pay for any that unless you have some means of judging who benefitted immediately, who later, and who suffered.

[magistra]

It takes a strong man to overcome early bonds of affection and accept that it might be necessary, in the interests of our civilization, to kill people one was raised with – maybe even to kill one’s own relatives, if that is what is required. Does the candidate of Oprah seem likely to be the one to dispense with that sort of sentimentality?

I *am* saying that Adam Yoshida is a fascist.

[IR Baboon]

“Except the truth is that you would, see Milgram's experiment and all. And if you don't feel concerned by those far-away things you're less likely to recognize them in yourself.”

Milgram didn't show, and didn't purport to show that everyone would act cruelly under orders, only that it was much more common than expected. Some people did just walk away and refuse to continue the "experiment". The important lesson from Milgram is that it's not about a "few bad apples", but instead you seem to have taken away the idea that it's just part of human nature and we should accept genocide as a natural occurence and then offer empty apologies for it later...

I do feel concerned about slavery as a real phenomenon. It's a peculiarity of the US and a few other countries that slavery is regarded purely as a historical race issue, leading to the idea that there is some coherent group to "apologise" to. In Britain, as someone already pointed out, you could easily cause the ridiculous situation of a white government official whose ancestors were kept in slavery apologising to a black community leader whose ancestors were slavers.

Right now there are workers in many countries who live in fear of being shot or starved if they don't do as they're told by their masters. In some cases their country notionally prohibits slavery but turns a blind eye to their condition. In some cases they are kept in secret, by organised criminals in big cities. Some of these workers are women, their "work" is prostitution (in essence they are being raped for money). What use to those people is an empty apology about past deeds by dead men?

[Wakboth]

The Manchurian jokes are sort-of redundant, since the impact is lessened by the actual, verifiable and quantifiable* vileness of Adam Yoshida.

*) 0.27 kilonazis

[Praline]

The thing is, exactly what harm would it do to apologise for slavery? It would be a public acknowledgement that slavery was a Bad Thing, it wouldn't cost anything, but neither would it preclude better social policies in future. This is not an either/or question: either we apologise for slavery or we do something to make the world a better place. You can do both. I'd go so far as to say that a willingness to do the former might imply a willingness to do the latter.

As I see it, the harm the not-sorryers consider would be that it would be a public acknowledgement that sometimes those in authority can be wrong. Really wrong. Cruelly, wickedly, profoundly wrong. People might start thinking that authorities aren't infallible. And, well, you can imagine the consequences for a sane and democratic society.

[Praline]

Is it possible that Democrats and independents and disaffected Republicans are setting themselves up for an equally large disappointment?

Considering the alternatives, I'd say there's probably just a note of desperation in the Democrats supporting Obama so fervently. I mean, the guy looks like he might win an election. That would mean no neocons in government. There might be fewer illegal wars, permanent scars on the environment and disenfranchised American citizens.

Frankly, I'd be excited about a yellow dog that could oust the neocons, and I'm not even American.

[Mrs Tilton]

Including Japanese-Americans like Yoshida, ne?

Ne. Yoshida is not an American; he only plays one on teh internets.

Seriously; he is Canadian. There are a few, a very few, Canadians who are whackjob loons in the high Freeper style. I "knew" another on usenet years ago -- posted constantly, through a series of sock-puppets, about how vitally important it was to reinstitute capital punishment. A couple of these misfits (e.g., David Frum, Mark Steyn) land high-paying gigs down south. But for the majority who, like Adam, are little too stupid and a little too poorly-connected to wangle a seat on the American wingnut gravy train, life in a civilised country must be a lonely and frustrating thing altogether.

[inge]

Drak Pope: I don't know. I can't see how anyone now could possibly offer a sincere apology for something that happened long before anyone currently involved was even born.

Unless you believe in re-incarnation, of course.

I do not exactly get this apology thing either. Still, an apology, ideally, is based on recognition of past wrongdoing, and that's a start. It should lead to action, though -- admitting wrongs is not worth much if nothing is done to put them right.

[Caravelle]

Milgram didn't show, and didn't purport to show that everyone would act cruelly under orders, only that it was much more common than expected. Some people did just walk away and refuse to continue the "experiment". The important lesson from Milgram is that it's not about a "few bad apples", but instead you seem to have taken away the idea that it's just part of human nature and we should accept genocide as a natural occurence and then offer empty apologies for it later...

Umm, no. You seem to have missed the part where I talked about apologies as a symbolic guarantee that you won't do it again. And while an apology might not be followed by acts, a refusal to apologize sure isn't promising either.
What I have taken away from Milgram's experiment is that it is indeed part of human nature and that therefore we should always be extra-careful not to do that kind of stuff. Because the natural tendency is to go "I would never do that", which makes you not less likely to not do it, but less likely to notice when you do.

Like the "we don't torture" camp. It was wrong when the Nazis tortured, because they were Nazis. Monsters. Not Like Us. We're the good guys, so whatever we do, it isn't torture. And if it is, it's for a good cause. 'Cause we're the good guys, you know.

[MikhailBorg]

My Bacon number is actually 2, but who's the destination for my Doctor number? Any of the 10 main actors? (Do Peter Cushing, Richard Hurndall, or Joanna Lumley count?)

It was wrong when the Nazis tortured, because they were Nazis. Monsters. Not Like Us. We're the good guys, so whatever we do, it isn't torture. And if it is, it's for a good cause. 'Cause we're the good guys, you know.

So, I'm in a tabletop role-playing campaign on Monday nights - it's a WWII comic-book superhero setting, and we're all members of the Legion of Liberty. (Yeah, LOL. Oh well.)

The players are a nice mix of careers, genders, and lifestyles, and all good friends of mine, but what bothers the heck out of me is the willingness of all of them to torture the dastardly Germans - not even for information, but just because they're Nazis, and it's okay to torture Nazis. I've tried a few times to point out that we are playing old-school, square-jawed superheroes, and torture is both beneath us and a bad example to the troops we're inspiring, but somehow it's still okay. "I'll ride in the armored car with the prisoner. He'll only have a few more broken fingers when we arrive."

Maybe I'm naive, maybe it's just a game. It bugs me, though.

[cjmr]

I think Doctor Who number goes to anyone who's played the Doctor.

[Jesurgislac]

Nenya: Yes. If formal apologies have any value at all, they have value as a beginning not an end.

Yes.

As a country, Britain profited enormously by the slave trade, by the opium trade, by the whole business of treating other countries, and the people living there, as natural resources to be exploited for profit. It doesn't actually matter if the government official formally apologizing on behalf of the British people happens to be a descendant of one of the people who was kidnapped from Africa and taken by force to the Carribean and sold there to be worked to death to make sugar and rum. (Well, it lends more than a little irony to the ceremony, but.)

It's not about ancestry: it's about patriotism. If patriotism is anything but the last refuge of a scoundrel, it means that you are willing to identify yourself with your country: to take pride in the good things your country has accomplished, to feel shame for the evil your country has done. If you want to be a patriot but not a scoundrel, you need to accept all of the history of your country, not just talk up the good things and ignore the bad.

[cjmr's husband]

Doctor Who number can be calculated from any of the main 10; with the high number of guest stars over thirty years, the numbers tend to be low.

If you can get a better number by including a less-canon Doctor, go for it.

I miscalculated Eric Robert's number; his should be 1 (I thought the Doctors were 1), which means my number would be 3, one lower than my Bacon Number.

(Doctors 1,3,4,5,8,9 and 10 all have a Bacon Number of 2, the rest are 3; Kevin Bacon therefore has a Doctor Who number of 2)

Meanwhile, back on topic, how much correlation is there between the we-must-never-apologize-for-slavery group and those who agree with the possibly apocryphal statement from Gov. Huckabee that the only reason we have illegal immigration is due to the reduction in the workforce due to all those abortions?

[Chris]

It's funny how, as your link shows, Adam Yoshida thinks that the President of the USA has absolute power to impose his EVIL HIDDEN FAITH on the populace. I am of course not saying that neocons believe that if they are in power in a country, they have unconstitutional power over everyone's life and death. But on the other hand, it's impossible to rule it out. These things are, after all, unfalsifiable by their very nature.

Oh, and then he says that Obama is evil because he may not have the strength of will to kill his family or friends. I'd say that's an excellent trait in a world leader. Which is presumably why Obama is a fair bet for a future world leader, and Yoshida is not.

[Caravelle]

Ha, just read the Yoshida link.
Islam has a specific doctrine, known as “al-Taqiyya”, which permits the followers of Allah to conceal their true faith when among unbelievers.

One of the few things I remember from a brief course in Middle-Eastern Culture was that the Shiite are "allowed" to lie about their faith when around Sunnis. Because sometimes not doing so means death.
Anyway, are there two similar doctrines here or is Yoshida completely off-base ?

[inge]

IR Baboon: The important lesson from Milgram is that it's not about a "few bad apples",

What I found most interesting in Milgram's book is how the experiment needed to be set up so that people would do what they are told. It gives a neat little list of bad habits one might want to be aware of in oneself.

Wakboth: *) 0.27 kilonazis

270 Nazis? I feel you are giving too much credit here.

[Caravelle]

The players are a nice mix of careers, genders, and lifestyles, and all good friends of mine, but what bothers the heck out of me is the willingness of all of them to torture the dastardly Germans - not even for information, but just because they're Nazis, and it's okay to torture Nazis. I've tried a few times to point out that we are playing old-school, square-jawed superheroes, and torture is both beneath us and a bad example to the troops we're inspiring, but somehow it's still okay. "I'll ride in the armored car with the prisoner. He'll only have a few more broken fingers when we arrive."

Yeah, it's difficult to know what to think about those things. We've often had such debates in role-playing games I've played. That's a nice thing about Vampire : The Maskerade : you've thought from the beginning about how moral your character is going to be, because that's the point of the game. If for some reason you torture someone, it's clear that only the more monstrous in the group will do it, and everyone else will lose a humanity point just from being in a neighboring room when it happened.

[cjmr's husband]

Clarification: earlier I should have drawn a distinction between the I-don't-see-a-point-in-apologizing crowd and the We!Must!Not!Apologize! crowd.

[Praline]

Question, then: do those who see a little point in not apologising see the point of not apologising? Because if not, why not just go with the apology in case it helps?

Personally I agree with Jes; if you don't want to acknowledge your country has done bad things, it implies a my-country-right-or-wrong attitude, and people like that are horribly dangerous.

[Praline]

Ahem , I mean 'those who see little point', not 'a little point'. 'A little point' makes no sense.

[Praline]

Oh man, I've just read it over, and it still makes no sense. This is not my day for first drafts. Let me try again:

Do those who see no point in apologising see any point in refusing to apologise?

[inge]

Praline: The thing is, exactly what harm would it do to apologise for slavery?

It might expose an individual to suffer from megalomania or delusions, believing themselves to be in control of deeds they could neither have done nor prevented without access to a time machine.

It might expose an official spokesperson as being in the pay of a bunch of hypocrites whose words do not match their actions.

So, looking only at the people doing the apologizing, it's mostly a risk of public perception. But so is not apologizing, and one might prefer being seen as delusional or a hypocrite to being seen as an insensitive jerk.

The best case scenario, as you mention, is to speak as an entity with a sufficiently long lifespan, and having words and deeds match.

As I see it, the harm the not-sorryers consider would be that it would be a public acknowledgement that sometimes those in authority can be wrong.

That seems to me a rather exotic reason. People in authority are probably wrong more often than people who aren't, because they have more to be wrong about, and usually invested a lot in being right, so they are less likely than Joe or Jane Average to correct their errors.

[cjmr]

Isn't there a difference in acknowledging that one's country has done horrible things (and expressing the intention to prevent said horrible things from occurring in the future and/or working to mitigate the current effects of the past horrible events)--and apologizing for said horrible things?

I see the point of the former, but not the latter.

[Caravelle]

Question, then: do those who see a little point in not apologising see the point of not apologising? Because if not, why not just go with the apology in case it helps?

I think they believe an apology is worse than useless because once you've apologized you might feel you've done your part and there isn't any more need to continue the good fight.

Ultimately I guess both may be right, because it's probable that four types of people exist - 1) those that apologize, mean it and use it as a starting point to improve things; 2) those that apologize but don't mean it or consider it the end of their obligation; 3) those who don't apologize out of principle but still fight to make things better; 4) and those who don't apologize and don't try and make things better, either because they don't care or because they're actively against it.

The whole question then becomes, which type is more common ? I suppose those who don't believe in collective apologies think 2) and 3) are the most common types. I personally don't know about whether there are more of 1) than 2), but I'm pretty sure that the 4) waaay outnumber the 3). Which means, as Fred said, the whatever the apology means the refusal to apologize means a lot more.

[cjmr's husband]

Bonus Doctor Who: Today would be William Hartnell's 100th birthday!

(For comparison, Tennant is 37. Meanwhile, the Doctor, whose self-reported age has gone down lately, appears to be lying about his age)