Philosophy of Communication Ethics by unknow

Author:unknow
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: undefined
Publisher: Fairleigh Dickinson
Published: 2012-03-15T00:00:00+00:00

The Other-ing of Apology in State Slavery Resolutions

In this light, we can begin to understand why representatives of the recipients of proposed legislative apologies—black legislators—would introduce resolutions apologizing for slavery and its legacy. They were not proposing apologies so that their white colleagues or the legislative bodies as a whole could restore an image of white innocence or win favor from black constituents. Rather, as representatives of the Other to whom these apologies would be directed, the black legislators sought the acknowledgment and recognition that would do justice to their people’s historical, psychological, economic, and cultural burden of suffering and, in the process, offer due respect to blacks as moral agents who survived despite the difficulty of thriving in a long-racist, and still thoroughly racialized, society. They believed that such an official acknowledgment in itself would contribute to the healing of their people and the nation, establish a warrant for attending seriously to blacks’ claims about the lingering economic effects of slavery and racism, and facilitate dialogue regarding what redress might be needed to assuage those effects.[39]

With some variations in emphasis, the recent state apologies do focus on acknowledgment and recognition: acknowledging a historical pattern of heinous actions toward African Americans and recognizing their sufferings, struggles, survival, and triumph in the face of that history. Regarding the three parties or entities an apology may aim to restore, the Virginia apology is a study in contrast with those offered after it in Maryland, North Carolina, and Alabama—for the Virginia legislature evidently counterbalanced acts of Other-restoration (for Native Americans and African Americans) with attempts at image restoration (for the state). The resolution celebrates Virginia’s contributions to the founding of American democracy and the ideals of human equality and inalienable rights—thereby bolstering its image—nearly as much as it denigrates its oppressive practices in violation of those hallowed principles; it satisfies white legislators’ desire for societal image restoration in order to leverage the racial acknowledgment and contrition desired by blacks. The apologies from Maryland and subsequent states, by contrast, give little or no attention to restoring the image of the state in whose name they offer regret, instead focusing almost entirely on a rehearsal of wrongs done to the Other.

Below, I examine and compare versions of the trailblazer—Virginia’s resolution—as a case study in the evolution of the slavery apology from the aim of restoring the Self’s image toward the ethical aim of restoring the Other. I consider what the Virginia resolution acknowledges, how it frames this acknowledgment (in terms of the tetrad), and how it speaks of the collective Self (the state, particularly the white citizens of the past) and Other (African Americans, to whom acknowledgment is directed).

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.