Should Europeans offer their apologies for their colonization?

Should the European apologize for their colonization?

  • Yes

    Votes: 24 10.8%
  • No

    Votes: 129 57.8%
  • No, but educate the European children more about this subject

    Votes: 70 31.4%

  • Total voters
    223
  • This poll will close: .

Naomasa298

Forum Staff
Apr 2010
32,499
T'Republic of Yorkshire
I think this is a pretty juvenile way of seeing things. Sure you could say that if you pay someone, for some reason in some case, then whats to stop from others forming an endless cue for "their special case that of course needs to be compensated".

However, reflexively shutting the door to any sort of spending might stop you from committing to low-cost but hugely important symbolic gestures like education campaigns, impartial historical investigations and museums etc. Also it says a lot if you don't think the possibility of a having a mutual beneficial future is worth at least a minuscule material sacrifice.
If educational programs are so beneficial, then they can invest in them themselves, instead of arms going into the pockets of kleptomaniac dictators.

It's funny how it always becomes about money in the end. Far better to be juvenile than hypocritical.
 
It's funny how it always becomes about money in the end. Far better to be juvenile than hypocritical.
First of all, I have no clear solutions on how dialogue or any action for that matter should be employed in the context of Colonialism or post-Colonialism. I do however find this conversation very interesting: It almost sounds like you're defending yourself against some sort of personal indictment and not thinking about the issue at large.

As far as the money thing goes, then thats how states do things. Countries aren't individual people who can just bake up blueberry pie and go knock on the door of their next door neighbour. Even having any sort of foreign diplomatic service or relationships with other countries - not matter how you feel about them - actually costs money. And its not always clear how and what is worth the cost and what isn't. Everyone who can see this issue in a winder context knows this.

Knee-jerk refusal, in this hypothetical, sends an unnecessarily harsh and quite frankly and probably helps keep the issue salient and problematic far longer than a measured response would. Its almost like you want to "reverse virtue-signal", if thats a thing. Mind-boggling
 

Naomasa298

Forum Staff
Apr 2010
32,499
T'Republic of Yorkshire
First of all, I have no clear solutions on how dialogue or any action for that matter should be employed in the context of Colonialism or post-Colonialism. I do however find this conversation very interesting: It almost sounds like you're defending yourself against some sort of personal indictment and not thinking about the issue at large.
I[o cam read whatever you like imto it. It makes no difference to me.

As far as the money thing goes, then thats how states do things. Countries aren't individual people who can just bake up blueberry pie and go knock on the door of their next door neighbour. Even having any sort of foreign diplomatic service or relationships with other countries - not matter how you feel about them - actually costs money. And its not always clear how and what is worth the cost and what isn't. Everyone who can see this issue in a winder context knows this.
Then the states are hypcrites, along with the people demanding apologies.

Knee-jerk refusal, in this hypothetical, sends an unnecessarily harsh and quite frankly and probably helps keep the issue salient and problematic far longer than a measured response would. Its almost like you want to "reverse virtue-signal", if thats a thing. Mind-boggling
Bu;;/ If these people were sincere about rwanting a "apology" then they would accept the apology offered without financial compensation. If they don't, then it shows that what they REALLY want is free money.
 
Likes: Ancientgeezer
Then the states are hypcrites, along with the people demanding apologies.
I honestly don't know how to answer this. Do you mean that states are hypocrites because they need to have money to spend? Because people in the government need to sustain themselves and the infrastructure didn't fall from the sky? Please clarify.

Bu;;/ If these people were sincere about rwanting a "apology" then they would accept the apology offered without financial compensation. If they don't, then it shows that what they REALLY want is free money.
So the apology is conditional to agreeing to not seek financial compensation? Again I don't get the logic that's supposed to run through this argument. In my opinion, you apologise because you honestly think you want to have a (good) relationship, and want to project upon your partner and observes a future that would contrast a negative past.

And when it comes to any form of compensation, then the key thing is that is it objectively measurable and enforceable?
In the case it is, what point is there to tie the two together (apology, monetary compensation). If in a legal and procedural sense compensation is justified, then somehow holding out an apology as some sort of hostage is just petty and self-defeating.

If there is no way to determine a fair monetary amount and no realistic mechanism to dispense it justly things are of course different. Its completely up to the two parties to decide what is and isn't sacrificed in order for the two sides to have a productive relationship. And this would probably be the case in the overwhelming majority of colonial relationships. After all thats what good diplomacy is all about. Betting on a mutually beneficial relationship.
 

macon

Ad Honorem
Aug 2015
3,793
Slovenia
European children are already educated enough about this subject. I would educate them on Arabian, Ottoman and Chinese colonialism more.
 
I would educate them on Arabian, Ottoman and Chinese colonialism more.
In a way you're right. Not even high school courses here in Finland go into depth about the history of Eastern European states. These countries had a much different experience from the West and were often under oppression or domination themselves. Poland is a very good example of this. Its experience before the second world war and during it was so radically different from the west its not hard to understand why the Polish mindset is so different from the Atlantic one.
 
Feb 2016
550
ROK
Why are their still a lot of countries who still want payments or apologizes from their old colonizers. What is the use? Of course slavery is a bad thing, but the average European has changed and I see really no use in offering an apologize. What is your opinion about this? Should the Europeans offer their apology or do you find the idea ridiculous?
I can explain what went on in East Asia. Japan actually provided South Korea a large compensation payment in 1965. In 1998, Emperor Akihito of Japan apologized to South Korea when the then South Korean president, Kim Dae-jung, was in Japan. The relationship continued to improve. Both countries allowed each other's citizens to visit without the need for a tourist visa.

The problem resurfaced more than a decade later when Japan began to allow revisionist history textbooks. The current prime minister, Shinzō Abe, is described by political commentators as a right-wing nationalist. He also visited the Yasukuni Shrine. The commemoration in this shrine includes those to a lot of people who were convicted war criminals. (Remember that none of the Koreans convicted them as they didn't have the power to. The winners of WWII (US and UK) were the ones who convicted them). The Korean women who were forcefully taken as "comfort women" during WWII wanted an official apology and to be directly paid for reparations. They didn't get any reparation money. Shinzō Abe denied Japanese involvement in forcing those women in WWII. Also, Shinzō Abe demanded two South Korean islets. Recently, South Korea banned the import of fish from several Japanese states due to concerns over Fukushima.
 
Last edited:
Sep 2014
837
Texas
I think this is a pretty juvenile way of seeing things. Sure you could say that if you pay someone, for some reason in some case, then whats to stop from others forming an endless cue for "their special case that of course needs to be compensated".

However, reflexively shutting the door to any sort of spending might stop you from committing to low-cost but hugely important symbolic gestures like education campaigns, impartial historical investigations and museums etc. Also it says a lot if you don't think the possibility of a having a mutual beneficial future is worth at least a minuscule material sacrifice.
Did you know in America Carnigie built libraries. Many of them are too small these days, but I would think one apology is enough, or must it be an unending thing. Cause the moment one generation gets something the next one will want it too...and then you have a working class supporting an entitled class. No, don't start something that will saddle you with the sins of humanity for the rest of humanity. Shut the door and lock it tight.
 

royal744

Ad Honoris
Jul 2013
10,127
San Antonio, Tx
Sure...and
I don't think it was ok to drop the bombs, IF US intelligence knew that the Japanese were prepared to surrender if given a guarantee on the status of the Emperor (which is after all, what eventually happened), but only if the surrender made clear that Japan was a defeated power, not an "honourable" surrender. I don't know if the Japanese would have accepted that latter part or not.

But if there was any alternative to killing a quarter of a million civilians to force Japan's surrender, it should have been taken.
if there were no reasonable alternative? I’m all ears.
 

Similar History Discussions