Are Political Apologies Justified?

Abstract

For the past century, especially for the past three decades or so, there has been a surge in demand for reparation for previous infractions by and towards individuals and groups. Governments, religious institutions and group associations have all been asked to ?make up? for previous mistakes by giving a public apology coupled with some form of compensation. Some have obliged almost immediately and have engaged in swift and sweeping reform. Unsurprisingly, others have resisted the call with a stubbornness others perceive as inconsiderate. In the light of this demand and denial for political apologies, this thesis seeks to answer the question ?Are political apologies justified?? It begins with an examination of the assumed foundation and paradigm for political apologies: interpersonal apologies. It will then proceed to detail how and why the shift from interpersonal to political offers both problems and opportunities. The thesis will attempt to (1) organise the backgrounds and working assumptions from both sides of the debate; (2) categorise the main objections levelled against the theory of political apologies; (3) provide justifications why the practise of political apologies is morally, pragmatically and politically preferable. It will utilise the framework of communities and polities from Janna Thompson and Margaret Urban Walker to argue for the following: (1) that political apologies are justified given Thompson?s notion of a transgenerational polity and Walker?s notion of moral communities; (2) that a theory for political apologies is able to respond to the main objections raised against it; and (3) that the best alternative and justification is actually to fuse Thompson?s and Walker?s theories into a hybrid theory that provides for the justification of political apologies from the concept of transgenerational-moral communities.