Tuesday, January 06, 2009

no man's land

Terra nullius. From the Latin terra, earth, ground, land, and nullius, no one's
Thus: no one's land, land not belonging to anyboyd. Or at any rate, not to anybody that counts.
Originally: land not belonging to the Roman Empire.
In the Middle Ages: land not belonging to any Christian ruler.
Later: land to whcih no European state as yet lays claim. Land that justly falls to the first European state to invade the territory.

~ excerpt from Terra Nullius

I am not familiar enough with the Israel/Palestine history to have a strong opinion on the current conflict, but in watching the violence escalate, I am reminded of the near impossibility of forgiveness and redress for land appropriated and lives lost. It reminds me of how deeply our world is still rooted in the power of violence and how much of our world was established on the basis of dispossession.

We can condemn Israel's aggression (or defense, depending on your viewpoint) and condemn Hamas' terrorism, but we also need to be reminded that we have all benefited from violence. And when blood is shed and homes are displaced, it is not always easy to say who is more right or who is more just.

A re-posted excerpt from Terra Nullius, regarding the theft of land from Aborigines in Australia:

According to my Religious Education teacher in at secondary school, ‘contrition’ is at the core of all religions. It’s easy to make mistakes. Anybody can make mistakes, even commit crimes. The important thing is knowing how to feel contrition afterwards. That was why he began every lesson with the same question: ‘What constitutes contrition?’ To this day, I can still rattle off the answer in my sleep:
I realize I have done wrong.
I regret what I have done.
I promise never to do it again.
Today I tend to think these three criteria for contrition are far too introverted. ‘Realize’, ‘regret’ and ‘promise’ can all be done internally, in complete secrecy, without betraying any outward sign of realization of promise. Such an internal contrition process is precious little comfort the victim of the wrong I committed. And the promise is easily forgotten if nobody knows it was made. So the criteria should demand a more public process of contrition. Perhaps like this:
I freely admit that I have done wrong.
I ask forgiveness of those I have wronged.
I promise to do my best to make amends to them.
Here, the third criterion promises not only that I will not repeat the crime, but also that I will make efforts to put things right to the best of my ability. For the victims, redress is the most tangible result of my contrition and a measure of sincerity.
Can we feel contrition for other people’s crimes? Can we feel contrition for crimes we have not committed personally, but have subsequently profited from? How can we formulate the criteria for contrition to make them applicable to collective responsibility for historical crimes? Perhaps like this:
We freely admit that our predecessors have done wrong and that we are profiting from it.
We ask forgiveness of those who were wronged and of their descendants.
We promise to do our best to make amends to those who were wronged for the effects that still remain.
The larger the collective, the more diluted the personal responsibility. The less intimate the contrition, the greater the risk that it will just be hollow ceremony. A representative steps forward on our behalf, admits the wrong committed, apologizes, pays what it takes and appoints a committee to ‘monitor our practices’.
Australia isn't even doing that.

2 comments:

Jonathan said...

I've thought about this a lot. My ancestors have been in this country for a long time, so I tend to think in terms of the dispossession of the Native Americans and slavery. I also consider myself generally "European", and particularly German and British, so I have to consider colonialism and imperialism as well.

At first I tried to disassociate myself from this history. I argued that this all took place long before I was born, that my ancestors were not culpable and may have even been on the right side of things, and that I'm part Cherokee (just a smidgen).

However, as I thought about it more, I realized that I am proud of the positive aspects of my heritage. I strongly associate with the intellectual and cultural contributions found in American, British, and German history. Furthermore, I am a member of a class -- white, male, college-educated Americans -- that is privileged in part due to these crimes.

If I am justly proud of the accomplishments of my identity-group, shouldn't I also be ashamed of their crimes?

The Palestinian conflict is a whole 'nother ballgame. I think that any analysis of that situation has to begin with the assumption that all sides are highly culpable. I do feel some guilt for it as well, since American/British/German crimes are in many ways at its root.

l e i g h c i a said...

I agree with you-- we need to consider both the positive and negative attributes of our culture/heritage/society etc...