No, but could these be far behind? I mean, it is clearly illegal to grow marajuana in the US (right?). The laws state that I am prohibited from doing so. If I was doing so, the law states that I must destroy it. But I will only destroy it if there are clear and real consequences to me if I do not do so. Somebody from the DEA would come along to compell me to do so. Would they not?
Like I said, it wouldn’t have to be directly coercive.
And yes, an apology certainly is not required, but it’s good PR. A kind of PR you can’t buy. Of course, they could forgo the free apology and spend lot’s of advertising dollars on a campaign that says, “Wachovia: Celebrating 50 years of equal opportunity investing for our black clients.”
Maybe it’s a perception issue on my end, but I take these comments to mean that the apology has little or no worth.
QuickSilver, I have absolutely no idea what connects my quote to your comment. How I would link to your comment, however, is that I would be pleased to see the Russian regimes responsible for the pogroms apologize for those actions, as they were despicable to those immediately and indirectly involved.
Again… if this apology is directed at you, and you feel it’s insincere, fine. I just think it’s reaching quite a bit if you don’t feel it affects you to question the legitimacy and efficacy of the apology. That may be your perspective but it certainly isn’t representative of all the perspectives out there. Nor is my particular take. But I’m not suggesting that organizations, corporations, and individuals not attempt to acknowledge wrongdoing because it may be perceived as disingenuine.
Some people are not going to be happy with this apology. Some will. Some will be somewhere in the middle.
It’s not so much on the side of the person/corporation giving the apology that seems nonsensical, since if there happened to be a 160 year old former slave around I think it would probably make sense for Wachovia to apologize for its acquisitions for having held him or her in slavery.
What I don’t get is who they are apologizing to. There’s no one left to accept the apology.
pseudotriton ruber ruber, you type pretty well for someone who has such tiny appendages…
The problem I would have with your apology is that it shows no knowledge from you about what it is you are apologizing for. When I was herding my fourth grade students on the playground and helping them to adjudicate all kinds of arguments and fights, often a kid would roll his eyes and say, “I’m sorry for everything!” To which I would respond, “What are you sorry for? Tell Dejuan what it is you did that you’re apologizing for.” Dejuan would usually respond by stating that that apology was far better than the first one.
They acknowledge and have researched their depth of involvement, specific as possible:
They express (seemingly authentic) contrition - not just to African Americans, but to all Americans:
Now, I’m not stupid. I don’t think the next time I walk into a Wachovia branch, the branch manager will greet me in a dashiki and float me an interest-free loan. This may have absolutely zero effect on the daily goings-on in the bank. But again, some people in the organization spent time and effort revealing the company’s past. For whatever reason, this document was created and circulated. I don’t believe the law compels companies to do anything but report their involvement in slavery. Wachovia could have just said, “Yeah, our predecessor companies owned slaves, but so what? Everybody did back then, no big deal.”
It may have been a PR move, but at least it shows that they care about how they are perceived by others beyond their organization.
pseudotriton ruber ruber. Well, I don’t accept YOUR apology because it lacks the sincerity and earnestness I mentioned back on page one. In fact, there’s more than a lil’ bit of hostility and sarcasm in there… your negative tone did more damage to your dignity than the words in the apology. If it didn’t it ought’ve. You couldn’t be nice? (Reading this on preview, Hippy Hollow said it better than me.)
Quicksilver. Maybe it’s me, then. I only regard direct threats and actual attempts to force me to do something as genuinely coercive. Everything else is just talk, and I’m not impressed with abstract warnings. (I think this is a problem a lot of black men have. Police show up with guns and nightsticks and instead of complying we say, “What you think you gonna do with that shit, huh, you beefy muthafucker?”)
There are laws against burning leaves within city limits. But unless a police car pulls up to my yard and asks me to stop me, I’m cleaning my yard with lighter fluid 'cause I fucking hate bagging leaves.
I haven’t read this whole thread but I wonder if anyone except Americans are supposed to apologize for slavery?
Face it . It was common practice for many many years. The ancient Egyptians held slaves. The Greeks had Slaves. It wasn’t invented here in the US.
I haven’t heard of anyone else apologizing for their ancestors holding slaves.
Post #14 discusses it (in addition to yours, and others). I think most rational people realize the differences between American slavery and that practiced by other societies.
Right. I meant that I’m the first one in this thread to bring up whether African-Americans would accept an apology or official acknowledgement from West African nations re: their historic role as facilitators and in chattel slavery.
This may have happened already in some capacity in Ghana or Uganda somewhere. I’m currently Googling for cites now…
Hey, you shut your ugly mouth about my tiny appendages. Size shouldn’t matter.
Well, yeah, but my point is that I don’t have the slightest clue about what it is my nameless ancestors did or did or not do to people, and Wachovia doesn’t know much more. Oh, sure they know the numbers cited, but do they know that these particularly slaves were harshly treated, or well treated, what their names were, where they and when they were purchased, whether slave families were split up or allowed to stay intact, etc. ? No, they don’t. They are just apologizing tor being linked directly to slaveowning. That’s still plenty general.
I’m pretty sure my nameless ancestors did some things that hurt people–one or more of my thousands of blood ancestors must have committed some crime, screwed someone in a business dealing, violated some Commandment, broken and gotten away with some civil code, either of their time and jurisdiction or of mine or of their victim’s, or of their victim’s descendants–it’s practically impossible that I haven’t benefitted from, or that someone now living hasn’t indirectly been harmed by, some act of some ancestor of mine.
Without a specific record, you want me to shove my apologies up where the moon don’t shine? Okay, I retract the apology. Oh, some of you do want the apology, general as it might seem? Maybe I need to retract the retraction. Just let me know your pleasure.
How is this nonsense? Also, how do you figure buying something from McDonald’s or Mircosoft makes you partially responsible for the massacres of Native Americans?
And dude, Indian is not the preferred nomenclature… Native American please.*
Hippy Hollow, brickbacon, and Askia have said it all so much better than I could.
This is the part that really bugs me. There are people to apologize too. There are people alive today who are still affected by slavery having existed at all in america.
Does anyone bat any eye when a medal is conferred posthumously? Is it ok to have services memorializing someone’s death and expressing gratitude for their sacrifice?
If it is good to offer thanks posthumously, why is it bad to offer an apology?
The only reason I would hesistate to have companies and the government offer an apology to the descendants of slaves for the institution of slavery and the aftermath, is because of the “get over it already” attitude partially expressed in this thread and elsewhere. All an apology would do is encourage people to wipe their hands of the very real effects of slavery and racism on blacks in this country - and then I’d think we’d start sliding backward.
I prefer Indian. Dude. And I figure it the same way you figured yours. Your very citizenship owes its existence to the extermination of whole nations of people. When you engage in American commerce, you enjoy the fruits of your ancestors’ slaughter. Same point you made about Wachovia and slaves.
Your question makes no sense. Divisive to whom? Divisive to people who do business in Chicago, of course. Why is it stupid? Because it is frivolous and divisive. How does the information that two ancient enterprises engaged in slavery benefit anyone?
