Should We Apologize for Slavery?
Bad? Brilliant?
You can rate this post.
Register or login now and
tell us what you think.
I can't even recite my family history from 10 years ago, let alone 20, or even 100 years. Can you?

I've had to apologize ever since I learned about slavery. I think I speak for many in that we are sickened by our history of slavery, but we shouldn't have to keep apologizing or have a threat held over us that money will satisfy. People suffered hard times back then and blacks even more. But there were a few blacks that were treated fairly and sheltered from the offenses. I visited castles where blacks were hidden and allowed to read, they were fed, clothed better than whites. We should remember slavery, so we never commit this crime against humanity, but we must move on and continue to unite our society, rather than harbor bitterness and stir emotions and point fingers. We've grown as a nation, let's keep growing.

We should focus on the class that has no voice: our troops and children without health care.

Things might not be 100% fair - that goes for every human being, but relations between blacks and whites, I would say is at 99%. I see the bright side, we have laws to protect all humans, regardless of color and have placed those provisions in all working environments, we're fairer than most countries. That said, we've come a long way baby, it's time to focus on moving forward, not backward and shaming by pointing fingers.

I apologize again, but I shouldn't be shamed to do this. I'll do it when and if I want.

Reader Comments
  
It would be meaningless
By Mr Bill Jul 23rd 2008 at 5:58 pm EDT
the only people that deserve an apology have long since past they deserve the apology and their not listening for it anymore
Re: It would be meaningless
By Pirrettel Jul 23rd 2008 at 6:10 pm EDT
"I can't hear youuuu!" (Gomer Pyle's Sgt.)
Re: It would be meaningless
By Barbara"Obama/Biden"Hussein Jul 23rd 2008 at 6:20 pm EDT
Well thats just real good, wait until they all die, then allow freedom of speech without fear of linching, so no apology is needed.

Let see if that worked.
Re: It would be meaningless
By Pirrettel Jul 23rd 2008 at 6:33 pm EDT
Party POOPER! You didn't list the folks you adore so much and are arguing apology and $$$ for. I'll wait!

Bruhahahahahahaha.
  
.
By Moses Jul 23rd 2008 at 6:18 pm EDT
I can at least go back to Bronislawa who came over at age 19 and married and Konstanty who was age 38 and who together later in 1917 had Edmund who first kissed Pearl on July 4, 1939, and married her on the traditional Memorial Day, who together raised me. So, yes, I can go back at least 100 years, and before that a bit from when people were in "the old country."
Re: .
By Pirrettel Jul 23rd 2008 at 6:35 pm EDT
I'm impressed! Especially at kissing a Pearl! That why you're a gem?
  
.
By illinoismel Jul 23rd 2008 at 7:19 pm EDT
In answer to the title of your post, NO!
Re: .
By Pirrettel Jul 23rd 2008 at 10:24 pm EDT
SCORE!!! YOU scored! YOU answered the question! You win a foreclosure.
  
That's a really good post
By Hollywood Jul 23rd 2008 at 7:41 pm EDT
Hats off to you.

Thanks to an industrious, interested and retired uncle, I have my family tree. The first of my ancestors to arrive on this continent in the late 1600s were Huguenots, who fled France after the revocation of the Edict of Nantes and proclamation of the Edict of Fountainbleu. Ever since the St Bartholomew Massacre, French Protestants had been fleeing to England. It is estimated that between 1685 and 1688, over 50,000 French Protestants arrived in England as religious refugees, while an estimated 400,000 perished in France over the course of a century. The numbers were overwhelming, the native population unwelcoming, and the English decided the answer was to send them to the colonies. They were originally designated land near the York River at Rappahannock, but instead the refugees were taken to the site of a village which had been deserted by Monakan Sioux, and basically dumped there. Most had left possessions behind when they escaped from France, and the early arrivals had to scratch out an existence with no experience in agriculture. Many starved. But my ancestors survived.

"The persecution recommenced with greater fury and culminated in the revocation of the edict by Louis XIV, in 1685. Then the exodus began in earnest. There was no safety for a Huguenot in France. The galleys, dungeon or the stake was the alternative. All possible avenues of escape were closed by the king and his troops. He did not want to lose the people; he wanted to save their souls, but the poor deluded Huguenots did not see it in that light. The rich sacrificed their wealth, and the poor the little mite that they possessed, for the sake of life and liberty. Now and then some mentally weaker than the rest recanted, or pretended to do so, and outwardly seemed to be converted to the true faith, and were spared, but they were sharply watched.

North, South, East and West, they fled for life and liberty; by highways, byways, wild mountain passes, forest trails, by sea. or land, enclosed in casks, or in the foul holds of merchant vessels bound to some foreign port. Any future prospect was preferable to a life in France.

Holland, Germany and England gave them shelter, even benighted Russia gave a home to French exiles, and little Switzerland was full of refugees. Louis XIV sent the citizens of Geneva, a peremptory mandate to expel the Huguenots, under pain of his displeasure. They pretended to escort the exiles, with all due ceremony, outside the city gates, and quietly brought them in again by a gate on the other side. But Holland was crowded in population; the English laborer was jealous of the superior workmanship of the French emigrant; and it remained for America to make a final safe and happy home for the Huguenots of France."

- Colonel James Watkins, American Historical Association, 1908
Re: That's a really good post
By Pirrettel Jul 23rd 2008 at 10:30 pm EDT
Thank you. I got caught up in Barbara's racial baiting. I shouldn't have. Wastes time.

Your history sounds interesting, you should consider writing a book.
  
No
By Heather in NYC Jul 23rd 2008 at 9:38 pm EDT
You aren't responsible for the past, so no, you don't have to apologize.

Also, remember that slavery has existed since the beginning of civilization, all around the world, and continues today as a massive industry, still all around the world. It wasn't just the US in the 1800's.

There are many groups working to oppose modern slavery, if you want to get involved to help stop this scourge.

PS - You should do some genealogical research into your family, its amazing what you can find. Even going back a few decades can connect you to so much modern history.
Re: No
By Pirrettel Jul 23rd 2008 at 10:27 pm EDT
Someone before me did. My Indian side of the family owned an island off the east coast called "Mushtuk Island" now known as "Nantucket" Island. I'm part German, Indian and Irish. Hey! I want my island back!