A part of me sees your point, but... I dunno. That sort of blame and name-calling can be poisonous, too. I'd lean more towards a Truth and Reconciliation model, to be honest. It removes antagonism, makes the wrong-doers admit their crimes in their own words, and demands of us - the "good" people in whose names, or with whose passive approval, these acts were taken - an understanding of what happened. It robs us of justice, because it recognizes that justice for monumental crimes is impossible, and the better way forward is to heal.
But then, I suppose that requires also an opposing side that, as a group, recognizes their defeat and that they were properly defeated. TBH I don't know enough about Serbia to say if that's a realistic proposition.
Compare: Iraq's trial of Hussein and rapid execution of him were widely criticized. What's the difference?
Credits & Style Info
Talk Politics. A place to discuss politics without egomaniacal mods
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 26/5/11 22:43 (UTC)But then, I suppose that requires also an opposing side that, as a group, recognizes their defeat and that they were properly defeated. TBH I don't know enough about Serbia to say if that's a realistic proposition.
Compare: Iraq's trial of Hussein and rapid execution of him were widely criticized. What's the difference?