[anupshinde]

Shouldn't we as humans bury the longer past and move on and look at the present-day scenario? I know many will say - "What about justice to our ancestors?". Justice is done to them when their children(descendants) do not suffer similar injustice and/or live a better life. How many parents want their kids to live in a war-waging world?

I understand what she did was very hard work. But what's the point? People who raise these issues now probably and unintentionally end up generating hatred amongst individuals who might otherwise be perfectly fine with each other. Then there are people who get emotionally touched, take an absolute stand and create an uprising. The people (experts) who raised the issue first get sidelined. The govt tries to control the situation and gets labelled as oppressive. Politicians and media take control now. It goes on and then starts a racial and a religious divide and all the wars in the world. The true purpose is lost and what exists past those wars is just pieces of hazy truth mixed with spiced up vigilantism.

The British did very bad and evil things in the past. But why not talk about evil things performed now by another powerful and smart country that uses methods incomprehendible to most people.

[benbreen]

I have no issue with the anti-war aspects of what you wrote. But as an historian, I feel like I ought to write a defense of remembering past injustices. I think there are several grounds for doing so:

- I can't speak for Caroline Elkins, but I think that many historians, including myself, believe that every human life that was ever lived has some value and deserves to be remembered, as far as that's possible. As living human being we naturally have a tendency to privilege our present moment and the lives of the humans who happen to be alive alongside us, and there's nothing wrong with that. But it's humbling to realize that there are tens of billions of lives that have faded from memory, but which were every bit as vivid and profound to the people who experienced them as your own life is to you. So I think one core benefit of history is simply in preserving the memories and the experiences of all sentient beings. (This is going to get very interesting in the decades to come when we get better at digitally preserving people's personalities and memories, but that's for another discussion).

- There are a surprising number of people in the mainstream of political and cultural discussion who truly seem to believe that the British Empire should be uncritically celebrated. Niall Ferguson being probably the most famous example. This kind of work forces us to confront the fact that the good intentions of some British imperialists were counterbalanced by atrocities and acts of unthinking violence. Caroline Elkins' work is important in the same way that George Orwell's "Shooting an Elephant" is - it documents cruelties, not to settle scores, but to help us avoid repeating them.

- Arguably, more violence and hatred could be incited by failing to remember horrible past events. In other words, if a people have a sense that they've been wronged within living memory, and that as those memories fade, the injustice done to them will be forgotten, this could generate even more distrust and hatred then an acknowledgement and apology. This is a debatable point, but one that makes sense to me from the standpoint of my own life - we tend to get angriest at unacknowledged wrongs.

[nradov]

As a counterpoint I think remembrance of past injustices is one of the key obstacles holding back the former Yugoslavia. People there tend to be aware of history (or at least their own version of it) going back to 1389 in a way that most Americans can't grasp. And although they might be right in some moral sense, so what? This just encourages a victim mentality and won't get them anywhere in the long run.

[hx87]

> but I think that many historians, including myself, believe that every human life that was ever lived has some value and deserves to be remembered

I agree with that, but the difference is that we have the ability to improve present and future lives, something we cannot do for those of the past. Thus if bringing dignity to the past injures the present and the future, we would not do so.

[apozem]

This is a very naive view of history and reconciliation. It's easy to say, "Yes, it was bad, but why don't we move on? Why be divisive and bring up past wrongs?" when you were not the one tortured. I would even call it churlish to preach "forgive and forget" when our countries (assuming you are a Westerner) have been doing wrong by these other countries for centuries.

Pretending history never happened is not only disingenuous, it actively hurts attempts to heal and move forward. There can be no forgiveness if one side tries to pretend something bad never happened. The example everyone cites is South Africa's Truth and Reconciliation process, in which the horrors of apartheid were laid bare. Everyone acknowledged what happened, and it laid the basis for moving forward.

Facts are facts. If the ugly history of imperialism offends you, look away. It will be there regardless.

[anupshinde]

No, I am no westerner. I know what I am talking about. My country was oppressed by the British Empire and was left independent severely impoverished. But we are on our way up, slowly and steadily. People have moved on and have learnt to stand united in diversity

[sangnoir]

> Shouldn't we as humans bury the longer past and move on and look at the present-day scenario? I know many will say - "What about justice to our ancestors?"

Ancestors?!! 50 years ago is in living memory - as the article stated, some the victims of the Mau Mau repression are still walking the earth, why should they 'bury the past'?

Those who do not study the past are doomed to repeat it, we shouldn't bury it, but study and analyze it and make changes to lower the chances of it happening again - Nuremberg was a good thing for humanity, we need more of that.

[zyxley]

> People who raise these issues now probably and unintentionally end up generating hatred amongst individuals who might otherwise be perfectly fine with each other.

For events only 50 years ago, it's more likely that the hatred is already there and the effect of it on families gets ignored because "the past is past".

"Creating an uprising" only happens when there's already tension and unhappiness floating around and people don't feel like they have any other way for their problems to be heard.

[j45]

If we don't understand, acknowledge and what happened in the past, how can we be moving on with confidence that it's still not happening?

I encourage everyone to look into the Truth & Reconciliation movement in Canada. It's truly inspiring to see how important Truth is, and how important reconciliation is, only because of truth.

Really, the question can be of one's own guilt and blissful ignorance when we're reminded how clueless we really are of the plight of others. Looking in the mirror in that simple way isn't always easy.

[jokejokecry]

Why not forget about the Holocaust, then?

In education, there are few things more important than teaching the truth about the horrors of the past, and the human capacity for violence, racism, and bureaucratic indifference, in the hope of creating empathy and stopping future genocide.

Also, understanding the actions of the past helps us understand the actions of the present. Without historical context, it's nearly impossible to have perspective on why an individual or group of people hold certain beliefs or act in a way we may not at first understand.

[GFK_of_xmaspast]

Did you see or just ignore the part where she talked to people who actually had atrocities committed against them?

[linuxkerneldev]

> People who raise these issues now probably and unintentionally end up generating hatred amongst individuals who might otherwise be perfectly fine with each other.

I think that's a flawed way to think. Your logic would imply that we shouldn't make anymore movies about the Holocaust because it might cause Jews to hate Germans.