[lewispollard]

> I cannot fathom how an entire nation of people can allow themselves to be duped so well, by so few.

The same reason as in every western democracy, including the US: massive marketing budgets & the media.

> It is my belief that the English zeitgeist is so riddled with guilt over what IT did to its colonies and foreign possessions, that it is currently in the death throws of a society crippled by its own crimes against humanity.

What absolute nonsense. So many countries have committed atrocities on a similar level, and many more recently than the British empire. Should the Norwegians be crippled by guilt for the actions of the vikings? Should the Americans be crippled by guilt for crimes against the native people? Should the Japanese and Germans be crippled by guilt for atrocities committed in WW2? People don't live in the past.

[fit2rule]

Nobody should be crippled by guilt - but todays generations ought to damned well be held responsible for the wealth they enjoy as a result of the slaves their parents owned. It wasn't that long ago, and we still have people in modern society who are responsible for atrocities, yet are nevertheless getting away with it - because, as you say, 'people dont live in the past' ..

[lewispollard]

> but todays generations ought to damned well be held responsible for the wealth they enjoy as a result of the slaves their parents owned.

No. People should by all means recognise the privilege they have and make ethical decisions based on that privilege - but they shouldn't be 'held responsible' for it as if they're criminals themselves.

[cafard]

The slaves their parents owned? My parents were born considerably after the Emancipation Proclamation. As for my more distant ancestors, I have no idea whether any of them owned slaves. I do know that a bunch were serfs. Let me know where to send the bill.

[coldtea]

>What absolute nonsense. So many countries have committed atrocities on a similar level, and many more recently than the British empire. Should the Norwegians be crippled by guilt for the actions of the vikings? Should the Americans be crippled by guilt for crimes against the native people? Should the Japanese and Germans be crippled by guilt for atrocities committed in WW2? People don't live in the past.

Yes, they should be crippled by guilt. Guilt is good -- it prevents you doing the same bad things again and gives you a perspective of what you did.

People might not live in the past, but countries carry their past with them.

The fact that the actual people that started the Vietnam war have died, doesn't mean that the country and the organisations that they worked in died with them. Those should carry the guilt forward. (Of course, instead they usually carry forward the same long term strategic planning that led to their previous attrocities).

What I mean is, countries are not discreet: they are continuous. A country has a history like a person has. Its history doesn't die and start from zero with each generation.

That's even an accepted norm of international relation even when the change inside a country is from a state to another (e.g the US after independence) etc. It's called "succession of state")

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Succession_of_states

Now, of course the truth is that they are not crippled by guilt at all -- they never stopped doing crimes on humanity and on their own citizens ever. Look what they are doing to the native americans in Dakota still. Look at Zimmerman.

[lewispollard]

> Yes, they should be crippled by guilt. Guilt is good -- it prevents you doing the same bad things again and gives you a perspective of what you did. > People might not live in the past, but countries carry their past with them.

I would argue that it's the leaders and governments who should be crippled by guilt. It's useless for me to carry the guilt of the British empire when my ancestors were working class and had no influence over those decisions (and, in fact, were Irish when you go back more than a few generations - should I be angry at Britain in that case?)