3 ms·
Not sharing your values is not ipso facto "missing the point". Whether or not something is a strong principle of some historically mushy and faux-reified "weste
by crispinb 4y ago
Not sharing your values is not ipso facto "missing the point". Whether or not something is a strong principle of some historically mushy and faux-reified "western morality" is of only pop-anthropological value and of no interest to me (chauvanism just isn't my thing). And neither is any of this related to "our" 'system of laws' (whose and which - US? UK? English? Scottish? European? Common law? Napoleonic?), as no legal question has been raised.
What is however true of all human societies is that people associate in, and identify with, groups. Most nations, including the UK where The Guardian is based, institute a variety of laws and mores to cover various categories of organisations' behaviour. Amongst the mores is that company or organisation representatives can speak for the group, without there being any confusion amongst initiates of the culture that they are speaking for themselves as individuals. There's nothing in the statement to suggest that the people speaking for the Scott Trust have any individual or family connections with the events cited. They are not personally apologising. But The Guardian, qua centuries-old organisation, did, so it is. But "The Guardian", being a group rather than a mammal, doesn't have a mouth with which to speak. Hence the statement from a representative.
People who get hysterical about perfectly reasonable (and oh so nearly universally understandable) expressions of sorrow or shame about a group's past behaviour from representatives, for some reason always seem remarkably relaxed about similar expressions of pride. Especially when it's a group the red-faced critic has some sympathy with. You'd almost think some people want the reflected glory (ah we have Western Culture which makes us all very ethical and we did the Industrial Revolution and we invented Science so I am great!), but without the shame (but slavery was nothing to do with me, how dare you!). Good-oh. Nice work if you can get it.
- adastra22 4y agoWhat I mean by "missing the point" is that you were addressing something completely out of left field and had nothing to do with what I wrote. Now you are doing it again.
- crispinb 4y agoNo, your point is pretty clear, and manifestly false to anyone with any understanding either of history or of what The Guardian (an organisation, not an individual) is trying to do.