Historical apologies as acts of symbolic inclusion – and exclusion? Reflections on institutional apologies as politics of cultural citizenship

Abstract

Institutional apologies for historical injustices can be conceived as acts of symbolic inclusion directed to people whose collective experiences and memories of the past have not been recognized in the hegemonic narratives of the past. However, in this article it is argued that such apologies also have exclusionary potential as vehicles of symbolic politics of citizenship in that they may designate the apologizing community so that it effectively excludes cultural 'aliens', like migrants, from the community of 'remedial' citizens. The article suggests a crucial point is the rhetoric shifts when one is appealing to both cultural and political solidarity, as when apologizing in the name of the state but simultaneously invoking 'our' nation and 'our' history. Thus the increasing number of institutional historical apologies is not necessarily incompatible with the trend of reinforcing the symbolic boundaries around 'our' historical-cultural communities that has been visible recently, for example, in the demands for cultural canons and citizenship tests in many Western societies.

The Australian Experience: Peak Commemoration?

“…Questions of history and moral in/justice are heavily loaded largely, but not only, because the issue at stake is who is included in, or excluded from, the community whose memories of the past are recognised as part of a wider national or global narrative of history. Additionally, seemingly well-intentioned historical apologies may have exclusionary effects (Löfström, 2011). As the 20th century amply shows, narratives of historical trauma have great potential to fuel enmities between countries and within societies, and the last 15 years witness that history continues to be mobilised for a wide variety of political 'uses and abuses' (see, for example, Macmillan, 2010;Taylor & Guyver (eds, 2011).…”

“…It may be a reflection of the recognition that History/Social Studies educators in particular are expected to cultivate young citizens' and their history teachers' ability to reflect on historical problems and moral dilemmas and that, consequently, many History/Social Studies educators in universities are engaged in doing research on these themes. For example, the editors of this special issue have researched historical consciousness in school textbooks and the place of ethical values in historical thinking and in history teaching (see, for example, Ammert, 2008Ammert, , 2013aAmmert, , 2013b, adolescents' perceptions of the meanings and justification of historical reparations as a reflection of their historical consciousness, and the public uses of historical reparations (see, for example, Löfström, 2011Löfström, , 2014, adolescents' responses to issues of violence and responsibility, the place of social and historical controversies and moral dilemmas in the guidelines mandated by core curricula (see, for example, Edling, 2009Edling, , 2012Edling, , 2016Edling & Frelin, 2013), and the question of representing sensitive pasts in the History curriculum (see, for example, Sharp, 2011). One particular theme which has been studied extensively by History educators and which has a close connection with historical and also moral consciousness is historical empathy and how to develop it (see, for example, Brooks, 2009;Davis, Yeager, & Foster (eds), 2001; as an example of a social psychological approach to the concept of empathy see Myyry, Juujärvi, & Pesso, 2010).…”

Contesting and Constructing International Perspectives in Global Education

“…It could even be interpreted as effectively excluding the minority from the nation despite the inclusive intention behind the apology (Löfström, 2011). However, these inclusive apologies also (re)produce both the group that is apologising and the group they are apologising to.…”

“…The rhetoric of apologies often refers to a common history, not as a political community, but as a historically established cultural community (Löfström, 2011). These two types of communities, while overlapping, are often treated as interchangeable when it comes to the nation-state, and this leads to the reproduction of cultural hegemony within the state.…”

Remembering and Forgetting, Discovering and Cherishing

“…The way of representing WWII in Finland in two phases, as the Winter and the Continuation Wars, place the Lapland War as an epilogue of the latter, a scene that happened far in the north after the peace was already set (Tuominen 2015, 40-41). Public celebrations and popular culture have emphasized the events of the 'heroic' Winter War (see Kivimäki 2012;Löfström 2011) and the traumatic loss of Karelia in the Continuation War (e.g. Fingerroos 2012; Korjonen-Kuusipuro & Kuusisto-Arponen 2012).…”