Guilt attaches to the moral decisions governing a subject's personal acts and omissions, including the giving or withholding of his informed assent to the acts and omissions of others.
If it was not I but, e.g., my ancestors who acted, omitted or assented, I bear no guilt. Justice dictates that I may not be convicted as proxy for my ancestors nor for any other party whomsoever.
If my countrymen, parents or ancestors are accused of morally wrong acts, I will examine what can be known of their moral intent. I will inquire whether there was mens rea sufficient to convict them. If it can be established beyond reasonable doubt (that blessed and mighty English legal concept) and if there are no contemporaneous arguments for their defence, they may stand convicted, i.e., they may be guilty, of a moral wrong, but not I.
Guilt and shame must be distinguished. I may feel shame at the acts or omissions of those with whom I associate myself: my countrymen, family (including ancestors) and friends. Shame may prompt me voluntarily to try to ameliorate the ill consequences for another of my associates' acts or omissions, but that would be a charitable act of my free will and does not imply any share in others' guilt.
Collective guilt is a malign and false doctrine deliberately constructed to inflame mutual hostility among groups. It is beloved of Marxists who determinedly impute guilt (for real or invented wrongs) to entire classes, nations and races in order to engender hatred and foment group conflict. They feel a virtuous glow from 'having done something' to 'redress the wrong' but are blind to the ludicrousness of their action which offends against Justice -- in the name of Justice.
Collective guilt is irrational, political, and wholly inimical to the common good and to justice. I will have no part of it.
0 comments:
Post a Comment