Forgiveness
In the Globe and Mail article of September 29, 2003, ‘Some things are best forgotten’, the author, William Thorsell, espouses the virtue of forgiveness, which he considers ‘the most undervalued of virtues’. He also advocates forgetting painful incidents as the first step to construct a new life. Although the author preaches forgiveness with humane intentions, his deduction is at best simplistic, at worst dangerous.
Thorsell bases his analysis on a new conclusion on post-traumatic stress counseling by a panel of the American Psychological Society (APS). According to the APS, “Although psychological debriefing is widely used throughout the world to prevent PTSD [post-traumatic stress disorder], there is no convincing evidence that it does so …For scientific and ethical reasons, professionals should cease compulsory debriefing of trauma-exposed people.” From this conclusion, the author generalizes that repression, denial and selective amnesia should be the preferable solutions for dealing with ‘bad experiences’.
Thorsell’s generalization is insensitive because of its dangerous assumptions: “…most of us know that these tools (repression, denial and selective amnesia) of avoidance ward off certain madness in our personal lives.” This banal comment has the condescending tone of an arrogant majority, despite his failure to provide any scientific reference to support this ‘obvious fact’. Moreover, the author is quite overt in his disapproval of cathartic counseling- even when the counseling is not compulsory, and he vilifies the ‘culture of confession’ as ‘wasteful indulgence’. The author seems to laud the majority individuals who heroically “grieve privately and then get better on their own.”
Countering these popular myths, PTSD-Alliance (link: www.ptsdalliance.org), a PTSD advocacy organization says, “PTSD is a complex disorder that often is misunderstood. Not everyone who experiences a traumatic event will develop PTSD, but many people do…It is important to understand that people respond differently to trauma. Some people will have a few problems, and these problems may go away without treatment. Others will need support and some kind of treatment before they can move forward with their lives.”
The organization also cautions, “The most critical steps in treating PTSD often are most difficult- recognizing the problem and getting help. There are many reasons why this can be hard to do: People who have experienced an extreme traumatic event may hope, or even expect, to be able to ‘handle it’ and ‘get over it’ on their own…Sometimes the experience may be too personal, painful or embarrassing to discuss…There are a number of effective options for PTSD. Treatment can involve psychotherapy (i.e., counseling), medication or a combination of both.”
Thus, it is dangerous to assume that people should handle their ‘bad experiences’ by selective amnesia since mental health professionals repeatedly warn that many persons suffering from PSTD, as well as other mental illnesses, do not seek help because of the stigma of being perceived as ‘weak’. These people do grieve privately, but not all of them get better on their own. The expected ‘one size fits all’ solution leads some patients to commit suicide because of unbearable suffering unabated by counseling or medication.
Equally dangerous is the author’s attempt to apply the APS conclusion to a broader canvas: collective trauma caused by large-scale political injustice. Thorsell believes since “the nourishment of awful memories that distorts the lives of millions, and threatens the peace of millions more”, ‘thoughtful forgetting’ by victims should be the solution “to construct a new life after wars and horrors…” Although he is correct in his observation that “Revenge is exacted on living innocents in the name of long-dead innocent victims… ”, his panacea, forgiveness, is simplistic.
Contrary to the author’s fear, lives of millions are not at stake over the questions “Was Alexander the Great a Macedonian or a Greek? Did this tribe decimate that tribe 600 years ago in the Balkans?” Lives of millions, indeed, are at stake in the Balkans. The reason is the ‘tribal’ wars that started 600 years ago continues today since the perpetrators of atrocities committed long ago were never brought to justice. As a result, the victims decided to get even by murdering their oppressors, blurring the definition of an oppressor and a victim. Similarly, Macedonia is on the verge of a civil war, not because of questions concerning the ethnicity of Alexander the Great- despite the occasional Greek claims, but because of incessant repression against the minority- ethnic Albanians.
Moreover, it is wrong to assume that seeking justice and planning revenge are analogous. Nor is forgiveness the solution for “leaving dreadful things behind”. Unless perpetrators of atrocities are brought to justice and forced to stand fair trials, the victims’ suffering is not likely to mitigate. They may indulge in revenge and the cycle could go on and on. On the other hand, if the perpetrators can get away with mass murder, they will not refrain from it whenever they wish.
Sixty years after the end of the Second World War, Korean female sex-slaves are still fighting the Japanese government in court to extract the admission of its role in forcing them into prostitution. But the Japanese government is reluctant to admit guilt. In such situations, it would be quite insensitive to preach forgiveness to the victims. Moreover, it will encourage other groups or persons indifferent to human rights to indulge in similar schemes.
Undoubtedly, forgiveness is an honourable virtue. But the article by Thorsell fails to suggest the dangers of pardoning criminals. Unless criminals are prosecuted and punished for their crime, the trauma experienced by an individual or a society is unlikely to culminate into any positive outcome. Moreover, contrary to the author’s belief, because of our forgetfulness, history seems to repeat itself. In this respect, Rwanda might be just one example among many. The Guardian article of April 5, 2004: ‘Rwanda: peace but no reconciliation’ by Rory Carroll states:
“Rwanda is peaceful and stable, even staid…but Rwanda is an abnormal, traumatized society. Tolerance between mistrustful neighbours reflects not a miracle of forgiveness but the will of an authoritarian regime…It’s too early for reconciliation. That’s for future generations…people are coexisting because they have no choice. Where would they go?...(the elected President Paul Kagame) rules like a general and squashes opponents as ‘divisionists’ who stoke ethnic rivalry. Since Tutsis (the tribe of the President) make up less than 15% of the population, Mr. Kagame needs Hutu (the majority tribe) support to stay in power, so promoting ‘unity’ is a political imperative…The hate ideology is gone but homicidal impulses may linger. You hear people say that ‘if Kagame is killed we will eat the Tutsi’s cows’- a euphemism for killing the owners…”
Moreover, forgiving the mass-murderers is difficult, if not a crime. How can one forgive a person whose victim is portrayed by the same article: “Wearing a white dress and an uncertain smile, Irene Mutoni gazes from her cot, a two-year-old girl in a fading photograph. Her favourite food, says the (photo) caption, was banana and rice. Her favourite toy was a stuffed dog. Her first word was daddy. Her method of death was drowning in boiling water.”
------------------------------------
link for the guardian article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/rwanda/story/0,14451,1185757,00.html
Thorsell bases his analysis on a new conclusion on post-traumatic stress counseling by a panel of the American Psychological Society (APS). According to the APS, “Although psychological debriefing is widely used throughout the world to prevent PTSD [post-traumatic stress disorder], there is no convincing evidence that it does so …For scientific and ethical reasons, professionals should cease compulsory debriefing of trauma-exposed people.” From this conclusion, the author generalizes that repression, denial and selective amnesia should be the preferable solutions for dealing with ‘bad experiences’.
Thorsell’s generalization is insensitive because of its dangerous assumptions: “…most of us know that these tools (repression, denial and selective amnesia) of avoidance ward off certain madness in our personal lives.” This banal comment has the condescending tone of an arrogant majority, despite his failure to provide any scientific reference to support this ‘obvious fact’. Moreover, the author is quite overt in his disapproval of cathartic counseling- even when the counseling is not compulsory, and he vilifies the ‘culture of confession’ as ‘wasteful indulgence’. The author seems to laud the majority individuals who heroically “grieve privately and then get better on their own.”
Countering these popular myths, PTSD-Alliance (link: www.ptsdalliance.org), a PTSD advocacy organization says, “PTSD is a complex disorder that often is misunderstood. Not everyone who experiences a traumatic event will develop PTSD, but many people do…It is important to understand that people respond differently to trauma. Some people will have a few problems, and these problems may go away without treatment. Others will need support and some kind of treatment before they can move forward with their lives.”
The organization also cautions, “The most critical steps in treating PTSD often are most difficult- recognizing the problem and getting help. There are many reasons why this can be hard to do: People who have experienced an extreme traumatic event may hope, or even expect, to be able to ‘handle it’ and ‘get over it’ on their own…Sometimes the experience may be too personal, painful or embarrassing to discuss…There are a number of effective options for PTSD. Treatment can involve psychotherapy (i.e., counseling), medication or a combination of both.”
Thus, it is dangerous to assume that people should handle their ‘bad experiences’ by selective amnesia since mental health professionals repeatedly warn that many persons suffering from PSTD, as well as other mental illnesses, do not seek help because of the stigma of being perceived as ‘weak’. These people do grieve privately, but not all of them get better on their own. The expected ‘one size fits all’ solution leads some patients to commit suicide because of unbearable suffering unabated by counseling or medication.
Equally dangerous is the author’s attempt to apply the APS conclusion to a broader canvas: collective trauma caused by large-scale political injustice. Thorsell believes since “the nourishment of awful memories that distorts the lives of millions, and threatens the peace of millions more”, ‘thoughtful forgetting’ by victims should be the solution “to construct a new life after wars and horrors…” Although he is correct in his observation that “Revenge is exacted on living innocents in the name of long-dead innocent victims… ”, his panacea, forgiveness, is simplistic.
Contrary to the author’s fear, lives of millions are not at stake over the questions “Was Alexander the Great a Macedonian or a Greek? Did this tribe decimate that tribe 600 years ago in the Balkans?” Lives of millions, indeed, are at stake in the Balkans. The reason is the ‘tribal’ wars that started 600 years ago continues today since the perpetrators of atrocities committed long ago were never brought to justice. As a result, the victims decided to get even by murdering their oppressors, blurring the definition of an oppressor and a victim. Similarly, Macedonia is on the verge of a civil war, not because of questions concerning the ethnicity of Alexander the Great- despite the occasional Greek claims, but because of incessant repression against the minority- ethnic Albanians.
Moreover, it is wrong to assume that seeking justice and planning revenge are analogous. Nor is forgiveness the solution for “leaving dreadful things behind”. Unless perpetrators of atrocities are brought to justice and forced to stand fair trials, the victims’ suffering is not likely to mitigate. They may indulge in revenge and the cycle could go on and on. On the other hand, if the perpetrators can get away with mass murder, they will not refrain from it whenever they wish.
Sixty years after the end of the Second World War, Korean female sex-slaves are still fighting the Japanese government in court to extract the admission of its role in forcing them into prostitution. But the Japanese government is reluctant to admit guilt. In such situations, it would be quite insensitive to preach forgiveness to the victims. Moreover, it will encourage other groups or persons indifferent to human rights to indulge in similar schemes.
Undoubtedly, forgiveness is an honourable virtue. But the article by Thorsell fails to suggest the dangers of pardoning criminals. Unless criminals are prosecuted and punished for their crime, the trauma experienced by an individual or a society is unlikely to culminate into any positive outcome. Moreover, contrary to the author’s belief, because of our forgetfulness, history seems to repeat itself. In this respect, Rwanda might be just one example among many. The Guardian article of April 5, 2004: ‘Rwanda: peace but no reconciliation’ by Rory Carroll states:
“Rwanda is peaceful and stable, even staid…but Rwanda is an abnormal, traumatized society. Tolerance between mistrustful neighbours reflects not a miracle of forgiveness but the will of an authoritarian regime…It’s too early for reconciliation. That’s for future generations…people are coexisting because they have no choice. Where would they go?...(the elected President Paul Kagame) rules like a general and squashes opponents as ‘divisionists’ who stoke ethnic rivalry. Since Tutsis (the tribe of the President) make up less than 15% of the population, Mr. Kagame needs Hutu (the majority tribe) support to stay in power, so promoting ‘unity’ is a political imperative…The hate ideology is gone but homicidal impulses may linger. You hear people say that ‘if Kagame is killed we will eat the Tutsi’s cows’- a euphemism for killing the owners…”
Moreover, forgiving the mass-murderers is difficult, if not a crime. How can one forgive a person whose victim is portrayed by the same article: “Wearing a white dress and an uncertain smile, Irene Mutoni gazes from her cot, a two-year-old girl in a fading photograph. Her favourite food, says the (photo) caption, was banana and rice. Her favourite toy was a stuffed dog. Her first word was daddy. Her method of death was drowning in boiling water.”
------------------------------------
link for the guardian article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/rwanda/story/0,14451,1185757,00.html
posted by Roguentin at 10:45 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home