[Inspired by two
recent events about which I wrote on Monday, a series on the complex question
of whether and how America should apologize for historic wrongs. Leading up to
a special weekend post where I’ll share some broader thoughts and for which I’m
not at all sorry to ask for your contributions as well!]
Two things that
the 1988
Civil Liberties Act got very right, and one way it came up short.
1)
Education for the future: The 1988
law, entitled “Restitution for World War II internment of Japanese-Americans
and Aleuts,” included a number of initiatives dedicated not only to
redressing that past but also to influencing the future. For one thing, the law
appropriated monies “to provide for a public education fund to finance efforts
to inform the public about the internment of such individuals so as to prevent
the recurrence of any similar event.” More broadly, it included among its purposes
the goals of “discouraging the occurrence of similar injustices and violations
of civil liberties in the future” and “making more credible and sincere any
declaration of concern by the United States over violations of human rights
committed by other nations.” Apologies for the past have to include a sense of relevance
and meaning in the present and future as well, and the CLA did so
pitch-perfectly.
2)
Reparations for the past: They can’t only
address those present and future concerns, though—not without becoming too
purely symbolic. I greatly (and obviously) value symbolism and collective
memories and national narratives, but there’s something—really a great deal—to be
said for accompanying them with meaningful action as well. In the CLA, that
meaningful action took the form of substantive financial reparations for every
living survivor of the internment camps, a community
numbering more than 82,000 individuals. It’s easy, and not inaccurate, to
argue that money paid in 1990 (when the payments began) can’t possibly ameliorate
wrongs done half a century earlier, much less the cumulative effects and
aftermaths of those wrongs. But without a time machine, action could only be
taken in the present—and the financial reparations both gave the symbolic
apology teeth and undoubtedly aided these Japanese Americans and their
families.
3)
A messy and partial aftermath: Support and
opposition for the CLA largely fell along partisan political lines, and such
political debates continued to impact the establishment and work of the Civil Liberties Public Education Fund,
created to fulfill the purposes discussed above. The bill had authorized $50
million for the fund, but years of budget battles both held the monies up in
committee and reduced the sum to $5 million as of 1994. The CLPEF was finally
able to begin distributing the funds in 1997, but only did so for one year
before (as the archived website at that above hyperlink notes) closing its
offices permanently in November 1998. A great deal of good was done in that
year to be sure, but these ugly realities nonetheless remind us that apologies
and laws require continued work and diligence, and that the battle to remember
our history more fully and accurately is not one that will have ever definitive
or conclusive victories. Yet the CLA was a victory all the same, and one worth
its own collective memory and emulation.
Next
ApologyStudying tomorrow,
Ben
PS. What do you
think? Responses to this topic and/or broader thoughts on American apologies
for the weekend post are very welcome!
No comments:
Post a Comment