Now I seem to remember that one of the reasons that John Howard
refused to apologise to the stolen generation was that “we” weren’t
personally responsible. Afterl all, none of “us” ever stole children so
how could “we” apologise for something we didn’t do. And I seem to
remember that the Murdoch Media was fairly supportive of this position.
But now I find that Mr. Murdoch embraces the notion of collective
responsibility. If you’re a member of a particular group, then you’re
responsible for the actions of all members of that group.
It’s an interesting concept.
Should perhaps all energy companies be fined for the actions of Enron?
Or all newspaper journalists be jailed for the phone hacking in Britain?
Of course, it’s be ridiculous to jail all journalists. I think just the ones who work for Murdoch would probably be enough.
But now we’ve established the notion of group responsibility. Here is
my quick list of people who should apologise on behalf of their group:
- All police should apologise for the death in Ferguson.
- All bank employees should apologise for the GFC.
- All drivers should apologise for the car that cut me off the other day.
- All Dutch immigrants should apologise for Andrew Bolt.
- All teenagers should apologise for the popularity of “One Direction”.
- Alll Australians should apologise for the election of the Abbott government.
Ok, it’s only a quick list, and maybe an apology isn’t enough. Maybe
like Rupert says until the people who are part of the group “recognise
Oooh, that sounds a bit nasty and threatening when put in another
context. Gee, I certainly don’t want to suggest that any member of that
group should “recognise and destroy” someone else in the group.
I mean, people reading this blog might get the wrong idea about what I
mean and it would sound like I were inciting hatred and violence.
Lucky Rupert’s made himself a lot clearer about what he means by
“recognise and destroy” and that the words won’t encourage such things!