Argument: Damages the country’s reputation

Rightly or wrongly countries are judged in part based upon the past; In Europe Germany is regularly judged on the basis of the Nazi’s [1] and in Asia Japan on the basis of its atrocities in World War II. [2] Any nation would be sensible to want to avoid such vilification on the basis of actions taken by one’s ancestors and the further back the less sense such vilification makes sense. Digging up past wrongs for the sake of digging is wrong simply because of the souring effect it can have on the present. If there are dark areas of the past that have been forgotten then it is best to leave them forgotten than rather than risk creating new enmities between nations. Although not an exact parallel rather similar would be the creation of the Hutus and Tutsis in Rwanda. The Belgian colonial powers divided the population into several distinct groups where no divide had previously existed. The population was then divided through a census and identity card system introduced in 1933-4 which set individuals ethnicity. This was the root of one of the worst genocides of the twentieth century; [3] essentially through creating an enmity where none previously existed, something that could equally be done by digging up the past rather than inventing a past.

[1] Lowen, Mark, ‘Debt-laden Greeks give vent to anti-German feelings’, BBC News, 27 February 2012, http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17177200

[2] Komine, Ayako, and Hosokawa, Naoko, ‘The Japanese New History Textbook controversy’, Free Speech Debate, 13 July 2012, http://freespeechdebate.com/en/case/japanese-new-history-textbook-controversy/

[3] Magnarella, Paul J., ‘Explaining Rwanda’s 1994 Genocide’, Human Rights &amp; Human Welfare, Vol.2, No.1, Winter 2002, http://www.du.edu/korbel/hrhw/volumes/2002/2-1/magnarella2-1.pdf

Candidate 1: "This gives all the more reason to act pre-emptively by allowing free and open scholarship and critical analysis of the past. If a nation will not take a long hard look at its own past eventually someone else will and they are just as likely to uncover any skeletons in the closet as a national historian is. If however the government is open to new ideas then they can quickly say sorry, possibly pay some form of reparation and prevent any creation of enmity that will occur through denials. Japan is an excellent example of this; China and Korea are still calling for the Japanese emperor to apologise for atrocities during imperialism. [1]

[1] Kyodo, ‘Japanese Emperor must apologize for colonial rule: S. Korean president’, The Japan Times, 15 August 2012, http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20120815b5.html"
Candidate 2: "While a country is entitled to promote its own national story, its own interpretation of events and create its own national heroes however it is not entitled to suppress historical events and so blot things out of history by preventing any competing ideas about that history. Most people learn their history through the state education system rather than through scholar’s history books so having competing narratives is not a threat to the state’s interpretation.

Role models are not undermined by having some minor faults."
Candidate 3: "Simple ‘disrespect’ is not sufficient reason to limit freedom of speech and freedom of academic enquiry. Those who find it disrespectful need not watch or read that which is written that they find disrespectful but more importantly they should be open minded enough to be able to reconsider their previous views. No matter the subject if it has strongly held views about it then holding up a different prism to that subject is going to be considered disrespectful as it is challenging those deeply held beliefs. Yet if we can’t challenge and test those beliefs then there is no opportunity for change and progress. Ultimately then preventing inquiry due to ‘disrespect’ holds back societies development."

This gives all the more reason to act pre-emptively by allowing free and open scholarship and critical analysis of the past. If a nation will not take a long hard look at its own past eventually someone else will and they are just as likely to uncover any skeletons in the closet as a national historian is. If however the government is open to new ideas then they can quickly say sorry, possibly pay some form of reparation and prevent any creation of enmity that will occur through denials. Japan is an excellent example of this; China and Korea are still calling for the Japanese emperor to apologise for atrocities during imperialism. [1]

[1] Kyodo, ‘Japanese Emperor must apologize for colonial rule: S. Korean president’, The Japan Times, 15 August 2012, http://www.japantimes.co.jp/text/nn20120815b5.html
