The concept of collective guilt is very controversial. Used by the Nazis during the holocaust, then used against the German people after World War II, it is a blade that cuts both ways. More recently, Ward Churchill lost his job as a professor at CU after an investigation that began when he argued that the collective guilt of many of the workers in the World Trade Center meant that they were military targets, not innocent victims. Collective Guilt is an important theme in A Tale of Two Cities. The concept is applied by peasants and aristocrats alike. What do you think about the idea of finding a whole group of people guilty for allowing crimes to be committed by a few? Is it fair? Is it effective?
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Collective Guilt
The concept of collective guilt is very controversial. Used by the Nazis during the holocaust, then used against the German people after World War II, it is a blade that cuts both ways. More recently, Ward Churchill lost his job as a professor at CU after an investigation that began when he argued that the collective guilt of many of the workers in the World Trade Center meant that they were military targets, not innocent victims. Collective Guilt is an important theme in A Tale of Two Cities. The concept is applied by peasants and aristocrats alike. What do you think about the idea of finding a whole group of people guilty for allowing crimes to be committed by a few? Is it fair? Is it effective?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
36 comments:
I think collective guilt is ridiculous! It is ok to use one person as an example but it isn't fair to take advantage of others just for the sake of peer-pressuring the guilty person into doing the "right" thing. So ya, that's what I think.
-The Beast
Its called a conscience use it
-cydonia
Collective guilt may not always be a good thing but it always can reap in good, because everyone gets to learn form one persons mistake instead of everyone making the same mistake again.
lifeguardbum
It's stupid, and it will only make the people angry at each other. It's better to punish the people who do what you don't like and not the group of people. It's better to punish someone harshly then punish a large group of people somewhat fairly.
note- this does not apply to the holocaust.
-quakken
just because something is unfair does not mean that its bad... if a large group of people get mad then thats there fault they should be content with the opportunity that they got to improve.
--beachbum
Think about it though, people pay attention when everyone gets in trouble for the actions of one person. They pay attention and evaluate whats going on around them, is that so wrong?
-thatsgoofy
collective guilt is very effective in the short term but it causes the opposite effect in the long run... so everybodys rite
-trevz
I dunno... I read "lifeguardbum" and s/he has a point. Yeah, it's stupid and makes people all mad at each other, but after the whole thing is over, they end up smarter in the end 'cause they realize it was all stupid so they won't do it again, even if they didn't do it in the first place.
-Shukumei
Oh... and Trevz... I pwn you. HA!
my conscience got lost so cydonia could you explain what that is
-V
Collective guilt is pretty dumb. It is pretty much just like telling someone they're in trouble for standing next to someone who committed a crime or if they are wearing the same color as the guilty person.
-Mona Lisa
without collective guilt than people would be doing the same crime or same mistake as the person right infront of you.
--beachbum
sure you are supposed to have a conscience but honestly i don't think everyone does.
it's quite sad actually.
-mccrizzle92
This is a good method b/c you can use the "culprit" as an example for all to see and therefore avert any future mishaps
-JrEagles09
v it is the voice in your head that tells you what is right and wrong.
-cydonia
there are a lot of voices in my head sometimes but mostly its just empty space.
-V
It's definitely effective, but I don't think that it's fair in the slightest. But, wouldn't the guilt of the people dishing out the collective guilt feel guilty themselves it they have this so called "conscience".
-Mr. Owl
I think that collective guilt is not fair and it is not right but yet, it is pretty effective. For example, in classrooms it works very well. But I do not believe in using collective guilt as a punishment. It's not really fair. *Sunshine*
In examples where the group being punished has no way to change to no be punished, doing the things that they need to do to prevent may be impossible so they do just get angry if you instill some kind of collective guilt for punishment it's ineffective.
In other settings though, it can be useful to make the people change their few bad apples, but if it doesn't work and you can see that they are trying to change themselves and you have to punish them again, it can't work.
-quakken
I think collective guilt isn't good but I think it is effective in many situations, such as this one and many more. People shouldn't be blamed for other peoples actions but being punished for something you haven't done yet will probably stop you from doing it in the future.
-2lex
I don't think that collective guilt is fair, unless all the people are involved with the few who are getting in trouble. other wise i don't think you should be punished for the doings of others. I don't know how effective it is, because it may work for some and it may not for others.
-giggles745
Mona Lisa has a point!
it is stupid! even the whole killing people thing is stupid! its like us having the death penalty...
why kill people to show that killing people is wrong?
why kill someone, because they stand next to the other person!
-SmileLikeYouMeanIt
collective guilt blows.
if your friend murdered someone you shouldnt feel guilty, its not your fault.
that was a bad example, sorry.
*pumpkin*
i agree that collective guilt is ridiculous to a point because its not fair to punish every person for one persons crime. i find that unfiar and unnecessary. but, at the same it could be helpful because there's a little saying that goes 'learn from others' mistakes' and i almost agree with that so if we might get punished for someones' mistake at least we can learn from them and not do it so we don't receive punishment for that mistake again.
-snapple
pumpkin its your fault if you didn't try to stop them
-V
V, that's not even related to the argument. And if your friend gets murdered and you feel bad that's collective guilt at all. collective guilt is being punished because you are in a group of people and some of the people did something against the rulers/enemies of the group you belong in.
-quakken
Pumpkin has a point; something that happens to somebody around you does not make it your fault. I think it's really stupid when somebody punishes others because of collective guilt. Because Darnay's father made some stupid offense to "Madame" Defarge does not mean that Darnay should be punished for it because he had nothing to do with it and he hated the injustices that his relatives commited just as much as some of the peasents.
~stephanie
I want to go back to 2lex.That's really dumb. If I interpreted what you said correctly you say it doesn't matter if you are innocent because you will learn from another person's mistakes. So if that is what you are saying, does that mean that we give the death penalty to all Germans because Hitler was a German who killed thousands or that we need to lock every Muslim up in prison to rot for the rest of their lives because there is a few Muslims who are terrorists? We can't group people like that.
- Mona Lisa
Mona Lisa, you really twisted 2lex's words you know that's not what they were saying. Don't assume what somebody is saying when you don't know for sure if that is what they meant.
~stephanie
Well Stephanie, what do you think it says?
-Mona lisa
I think if one person lets a bunch of people down it will have an effect on them and they won't want to let those people down again.
It shouldn't matter what I think they saying though maybe you should find 2lex and ask them what they meant. And don't be so snotty about it.
~stephanie
Regardless of how effective something is it still is what it is and whether or not you like it thats not gonna change so you either have to accept it and move on or your wasting your time
JrEagles09
Mona lisa, what are you thinking that 2lex is saying, it makes sense, and i agree.
-giggles745
What I am trying to get across is we can't assume the worst in people and expect them to do horrible things.
-Mona Lisa
It's really easy for all of us to sit here and judge the way that the revolution went, but really what we have done? Would we have known what to do to stop the oppression? I don't really think that we would've known what to do either. Not saying that i agree with everyones actions, but really..think about it.
-thatgoofy
thatgoofy we probably wouldn't know what to do if we were oppressed because the USA is such an amazing country that we don't have to think about stuff like that.
-V
Let me start by saying of course it's not fair, being punished for something you didn't do is never fair, but (as there's always two sides to a question) it alwyas seems fair to the people punishing because it is simply revenge. My opinion on how effective it may be is based only the history that I understand, and that is that among mankind, collective guilt through violence is not at all effective, but without violence, it is. Either we use collective guilt as revenge, which is a never-ending cycle, or we use it as gossip, to force our society to shun (without physically hurting and without the other's knowledge) the other group. An example is (and no offense Clarke) when you say that "when the Catholic Church imprisoned Galileo, burned all of his works and books..." it automatically puts into the minds of everyone in the class, subconsciencely, that it was the Catholic Church's fault, as a whole, for stunting the growth of science and progress during the Dark Ages, and thus still is stunting its growth today. And although it's understood that it was the thought of destroying a religion rather than refusing to accept any new scientific hypothesis that fueled them, that impression is still there, and the next time Catholic Church is mentioned with the Dark Ages, that conversation will be fresh in their minds, thus collective guilt is kept up since the 17th century. In this way, it is very effective.
-Mariah B.
Post a Comment