I agree with highthief.
The big difference is that nations with a democracy, a free press and freedom of speech need to remember these events. I would suggest that remembering these events, clearly is essential to never repeating them.
If you don't think it's working point to a nation that has these conditions that *has* repeated something like this...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by jorgelito
Why is condemnation useful? Because at the very least, it says that humanity does not condone these acts. To have an official stamp on it legitimizes the victims pain and suffering and offers a modicum of empathy and sympathy. Even if it is only lip service at least it's a start.
|
I think the condemnation is important but not necessarily after so much time has passed. The Turkish event happened so many years ago and it just seems that there is more of the fueling of hatred than the useful side of the equation.
If there had been an official history of condemnation it is different from digging at the past. I am not sure it is completely useful and is more likely to have the contrary effect.