Historical Methods

I’ve never been very good with public speaking, but I feel that I did pretty well with this presentation. My preparation was fairly good and I stayed within the time-limit. The biggest worry that I had was I would forget one of my points or that I would accidentally skip over a part and have to go back and tell it out of order, but I managed to make some note-cards which helped to keep my in line. I regret not using a visual aid like PowerPoint since those usually give me a better focus and help to keep the presentation more interesting and if I had to do it again I would definitely include that. Overall though I did manage to stay on topic and keep myself from going off on any tangents, so I feel that the presentation made since and got across the points I was trying to convey.  Also, I think one of the strong points for my presentation was that I was able to include specific facts and quotations that backed up my thesis while I spoke. It has been a pretty interesting class and I cannot wait or next spring. Hopefully I’ll see many of you there.

Oppression by a small percentage of elite over the mass of people within a country is not unheard of. In fortunite circumstances, like in Eastern Europe, these totalitarian regimes meet their end and are replaced by a new and hopefully better form of government. After the new government has come to power the question of what to do with the former oppresors remains. It’s not as if the scars made by secret-police heal as soon as their existance as a legal body has been abolished, and the fear of being noticed does not dissapate just because the prey is no longer being hunted.  To find closure victims often need to see the ones that hurt them punished. In cases like Eastern Europe where the victim is the entire population of a country and the purpatrators are the government of that country at all levels the trial and the sentencing of those at fault is extremely difficult. Should only those at the highest levels of government be punished? The chief of police that oversaw the falsification of evidence to convict supposed “collaboraters”, should he be punished? What about the policemen themselves who both oppressed their own people, and simply did their job? Are these men innocent because their actions were legally sanctioned by the government at the time?

Answering these questions is difficult, but after a regime change it becomes neccesary to address the wrong-doings of the past and confront the painful memories. South Africa’s unique solution to this was the establishment of a Truth and Reconcilation Commision that would offer amnesty in return for full disclosure of the facts. It’s aims were to release the truth about the horrors of Aparthied in order to provide closure, while still reconciling the population by not punishing those responsible; only revealing their participation insted. In some ways this solution is the most likely to provide a future for a country, but it takes a level of understanding by the population that is almost unprecidented. It is natural that all those that have been wronged would want vengence, and pacifying that urge can be a challange even on an individual level.