Ethical Relations to the Past: Individual, Institutional, International

IF 0.7 Q4 SOCIAL WORK Ethics and Social Welfare Pub Date : 2021-10-02 DOI:10.1080/17496535.2021.2004644
G. Calder, T. Brannelly, Ian Calliou
{"title":"Ethical Relations to the Past: Individual, Institutional, International","authors":"G. Calder, T. Brannelly, Ian Calliou","doi":"10.1080/17496535.2021.2004644","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Ethical relations to the past – whether to ancestors, the dead, historical injustices, events with contested interpretations – are complex and often elusive. The representations of history are, as Edward Said put it, not ‘ontologically given’ but rather ‘historically constituted’ (Said 1989, 225). Rather than preserved as a ‘thing’ by this or that established account, ‘the past’ is something with which we are in an ongoing state of negotiation. At points, this process seems especially highly charged. Our call for contributions to this special issue followed the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis in June 2020, and a global response calling for an end to racism and colonialisation, an acknowledgement of the presence of past injustices in the here and now. The need for such acknowledgement has been at the heart of other recent high-profile cases and movements, from historic child abuse by high-profile celebrities to #MeToo, and from the moral skirmishes in the UK and US around the removal of statues of those involved in the slave trade, to the October 2021 ruling that the Canadian government must compensate Indigenous children taken from their homes and placed for the sake of ‘assimilation’ in residential homes where many went on to be abused. Distinct ethical questions arise when we are dealing with the past, and with transition. Can people of the past be wronged in the present? With events long in the past, how does responsibility carry over to current agencies not directly involved – to present governments, businesses or institutions? Does ethics sometimes require a revision of how past events and people are commemorated? To what extent is it legitimate to judge beliefs and actions taken as ‘normal’ in previous eras and contexts by standards arising in our own time? In post-colonial contexts, what is the rightful role of ‘allyship’ in resolving past conflict, trauma and oppression – and giving due prominence to the agency and authority of those who have offered resistance? Meanwhile other factors are crucial to how these ethical questions are negotiated. Whose knowledge counts, in getting to grips with historical events? What role can, or should, survivors’ testimony play? What (if anything) constitutes an authoritative account? Our commitment in this special issue has been to address how the harms of the past live in current welfare policy and practices. Terms such as ‘post-coloniality’ and ‘historical abuse’may suggest that somehow the harms at stake exist only in the past, rather than being carried among those currently living. A willingness by governments to take steps to redress those harms may seem to be partial, and non-inclusive of the insights of those affected. Our intention is to foreground both the need for care and criticality in our understanding of ethical relations to the past, and the need to hear the plurality of voices and insights among those affected then and now. Shona Hunter’s paper addresses the question of decolonising the white self as an action of anti-racism in institutional settings, in response to the call for change sitting with people of colour rather than people who benefit from white privilege. Hunter’s graceful choreographic interplay of responsibilities for change calls for a contextualised understanding of situations, giving depth through listening to the voices of experience.","PeriodicalId":46151,"journal":{"name":"Ethics and Social Welfare","volume":"15 1","pages":"341 - 343"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2021-10-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ethics and Social Welfare","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17496535.2021.2004644","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Ethical relations to the past – whether to ancestors, the dead, historical injustices, events with contested interpretations – are complex and often elusive. The representations of history are, as Edward Said put it, not ‘ontologically given’ but rather ‘historically constituted’ (Said 1989, 225). Rather than preserved as a ‘thing’ by this or that established account, ‘the past’ is something with which we are in an ongoing state of negotiation. At points, this process seems especially highly charged. Our call for contributions to this special issue followed the death of George Floyd in Minneapolis in June 2020, and a global response calling for an end to racism and colonialisation, an acknowledgement of the presence of past injustices in the here and now. The need for such acknowledgement has been at the heart of other recent high-profile cases and movements, from historic child abuse by high-profile celebrities to #MeToo, and from the moral skirmishes in the UK and US around the removal of statues of those involved in the slave trade, to the October 2021 ruling that the Canadian government must compensate Indigenous children taken from their homes and placed for the sake of ‘assimilation’ in residential homes where many went on to be abused. Distinct ethical questions arise when we are dealing with the past, and with transition. Can people of the past be wronged in the present? With events long in the past, how does responsibility carry over to current agencies not directly involved – to present governments, businesses or institutions? Does ethics sometimes require a revision of how past events and people are commemorated? To what extent is it legitimate to judge beliefs and actions taken as ‘normal’ in previous eras and contexts by standards arising in our own time? In post-colonial contexts, what is the rightful role of ‘allyship’ in resolving past conflict, trauma and oppression – and giving due prominence to the agency and authority of those who have offered resistance? Meanwhile other factors are crucial to how these ethical questions are negotiated. Whose knowledge counts, in getting to grips with historical events? What role can, or should, survivors’ testimony play? What (if anything) constitutes an authoritative account? Our commitment in this special issue has been to address how the harms of the past live in current welfare policy and practices. Terms such as ‘post-coloniality’ and ‘historical abuse’may suggest that somehow the harms at stake exist only in the past, rather than being carried among those currently living. A willingness by governments to take steps to redress those harms may seem to be partial, and non-inclusive of the insights of those affected. Our intention is to foreground both the need for care and criticality in our understanding of ethical relations to the past, and the need to hear the plurality of voices and insights among those affected then and now. Shona Hunter’s paper addresses the question of decolonising the white self as an action of anti-racism in institutional settings, in response to the call for change sitting with people of colour rather than people who benefit from white privilege. Hunter’s graceful choreographic interplay of responsibilities for change calls for a contextualised understanding of situations, giving depth through listening to the voices of experience.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
与过去的伦理关系:个人、机构、国际
与过去的伦理关系——无论是与祖先、死者、历史上的不公正、有争议的解释的事件——都是复杂的,往往难以捉摸。正如爱德华·赛义德所说,历史的表征不是“本体论赋予的”,而是“历史构成的”(赛义德1989225)。“过去”并没有被这个或那个既定的账户作为一种“东西”来保存,而是我们正在与之进行谈判。在某些方面,这一过程似乎特别紧张。在乔治·弗洛伊德于2020年6月在明尼阿波利斯去世后,我们呼吁为这一特刊做出贡献,并在全球范围内做出回应,呼吁结束种族主义和殖民主义,承认过去存在的不公正现象。这种承认的必要性一直是最近其他备受关注的案件和运动的核心,从历史上备受关注的名人虐待儿童到#MeToo,从英国和美国围绕拆除奴隶贸易参与者雕像的道德冲突,到2021年10月的裁决,即加拿大政府必须赔偿因“同化”而被从家中带走并安置在寄宿家庭的土著儿童,许多儿童在那里受到虐待。当我们处理过去和过渡时,会出现明显的道德问题。过去的人会在现在受到委屈吗?由于事件早已过去,责任如何转移到目前没有直接参与的机构——现在的政府、企业或机构?伦理有时是否需要对过去的事件和人物的纪念方式进行修改?根据我们这个时代出现的标准,在多大程度上判断在以前的时代和背景下采取的“正常”信仰和行动是合法的?在后殖民时代的背景下,“盟友关系”在解决过去的冲突、创伤和压迫方面的合法作用是什么,并适当突出那些提供抵抗的人的代理和权威?同时,其他因素对如何协商这些道德问题至关重要。在掌握历史事件的过程中,谁的知识最重要?幸存者的证词可以或应该发挥什么作用?什么(如果有的话)构成了权威性的叙述?我们在本期特刊中的承诺是解决过去的危害如何在当前的福利政策和实践中存在。“后殖民主义”和“历史虐待”等术语可能表明,在某种程度上,危险的伤害只存在于过去,而不是在现在的人中传播。政府采取措施纠正这些伤害的意愿似乎是片面的,不包括受影响者的见解。我们的意图是在理解与过去的道德关系时强调需要谨慎和关键性,以及需要倾听当时和现在受影响者的多种声音和见解。肖娜·亨特的论文将白人自我非殖民化问题作为制度环境中的反种族主义行动,以回应与有色人种而非受益于白人特权的人坐在一起进行变革的呼吁。亨特优美的舞蹈般的变革责任相互作用,要求对情境进行情境化理解,通过倾听经验的声音来提供深度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
1.60
自引率
20.00%
发文量
36
期刊介绍: Ethics and Social Welfare publishes articles of a critical and reflective nature concerned with the ethical issues surrounding social welfare practice and policy. It has a particular focus on social work (including practice with individuals, families and small groups), social care, youth and community work and related professions. The aim of the journal is to encourage dialogue and debate across social, intercultural and international boundaries on the serious ethical issues relating to professional interventions into social life. Through this we hope to contribute towards deepening understandings and further ethical practice in the field of social welfare. The journal welcomes material in a variety of formats, including high quality peer-reviewed academic papers, reflections, debates and commentaries on policy and practice, book reviews and review articles. We actively encourage a diverse range of contributions from academic and field practitioners, voluntary workers, service users, carers and people bringing the perspectives of oppressed groups. Contributions might include reports on research studies on the influence of values and ethics in social welfare practice, education and organisational structures, theoretical papers discussing the evolution of social welfare values and ethics, linked to contemporary philosophical, social and ethical thought, accounts of ethical issues, problems and dilemmas in practice, and reflections on the ethics and values of policy and organisational development. The journal aims for the highest standards in its published material. All material submitted to the journal is subject to a process of assessment and evaluation through the Editors and through peer review.
期刊最新文献
A Qualitative Case Study of Undergraduate Social Care Students’ Approaches to Social Justice in a Finnish Context Can Street-Level Bureaucrats Assist with Material Resources? Naming, Trivializing and Privatizing Economic Abuse in Israel In the Periphery: Ethical Considerations When Indirectly Involving Children in Research Ethics of Youth Work Practice in the Twenty-First Century: Change, Challenge and Opportunity Towards a Notion of Relational Sacrifices: Nursing During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Wuhan
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1