Re: Jacboties

[Dale Hinchey <dhinchey@together.net>]

Dear Rory,


Unlike you Rory, the general population of the British Commowealth does not
have 
an accurate history of the Clearances, or the context in which they were to
be later seen as the first Imperialist movements which began the later Empire.

You understand the enormity of the clearances, as do all scholars who examine 
Scottish History. However they are not well known as one of the significant
turning points in history wherein England thenceforth considered itself the
leading civilization of the world in both moral and spiritual terms, and
was later to commit further human atrocities around the globe, in fact,
beleiving themselves to be somewhat devinely and racially mandated to do
just that. There were many Cullodens , all around the world, they just had
different names, and the native kaffirs just were a different color and
didn't wear plaid.

If you want to oversimplify what I say and put words in my mouth, please be
accurate about it. I do not expect you to agree with me particularly but I
will not allow you to redefine what I say without comment. Its actually a
very "British" trait , should you wish to examine the sociopathology, based
upon a false sense of superiority.

As you say:

<He(meaning me, Dale Hinchey) appears to wish that those who might  apologize:
>1: prove somehow that they really understand the enormity of the clearances.

No, what I said was that apology without responsibility is meaningless and 
inflamatory in the long run. An official institutional history of the
clearances,endorsed by Parliament and a subsequent apology, as inheritors
of the duties of the then government that failed the people, makes the
apology genuine. I also noted that the "oriental" face saving apology has
very much caught on in the West, apology without responsibility, as a
saving of face. Lets see someone try it on a cuckhold and see if it works !

>2: promise that no money will ever be made because of such apology

No, what I said was if money is to be made, then let it be money made from
truth
rather than from a "Disneyesque" marketing ploy designed to play upon the
emotions and pockets of the descendants of ex-patriot Scots, with them as
the fools and native Scots as the fool makers.That would hardly be what one
would call a functional relationship.

Perhaps you miss the point that such neo-Imperialism will only increase
militant
nationalism in Scotland in the long run, and alienate Scottish people from
their
brothers and sisters in America in the short run. It seems you do not think
the hatchet should be buried properly, merely replicated ad infinitum,
plasticized and coated in gold paint to adorn the mantels of returned
American tourists, "let them eat cake?" Hardly a worthy sentiment from a
Sinclair.

Your approach is gentler and kinder because it perpetrates ignorance
when the opportunity exists to dispel it once and for all.Again, it
indicates a very paternalistic approach. 

There can be no apology for the Highland Clearances without an act of
institutional contrition. Let the highlands be resettled by those who can
prove that they are descendants of cleared highlanders and other cleared
Scots. It would be a simple matter of ammending the laws of immigration and
citizenship. It surely would bring a lot of investment into the country.

Next thing you know Rory will be telling evry one "what I said again." If I
need someone to speak for me, I will appoint someone who is much more
capable of doing so.Thank you, but no thanks, this is my last word on the
subject, 

Yours,

Dale Hinchey




At 09:58 PM 10/1/00 -0400, you wrote:
>Dear Sinclair:
>Sorry, but we did participate in the '15. The Fife Sinclairs under the
>Master of Sinclair whose descendant is Baron St. Clair Bonde of Charlton,
>were a critical part of that rebellion ("1715 " by A. & H. Taylor 1936) .  I
>also understand that the Caithness folk rose for the Prince in the '45 but
>too late to be of any good at Culloden.
>John Prebble who is hard on the Lairds (especially the Sutherlands) who
>forcibly removed their tenants  to make place for sheep, is very gentle on
>Sir John Sinclair of Ulbster. I quoted that passage in an earlier discussion
>on this subject and you may have missed it.
>Whether or not the Sinclairs participated in the Clearances as the
>Sutherlands does not matter much to the very general question raised by Dale
>Hinchey.
>He appears to wish that those who might  apologize:
>1: prove somehow that they really understand the enormity of the clearances.
>2: promise that no money will ever be made because of such apology
>
>I take a "gentler kinder" approach.  If a person wishes to apologize, for I
>start from a place that tells me that it is not up to me to frame the
>apology.  Personally, I am quite amazed that anyone would raise the issue
>and yes, until I know otherwise, I would tend to give someone the benefit of
>making the offer before I judged it.
>Besides, how does one ensure either of 1 or 2 above.
>Rory
>
>[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@mids.org
>[ To get off or on the list, see http://www.mids.org/sinclair/list.html
>
Personal Web Page: Dale Hinchey <http://personalweb.smcvt.edu/dhinchey>
Where I teach:Saint Johnsbury Academy Web
Page:<http://www.state.vt.us/schools/stj/>
[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@mids.org
[ To get off or on the list, see http://www.mids.org/sinclair/list.html