Affiliation:
1. Department of Philosophy University of Minnesota Morris MN USA
2. Department of Philosophy University of Colorado Boulder CO USA
Abstract
ABSTRACTEssays on the ethics of monuments tend to focus on their morality in relation to domestic populations. In this article we turn our attention to how the principles we favor for the ‘ingroup’ apply to various ‘outgroups’, including foreigners and foreign governments, guest workers, visiting scholars, forcibly annexed or colonized peoples, and migrant communities. It argues that nations have a prima facie moral right to erect and maintain monuments offensive to foreigners and foreign governments or (in the case of institutions) rivals. Furthermore, we hold that whereas prospective immigrants have little standing to advocate for the removal of monuments they find offensive in their receiving countries, those who have been forcibly annexed have a much greater claim to inoffensive memorialization, contingent on their willingness to be countrymen with the descendants of their former oppressors and principles of reasonably charitable interpretation. Lastly, the article advocates for the protection of heritage landscapes from foreign influence and highlights the responsibilities of migrant populations to avoid memorializing their old grievances in ways that undermine the interests of their adopted nations.
Reference44 articles.
1. Statues, History, and Identity: How Bad Public History Statues Wrong
2. Monumental changes: The civic harm argument for the removal of Confederate monuments
3. Against Simple Removal: A Defence of Defacement as a Response to Racist Monuments
4. Berkman Seth.The Fight over Berlin's Comfort Woman StatueThe Nation July 18 2022.https://www.thenation.com/article/world/comfort-women-japan-korea-germany/
5. Brown De Neen.Frederick Douglass Delivered a Lincoln Reality Check at Emancipation Memorial UnveilingWashington Post June 27 2020.https://www.washingtonpost.com/history/2020/06/27/emancipation‐monument‐in‐washington‐dc‐targeted‐by‐protests/