I have great sympathy for the injustices visited upon the Wampanoag Nation, but I’m nevertheless opposed, for several reasons, to reciting a proposed “land acknowledgement statement” at the commencement of all municipal meetings.
First of all, the proposed statement is, in my opinion, based on the implicit premise that all non-Wampanoags are, in some way, responsible for these injustices. I do not believe that responsibility for wrongdoing is inherited by the progeny of the perpetrators – any more than entitlement to reparations is inherited by the progeny of the victims. Put another way, I do not believe in collective guilt – whether across generational lines or among members of the same generation.
Secondly, the proposed statement is, in my opinion, based on the implicit premise that all non- Wampanoags alive today are, in some way, more enlightened and more virtuous than their predecessors. Elevating oneself over one’s predecessors is easily done, because those predecessors are not here to defend themselves. Proving one’s piety by blaming one’s predecessors is “piety bought on the cheap,” in my opinion.
Thirdly, I don’t believe that it’s necessary to publicly proclaim one’s piety in every situation in which piety is called for. Each of us can and should honor the Wampanoags in our own lives without having to publicly proclaim it to others. There’s a reason why Catholics confess in confessionals: Private anonymous proclamations are generally more heartfelt and sincere than public proclamations.
Fourthly, oral proclamations make all persons present a captive audience, as opposed to, say, posting the statement on a wall at Town Hall, or adding it at the end of a meeting agenda, in each of which cases the persons present have the choice whether to read it. Oral proclamations, on the other hand, are involuntary, rather than voluntary, from the audience’s point of view.
Fifth and finally, there’s a reason why all public meetings start with a recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance, which, as we all know, promises “liberty and justice for all”. Why isn’t that enough? For me it is – but for those who feel it isn’t, then I suggest that a more appropriate venue for the proposed proclamation would be at church or in school, where it would be recited in a religious or an educational setting. But at a municipal meeting, the Pledge of Allegiance should pre-empt the field.
– Richard M. Serkey