perseverance of bitterness about the past

I have a question for those of you who live in nations far older than the USA.

Here in the states we still have people still butthurt in the south that the Confederacy lost the civil war.

The black people still have a lot of bitterness about slavery and how they were treated even after slavery was abolished..

The American Indians are still bitter about how whites treated them .

MY question is this

How long did it take your countries to grow beyond horrible tragedies that happened in the past? I know England had a very bitter civil war in the 1600's. Are people still fuming over it? And also do people really hate their nobles because of serfdom in the middle ages? Do people in Bulgaria hate people to the point they foam at the mouth because of some massacre Romania might have done to them 500 years ago?

I think you get my drift. I'm wondering how long its going to take to get all the stuff out of our system.

Why not consider perspectives from African nations as well? Many played complex roles in the Atlantic slave trade, both as participants and as forces of resistance. Given this dual experience, these nations might offer unique insights into navigating past grievances. Exploring how they have handled the legacy of such a profound historical tragedy—their roles in both supporting and resisting the transatlantic slave trade—could provide a nuanced understanding and perhaps even valuable lessons in reconciliation.

Yet by only asking the opinions of those that look like you—and overlooking the perspectives of those in the urban areas you and your well-kept lawn seem to take issue with—it seems you're not genuinely seeking answers, are you?

For Example Ghana. Between the 16th and 19th centuries, Ghana's coastline was central to the transatlantic slave trade. European powers built forts and castles—such as Elmina Castle and Cape Coast Castle—that served as points where millions of Africans were forcibly sent to the Americas. These historical sites have been preserved and are recognized as UNESCO World Heritage Sites, serving as powerful reminders of the past.

In Ghana efforts have been made to encourage a sense of national unity that transcends ethnic and historical divisions. There isn't widespread resentment toward specific groups or nations today in Ghana. The emphasis is on learning from the past. They might call you 'Obroni,' which translates to 'white person' or 'foreigner,' but it is generally not used in a derogatory manner. Generally you'll get more love from Black people in Ghana than African Americans and that's for a reason.

In my opinion, America's prolonged struggle to overcome its ailments stems from its continual refusal to seek and accept treatment. Eventually, the nation takes its medicine—kicking and screaming—so we'll get there at some point.

I'd say WWII had an impact on Europe. But we see Russia still bitching about Crimea, while Europe is trying to building towards the 21st Century.

Gospel said:

Why not consider perspectives from African nations as well? Many played complex roles in the Atlantic slave trade, both as participants and as forces of resistance. Given this dual experience, these nations might offer unique insights into navigating past grievances. Exploring how they have handled the legacy of such a profound historical tragedy—their roles in both supporting and resisting the transatlantic slave trade—could provide a nuanced understanding and perhaps even valuable lessons in reconciliation.

Click to expand...

Most of Africa is still trying to manage the impacts of colonialism, mainly the arbitrary division of territories and colonial powers pushing that divisions against each other.

The reality is the bigotry in America had a rough second half of the 20th century. But it is making a comeback.

BH said:

How long did it take your countries to grow beyond horrible tragedies that happened in the past?

Click to expand...

I will let you know when if it happens.

BH said:

I know England had a very bitter civil war in the 1600's. Are people still fuming over it?

Click to expand...

Some certainly are, though that particular grievence was largely painted over (at least in England) by Victorian era hyper-royalist imperialism; The grievences over the past often bear only passing resemblance to the actual history, as you would likely be aware of with the American Civil War.

Folks hold grudges based on history as they want it to have been, not as it was; And the further back they look, the less accurate are their excuses to hate each other.

Ireland still has a huge grudge over the direct aftermath of the Wars of the Three Kingdoms (of which the English Civil War* formed the major part). The victorious and staunchly protestant Army of Parliament, (and after the Restoration of the Monarchy and the coup d'êtat to remove the Catholic James II from power, the equally staunchly Protestant King, William of Orange), spent the next several decades after their victory rampaging through Ireland, in a program that would today be called 'ethnic cleansing' of the Catholic majority. The Northern Irish Protestants to this day keep the grudge fresh and nasty by such displays of adult behaviour as holding annual Protestant parades through Catholic neighbourhoods, and screaming abuse at Catholic primary school students.

Yorkshire and Lancashire still have a rivalry over the Wars of the Roses (1455-87), despite the awkward historical reality that those counties themselves were not in conflict - the "House of Lancaster" eventually overthrew the ruling "House of York", but Yorkshire wasn't at war with Lancashire; the decisive battle was in Leicestershire, and the Duchy of Lancaster already owned a large fraction of the county of Yorkshire before 1455 (and still does). More of the yorkshiremen who fought at Bosworth were fighting for Henry of Lancaster than were fighting for Richard of York - Medieval armies were levied by individual aristocrats, from the people who lived and worked on their estates.

BH said:

And also do people really hate their nobles because of serfdom in the middle ages?

Click to expand...

Generally they don't (at least in England), partly because the nobles from the middle ages have been very watered down by newer nobles; Partly because they have plenty of more recent greivances against the nobility and aristocracy; And partly because the nobles and aristocrats have been able to afford excellent propaganda - hence the Victorian era hyper-royalist imperialism alluded to above.

BH said:

Do people in Bulgaria hate people to the point they foam at the mouth because of some massacre Romania might have done to them 500 years ago?

Click to expand...

Yes.







* Actually two Civil Wars in close succession. Parliament won, captured the King, and locked him up; Whereupon the king's mates broke him out of jail (at Carisbroke Castle on the Isle of Wight), and kicked the whole thing off again. Having won a second time, Parliament chopped the king's head off, on the reasonable grounds that his mates would have a harder time gluing it back on than they had had in staging a jailbreak.

The North American Indigenous and African Americans are still fighting a very real struggle today, that's not a part of the past. Not the same thing as feelings over the civil war.

But a lot of the animosity from past eras is essentially a meme, someone heard it from their parents, who heard it from their parents, and it just keeps getting passed down through generations and reified. The in group is usually 'great', the outgroup 'isn't great', and the story just keeps being passed on without the application of critical thought.

The Crusades ended 700 years ago and are still a bitter memory in the Arab world and a political metaphor that can still be spun.

Gospel said:

In my opinion, America's prolonged struggle to overcome its ailments stems from its continual refusal to seek and accept treatment. Eventually, the nation takes its medicine—kicking and screaming—so we'll get there at some point.

Click to expand...

Not to derail the thread, but there's a great essay I read in this book earlier this year about American attempts to integrate and elevate African Americans. Apparently after the civil rights movement the economic status of African Americans did start to improve a bit.

But when North America transitioned into an information economy often requiring higher education this disproportionately affected African Americans and the gains were mostly lost.

Just thought that was an interesting fact.

Jimmy Higgins said:

Most of Africa is still trying to manage the impacts of colonialism, mainly the arbitrary division of territories and colonial powers pushing that divisions against each other.

Click to expand...

You won't get any disagreement from me on that. I just didn't think that obvious fact was relevant to the question the OP asked.

Jimmy Higgins said:

The reality is the bigotry in America had a rough second half of the 20th century. But it is making a comeback.

Click to expand...

Just another round of kicking and screaming. One can only hope that the Americans attempting to offer aid aren’t harmed in the process—much like Black Wall Street was.

Gospel said:

Jimmy Higgins said:

Most of Africa is still trying to manage the impacts of colonialism, mainly the arbitrary division of territories and colonial powers pushing that divisions against each other.

Click to expand...

You won't get any disagreement from me on that. I just didn't think that obvious fact was relevant to the question the OP asked.

Click to expand...

You mean other than Africa is still struggling with the made up arbitrary divisions put upon them by colonialists to be dealing with the actual ones?

Gospel said:

Jimmy Higgins said:

The reality is the bigotry in America had a rough second half of the 20th century. But it is making a comeback.

Click to expand...

Just another round of kicking and screaming. One can only hope that the Americans attempting to offer aid aren’t harmed in the process—much like Black Wall Street was.

Click to expand...

Dude, things are going backwards if Harris wins. If Trump wins, we really don't know what the bottom will be.

Jimmy, I’m really starting to feel like you’re not reading anything I write—unless this is your way of leaning in, nudging me with an elbow, and whispering in agreement.

I was surprised to learn just how many South Koreans hate Japan.

One might expect a typical South Korean citizen's greatest external bitterness to be directed towards North Korea and by extension China for their role in the Korean war, but I was surprised to discover something different. South Korea has a vast cultural animosity towards Japan stemming from the Japanese occupation of the Korean Peninsula in 1910 following several brutal wars. Japan was an oppressive overlord in Korea until the resolution of WWII in 1945. Both nations recovered from their mid-20th century devastation to emerge as prosperous modern democracies facing far more dangerous and autocratic regional rivals in Russia, China, and North Korea. Both are closely allied to the USA, and on paper one would expect them to be eager allies. And they are allies but I get the impression that there are many South Koreans citizens who have reservations about the alliance. The lingering wounds from the Japanese occupation seem to overshadow even the trauma from the Korean War.

Part of the continuing resentment might result from their status as economic rivals but whenever there is an anti-Japanese protest here, the Occupation is always the headline complaint.

zorq said:

I was surprised to learn just how many South Koreans hate Japan.

One might expect a typical South Korean citizen's greatest external bitterness to be directed towards North Korea and by extension China for their role in the Korean war, but I was surprised to discover something different. South Korea has a vast cultural animosity towards Japan stemming from the Japanese occupation of the Korean Peninsula in 1910 following several brutal wars. Japan was an oppressive overlord in Korea until the resolution of WWII in 1945. Both nations recovered from their mid-20th century devastation to emerge as prosperous modern democracies facing far more dangerous and autocratic regional rivals in Russia, China, and North Korea. Both are closely allied to the USA, and on paper one would expect them to be eager allies. And they are allies but I get the impression that there are many South Koreans citizens who have reservations about the alliance. The lingering wounds from the Japanese occupation seem to overshadow even the trauma from the Korean War.

Part of the continuing resentment might result from their status as economic rivals but whenever there is an anti-Japanese protest here, the Occupation is always the headline complaint.

Click to expand...

Korea is to Japan, as Ireland is to England.

Where an Englishman would joke about the Irish being stupid, the Japanese would make a similar crack about the Koreans.

The Koreans have plenty of reasons to dislike the Japanese, with the history of Imperial Japan as the well justified main element of the animosity.

Red Sox fans—yeah, they’re still hating. Babe gets sold to the Yankees, and here we are, nearly a century later, still bitter! Some grudges just have no expiration date.

We are a social animal and our connection to the group is critical to survival. In the technological age, where a person can live a solitary life because they do not have to actually talk to the person who made their shirt, or the person who uses whatever they produce, it's easy to forget how pathetically vulnerable human is in the wild. There is great danger from animals and other humans.

Our group insures our safety and security from threats. When the threat is from another human group, this will become part of the cultural memory and identity. As time passes, groups shift and merge, but the cultural memory has a very long half life.

It is not human nature to get over it, especially for no better reason than to help a member of a formerly adversarial group feel a little more comfortable.

zorq said:

I was surprised to learn just how many South Koreans hate Japan.

One might expect a typical South Korean citizen's greatest external bitterness to be directed towards North Korea and by extension China for their role in the Korean war, but I was surprised to discover something different. South Korea has a vast cultural animosity towards Japan stemming from the Japanese occupation of the Korean Peninsula in 1910 following several brutal wars. Japan was an oppressive overlord in Korea until the resolution of WWII in 1945. Both nations recovered from their mid-20th century devastation to emerge as prosperous modern democracies facing far more dangerous and autocratic regional rivals in Russia, China, and North Korea. Both are closely allied to the USA, and on paper one would expect them to be eager allies. And they are allies but I get the impression that there are many South Koreans citizens who have reservations about the alliance. The lingering wounds from the Japanese occupation seem to overshadow even the trauma from the Korean War.

Part of the continuing resentment might result from their status as economic rivals but whenever there is an anti-Japanese protest here, the Occupation is always the headline complaint.

Click to expand...

Japan is extremely unpopular with the places it occupied. "Rape of Nanking" and "Unit 731" come to mind. I suspect they're even more unpopular in Korea as at least during the communist time the educational system in China basically omitted any history that was in conflict with the idea that China is the best. I asked my wife about Unit 731, she knew nothing of it. No idea that bioweapons were used, nor any idea that nuclear weapons were used.

Fascist Italy tried to remake the Roman Empire. Which suggests that bitterness about lost power can last a long time.

I wonder how long it will take the English to get over the loss of theirs.

Bronzeage said:

It is not human nature to get over it, especially for no better reason than to help a member of a formerly adversarial group feel a little more comfortable.

Click to expand...

I'd tack on that it's not common to get over it. The small fringe of people who do get over it are what separates us from the animal kingdom.

rousseau said:

Bronzeage said:

It is not human nature to get over it, especially for no better reason than to help a member of a formerly adversarial group feel a little more comfortable.

Click to expand...

I'd tack on that it's not common to get over it. The small fringe of people who do get over it are what separates us from the animal kingdom.

Click to expand...

The quality of mercy is not strained, but holding a grudge is definitely a human trait. Cattle in a feedlot are content because they have no idea the guy who fills the feed trough has slaughtered countless generations of cows.

If cows suddenly became sentient along with a complex language, it would not be long before the first cow legend arose when a steer(he's got a double grudge) looked the rancher in the eye and mooed, "You can't take us one by one because we won't go one by one." It's the story of the Long Stampede, still told to all young calves.

Eventually, humans would have to give up eating beef, if for no other reason than it was no longer profitable to wage war just to get a hamburger out of the deal. Humanity and Bovinity would come to an uneasy truce, which only gets more tense every time a human says, "Why can't you get over it? I just want to steal your milk."

bigfield said:

Fascist Italy tried to remake the Roman Empire. Which suggests that bitterness about lost power can last a long time.

I wonder how long it will take the English to get over the loss of theirs.

Click to expand...

I wonder how long it will take the English to admit that they have lost theirs.

This is the country that recently left the EU, because it genuinely believed that the EU was constraining it from continuing to dominate the world.

Several generations after the loss of their empire, they looked at the EU, and decided that a bunch of foreigners banding together for their mutual benefit was an existential (or at the very least reputational) threat, to an empire that no longer exists.

Perhaps they should just have invaded Ukraine.

But isn’t the UK largely made up of people who lost power elsewhere and migrated there as a result? In fact, the entirety of the EU consists of nations formed by people scattered from empires like the Roman and Carolingian Empires, as well as groups like the Celtic tribes, Anglo-Saxons, and others. Basically an international cling to lost power.