Christopher Columbus statues have been taken down since the Black Lives Matter protests pushed Americans to reflect on the darker chapters of their history, which includes the genocide of indigenous people resulting from European explorers’ American conquests. Jorge Baracutei Estevez, chief of the Higuayagua Taíno, a Taíno culture protection group, claimed that he is ashamed of the Columbus memorials as they honor the atrocities committed by European colonizers (Brito). However, to Italian Americans, Columbus remains a proud symbol of their Italian heritage, representing the acceptance of Italian immigrants into the United States’ proverbial melting pot. One statute, two feelings stirred: an intense feeling of shame from some, pride from others. The controversies over whether to keep Columbus’ images displayed in public squares provoke reflection on Americans’ feelings of shame or pride in relation to their nation’s history.

A nation’s history forms a crucial part of its citizenry’s identity, but that history must first correctly identify its past events, recounting them as accurately and honestly as possible. With such understanding, citizens can then identify the moral progress and pitfalls of the past, acknowledging both its injustices and advances. Although modern citizens are not direct participants in creating their collective past, the past still informs their present. As such, this essay argues that people of the present have moral obligation rooted in the past to rectify injustices, though not to feel shame arising out of complicity with those moral wrongs. Similarly, people of the present have a moral obligation to feel proud of the moral progress in the past and uphold that advancement for the future.

***

People living in the present tend to feel uncomfortable about their ancestors’ wrongdoings, yet there is no need for modern people to be ashamed or feel guilty about past

injustices they had no part in. In the Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Paulo Freire argues that only humanization is in human’s vocation, and oppression is a historical distortion of this nature, not an inherent part of being human. Human beings are meant to become more human through liberation and solidarity—not through dominating others. (Freire, 44). For example, though it is historically accurate to note that White people used to enslave Black people through a system of racialized slavery, it is not inherent in a Black person’s destiny to be enslaved, and more importantly, it is not an inherent characteristic in a White person’s identity to exploit Black people. Hence, there’s no moral reason for the descendants of both the historical oppressed and oppressor to feel guilt or to be ashamed of their forebears’ history since neither of those destinies can be inherited in them. This is not to say, however, that people of the present will not choose to feel a sense of personal shame for their ancestors’ past actions; this essay contends, however, that they have no moral obligation to feel guilt or shame.

That said, people living in the present do have obligations arising from the actions of people of the past; but this obligation isn’t shame, it is the moral duty to address persistent injustice. Past injustice tends to cast a long-lasting shadow in modern society in unobvious ways. For example, even though slavery was abolished in the United States in 1865, racial disparities and discrimination arising from slavery and the later Jim Crow era persist today in the form of intergenerational wealth gaps, redlining, and de facto segregation. According to a 2024 report by the Annie E. Casey Foundation, Black students are twice as likely as their White peers to study in inadequately funded school districts. Furthermore, racial wealth gap and employment disparities demonstrate that White workers are more likely to get better jobs than Black workers at every level of education (Klein). This means that the wrongdoing of the past still affects

society’s winners and losers today; for that reason, Americans have an obligation to rectify these inequalities, as many enjoy privileges arising from slavery’s legacy.

Some American universities are recognizing this obligation. Yale University confronts its historical involvement in slavery by sharing the findings regarding the university’s entanglement with slavery and cooperating with Historically Black Colleges and Universities (Dennehy and Gonzalez), while Stanford University recognizes that its land was historically owned by Native Americans, and that they are the current beneficiaries using the lands (Stanford University). Both examples demonstrate that even though we, as contemporary citizens, are not the direct participants of injustices like slavery or colonization, we still inherently enjoy unequal privileges inherited from our history, and hence we owe a debt to victims still experiencing the effects of past exploitation and injustice.

Interestingly, this obligation arises out of America’s foundational text. In the preamble of the U.S. Constitution, the framers agreed on that the goal of establishing the Constitution is “In order to form a more perfect Union” (The Constitution of the United States). This is best interpreted as a constitutional obligation to make constant improvements–to strive toward a more perfect Union from the current state of imperfection. Moments of moral progress–like advancing civil rights– in the nation’s past represent this striving, and thus Americans have a constitutional obligation to maintain and advance those advancements. For past injustices still haunting the present, the constant improvement mandate is to remedy and put an end to the unjust legacy impacting generations into the present.

Some argue that, intuitively, the shame arising from negative history leads to reflection and progress. However, this is often not the case. Attitudes such as shame and guilt can lead to negligence and irresponsibility, as people conflate the present with the past. It is easy to view

historical mistakes as blemishes on the nation’s image and, as a result, for today’s citizens to become unwilling to confront or take responsibility for that history. For example, Japan is criticized for distorting its own World War II past regarding its invasion of China and Korea in Japanese history classrooms (Ahn Sung-mi; Oi). In one history textbook, the Nanjing massacre and the “comfort women” (women and girls who were coerced into sexual slavery by the Japanese military) were disproportionately passed over (Oi; Wingfield-Hayes). Experts expressed concerns about whether Japanese education overall is sanitizing and concealing its past, instead of recognizing past mistakes with moral subjectivity (Wingfield-Hayes). In addition, former Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe also called for a denial of historical facts, and he refused to apologize to the victimized parties (Chotiner; Dudden and Mizoguchi).

Japan’s failure to fully acknowledge the complete history of its World War II atrocities has caused significant diplomatic conflicts with South Korea and China (Reuters; Ahn Sung-mi; Gustafsson). South Korea and China have repeatedly criticized Japan for what they see as historical revisionism, and public anger over Japan’s perceived whitewashing of history fuels nationalist sentiment (Gustafsson). This results in protests, boycotts, and pressure on governments to take a harder line against Japan, which further limits diplomatic and trading flexibility (Kahn).

Because Japan resists acknowledging its past misbehavior, it suffers geopolitical consequences. However, if Japan approached reconciliation with sincerity, accuracy, and accountability, the resentment and dissatisfaction toward Japan would be settled, and Japan could cultivate better relationships with China and South Korea. The lack of transparency caused by Japan’s intransigence, shame, and hollow patriotism makes it difficult for other countries to build lasting trust or cooperate fully with Japan on regional issues. While modern Japanese citizens are

not personally responsible for wartime atrocities, efforts to conceal or deny that history out of shame risk rendering them complicit in the continued injustice.

Even though history can be negative, it cannot be denied; to do so would be dishonest revisionism, which skews facts and fails to acknowledge mistakes, thus denying reparations to victims. Although shame sometimes leads to reflection and prevention of misdeeds from repeating in the future, it is less productive for advancing social progression. A shame-free, but honest and accurate discussion of the past can fulfill the present obligation to restore justice to those still victimized by historical wrongdoing.

Germany offers a positive example of this in practice, as Germany exhibits a remorseful and candid attitude toward its Nazi past. Modern German education emphasizes the causes and consequences of the Nazi regime with a strong focus on Germany’s responsibility for the war and its atrocities (PBS). Germany fully acknowledges its historical responsibility toward the Jewish community and the State of Israel for the crimes committed by the Nazis. This sense of responsibility calls for remembrance, reconciliation, and continued vigilance now and in the future (PBS; German Missions in the United States). Today, Germany hosts the third-largest Jewish community in Western Europe. This result is driven by this sense of responsibility and the proud pursuit of restoring humanization instead of shame or guilt.

***

A citizenry should be proud of the history involving their nation’s moral progress. These advancements not only include technological innovation but also progression in social justice and human rights. In other words, we should celebrate the abolition of feudal values and the awakening of enlightened morality. The most important prerequisite for social progress is being able to identify past wrongs. In fact, as Freire argued, this refinement of morality and the pursuit

of humanization is inherent (Freire, 44). Hence, we should take pride in our collective moral accomplishments, mindful that more work must be done. Also, as the U.S. Constitution mandates constant improvement, and as an individual is able to recognize positive progress, one should be proud of these accomplishments; yet most importantly, people living in the present should strive to uphold and further advance moral progress. For example, celebrations like Juneteenth and Black History Month are efforts to spread humanity’s advances. By honoring resilience against slavery and the excellence of Black figures, Americans are encouraged to further fight injustice and strive for equality. Although rebuking the moral wrong of slavery promotes remembrance in the present, being proud of our ancestors’ efforts in ending slavery leads to actual social progress.

Yet one should always be cautious about what is being celebrated. When we are proud of our nation’s history or the nation’s identity, we are really celebrating the demonstrated values and action the nation incorporates or symbolizes, as celebrating the nation itself , an abstract identity, holds little meaning. This crucial realization helps settle the aforementioned controversy over Columbus’s image, a case that exemplifies how symbolic history must be reevaluated when we celebrate them: by recognizing the positive values represented by immigrants, like

Italian-Americans who see Columbus as a forebear of their journey to America, we reinterpret Columbus statues as honoring the immigrant pursuit of opportunity and dignity, rather than celebrating the man himself or the violence tied to colonization. This not only honors the symbol of equality for immigrants but also leaves room for us to recognize the wrongful history of colonization, since this, too, is part Columbus’s story. Just as Columbus Day and Indigenous Peoples’ Day share the same date, through this remembrance, we can dedicate ourselves to

rectifying the Native descendants by nullifying historic injustices still perpetuated in modern society.

***

James Baldwin once said: “I love America more than any other country in the world and, exactly for this reason, I insist on the right to criticize her perpetually” (Baldwin, 22). Baldwin, a proud yet critical American, expresses both his pride for being an American while pointing out that his nation is not a perfect country. Yet he is not ashamed of that fact. Instead, through fulfilling the constitutional obligation of making “a more perfect union,” Baldwin advocates to improve his beloved America. Following Baldwin’s example, one should always be proud of the moral progress attached to the nation’s history, but one must also confront that same history with transparency and honesty, realizing that it is the present generation’s obligation to seek justice for those still harmed by the wrongs of the past. Although one does not have an obligation to feel guilt or shame, to fulfill one’s duty to advance social progress, there is an intrinsic moral obligation to reckon with and make amends for historical injustices.

Works Cited

Ahn Sung-mi. “Seoul Calls out Japan’s Watering-down History in Textbooks – the Korea Herald.” The Korea Herald, 29 Mar. 2022, www.koreaherald.com/article/2825335.

Baldwin, James. Notes of a Native Son. Penguin Books, 1955.

Brito, Christopher. “Dozens of Christopher Columbus Statues Have Been Removed since June.”

Www.cbsnews.com, 25 Sept. 2020, www.cbsnews.com/news/christopher-columbus-statue-removed-cities/.

Chotiner, Isaac. “How Shinzo Abe Sought to Rewrite Japanese History.” The New Yorker, 9 July 2022,

www.newyorker.com/news/q-and-a/how-shinzo-abe-sought-to-rewrite-japanese-history.

Dennehy, Kevin, and Susan Gonzalez. “Yale Publicly Confronts Historical Involvement in Slavery.” YaleNews, 1 Nov. 2021,

news.yale.edu/2021/11/01/yale-publicly-confronts-historical-involvement-slavery.

Dudden , Alexis, and Kozo Mizoguchi. “Abe’s Violent Denial: Japan’s Prime Minister and the ‘Comfort Women’ – the Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus.” The Asia-Pacific Journal: Japan Focus, Mar. 2007, apjjf.org/alexis-dudden/2368/article.

“Germany Is Profoundly Aware of Historic Responsibility.” German Missions in the United States, 2018,

www.germany.info/us-en/welcome/03-jewish-life-germany/1422276-1422276. Gustafsson, Karl. “Narratives and Bilateral Relations : Rethinking the ‘History Issue’ in

Sino-Japanese Relations.” Research Gate, 1 Jan. 2011, www.researchgate.net/publication/277754119_Narratives_and_Bilateral_Relations_Rethi nking_the_History_Issue_in_Sino-Japanese_Relations.

—. “The ‘History Problem’ in Sino-Japanese Relations: What’s the Problem?” E-International Relations, 31 Oct. 2016,

www.e-ir.info/2016/10/31/the-history-problem-in-sino-japanese-relations-whats-the-probl em/.

Kahn, Joseph. “China Is Pushing and Scripting Anti-Japanese Protests.” The New York Times, 15 Apr. 2005,

www.nytimes.com/2005/04/15/world/asia/china-is-pushing-and-scripting-antijapanese-pr otests.html.

Klein, Alyson. “White Workers More Likely to Get Good Jobs at Every Level of Education.”

Education Week, 18 Oct. 2019,

www.edweek.org/leadership/white-workers-more-likely-to-get-good-jobs-at-every-level-of-education/2019/10.

Oi, Mariko. “What Japanese History Lessons Leave Out.” BBC News, 14 Mar. 2013, www.bbc.com/news/magazine-21226068.

PBS. “Germans, Jews & History – Holocaust Education in Germany – an Interview | a Jew among the Germans | FRONTLINE | PBS.” Pbs.org, 2014, www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/germans/germans/education.html.

Reuters. “Factbox: The Many Disputes Overshadowing Relations between South Korea and Japan.” Reuters, 15 Mar. 2023,

www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/many-disputes-overshadowing-relations-between-so uth-korea-japan-2023-03-15/.

Stanford University. “Land Acknowledgement | Archaeology Center.” Archaeology.stanford.edu, archaeology.stanford.edu/about/land-acknowledgement.

The Annie E. Casey Foundation. “Racial Inequality in Education.” The Annie E. Casey Foundation, The Annie E. Casey Foundation, 23 Sept. 2024, www.aecf.org/blog/racial-inequality-in-education.

“The Constitution of the United States: A Transcription.” National Archives, 4 Nov. 2015, www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript#toc-article-iv-.

Wingfield-Hayes, Rupert. “Japan Revisionists Deny WW2 Sex Slave Atrocities.” BBC News, 3 Aug. 2015, www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-33754932.