-
7. The Public’s Response
- University of Arkansas Press
- Chapter
- Additional Information
ChApter 7 The Public’s Response The wisdom of this process lies in the recognition that it is not possible to build a healthy community at peace with itself unless past wrongs are acknowledged and brought out into the open so that the truth of what happened can be determined and social trust renewed through a process of forgiveness and reconciliation. A community in which there is no trust is ultimately not viable and gradually begins to tear itself apart. —TIMOTHY MURITHI THOUGH NO ONE expected Greensboro to be suddenly“reconciled” when the Final Report was released,the report was viewed as an essential stepping-stone toward community-wide awareness,understanding,and critical discernment of the past and the present. In this way, the Final Report was never intended to be a static document. Rather, it was conceived to be an ongoing community resource for reconciliation as its readers acknowledged the many hidden stories,facts,and consequences pointing to how our histories are ethically, politically, and culturally bound. The community did engage the TRC process and Final Report using varied and creative means. A dialogic space was carved out for a few large events scattered among many small group gatherings before the release of the Final Report and for several years afterward. Duncan Bell () writes on the politics of memory suggesting that myths often arise from simplified narratives told over time. These simple narratives offer fixed and coherent meanings but fail to account for the diversity of experience in the community. He argues that the solution is not to simply forward a counternarrative, but rather to recognize that most events of the past are the subject of conflicting interpretations . Thus,“In order to facilitate a pluralistic radical democracy, it is essential to acknowledge multiple and often conflicting pasts, and the intrinsically power-infused and tension-ridden nature of communal mythological construction”(Bell,,).In this way,the interests of the community, as distinguished by various populations, special interests ,and distinct neighborhoods,for instance,are given the opportunity to make legitimate claims about the past and its impact on the present. Over time,the TRC supporters reasoned,the truth of the past would be revealed like the peeling back of an onion, one layer at a time, as people continued to come forward to share insights, feelings, and stories. The people who attended events to discuss the truth and reconciliation process were predisposed to seeing interconnections in the community,particularly with regard to how one event might influence others and how various aspects of city life affect one another. As well, the participants seemed to embrace the idea that while they may not have personally caused past misdeeds,they could see the value in a collective critique of the past of their city operations. For these community members, it made sense to consider their individual roles and the collective community’s responsibility in responding to the information collected by the TRC and offered in the Final Report. Brian Weiner’s work on national apologies in the United States offers a similar justification . He says, “The past does intrude into the present and future, individuals are rooted in the collective, and present-day citizens may share in the responsibility, although not the guilt, for deeds done long ago” (, ). a rhetoricalToolkit for social change On the discourse road to truth and reconciliation in Greensboro, a variety of methods were used to generate conversation.These methods formed the rhetorical toolkit for the TRC supporters with features common to the tenets of direct democracy and illustrative of the approach used by contemporary activists (Del Gandio, ). That is, the TRC process promoted diversity in thought, perspective, speech, and action. Putting diversity into practice meant that people of traditionally underprivileged or marginalized backgrounds were specifically encouraged to speak and contribute ideas at meetings and events that could reinvigorate deliberations with detail-rich, authentic experiences . When it was successful, discussions turned potential con- THE PUBLIC’S RESPONSE [34.238.143.70] Project MUSE (2024-03-28 19:48 GMT) frontations into a rhythm of responses that deepened the community relationships even if differences of opinion remained (Lingis, ). The most assured way of integrating new, personal insights into the TRC process was by sharing stories. To augment the storytelling process, a variety of conversation formats were also implemented and special events were planned. localTasK Force Building a core group of supporters was a vital first step in the TRC work, thus key constituent groups were invited into the dialogic fold...