On Forgiveness and Reconciliation

Consider for a moment the experience of Simon Wiesenthal.

During his internment in a Nazi concentration camp he was asked to forgive an SS soldier at the soldier's deathbed for Nazi atrocities commited during the war. He documents this experience in his haunting book, "The Sunflower.” In the moment that Wiesenthal stood beside the soldier's bed, he remained silent and the soldier died without being absolved. Wiesenthal left the chamber that night anxiously considering for the rest of his life if what he had done in not forgiving the SS man was the proper decision. But Wiesenthal takes his thought further; at the conclusion of “The Sunflower” Wiesenthal challenges readers to ask themselves, “What would I have done (in Wiesenthal’s place)?”

On contemplating this question, one is left to consider if the SS soldier was truly repentant or simply expected a Jew, who was speaking in the soldier’s mind for all victims, to forgive him in his final hours. Did the soldier desire only a clear conscious to die in peace, or was he earnestly asking for forgiveness? Notwithstanding either of these conditions, did Wiesenthal even have the authority to grant that pardon?

To answer Wiesenthal’s question, I believe we must differentiate rage and hatred. I contend that rage and hatred are two very different things. Rage is intolerance for destructive attitudes and behaviors. Hatred is intolerance for people and groups. This makes rage and hatred fundamentally different. The former leads to radical social change and the latter to ruin. In negotiation and mediation practices, conflict workers keep the discussion, critiques and suggestions on the issue and not to the person. The person and the topic are intentionally separated. Therefore, one may become engulfed in rage at social, economic, and environmental injustices, but should not participate in hate-driven acts of humiliation and violence toward the Other. I can forgive people over time because we share a common human experience, albeit our experiences are dramatically determined by condition and environment. This human experience is what makes us all at once one in humanity. Yet I cannot condone hate-filled conceits. Furthermore, I believe it is the right of the victims, and the victims alone, to offer forgiveness. I cannot offer a reprieve on behalf of the experience of others, nor can anyone else. This would be a hugely arrogant transgression.

Now I return to rage. Rage, on the other hand, is transformative, not destructive. It is rage that prevents us from tolerating acts of intolerance. This rage is the needle on our moral compass. It is articulated through action, such as boycotts, sit-ins, protests, non-violent action, civil disobedience, etc. I believe it is not parcel to violence. Violence is often uncontrollable emotion or pre-meditated hate. Rage is calculated love.

How would you respond to this situation?