Australian government
Australia’s Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, on 13/02/2008, gave a formal apology that was directed towards the aboriginal people in Australia. This apology followed years of investigations into the Stolen Generations, whereby past governmental policies led to indigenous assimilation and forced removal of children from their homes and country. The journey towards the achievement of the apology began with the formation of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, to investigate the matter. In a report labeled, “Bringing Them Home,” finding of the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission were tabled. The task-force was initiated by the government Attorney General, Lavarch, in 1995. The task-force was first to investigate all the past policies and laws governing the indigenous people. The commission then used evidence obtained from five hundred and thirty-five indigenous people. The team also used past letters issued by the government towards the eviction of indigenous people. In 1997, the Western Australian government had issued their apology, with the territorial and state government making their apologies in 2001, leaving the Austrian government under John Howard, the only exemption. Upon his win in 2007, Rudd wanted to restore unity and made his bid for an apology unequivocal, thus making it formal in 2008.
Strengths and Weaknesses
Strengths
The apology exhibits numerous strengths in the way it was presented. First, the apology shows acknowledgment of wrongdoing, which implies that the government was aware of its vice. The apology states, “We reflect on all the past mistreatment.” This implies that the government recognizes the presence of wrongdoings. This act of showing responsibility towards the makes the offended develop relive towards the content of apology. Secondly, the speech shows responsibility, by taking full account of the wrongdoing, and for not making excuses to the happenings. This implies that the government is sincere.
Weaknesses
First, the apology does not show regret towards the wrongdoings, which triggers the offended parties to question the sincerity of the apology. For instance, the letter should have expressed great regret and a show of concern in sharing grief with the indigenous people. In contrast, the Prime Minister kept saying, “We apologize,” which was an obvious way of expressing regret. The speech also shows no offer of correction or repair for the wrongdoing. For instance, the apology would state how the nation would help the oppressed population; this would help in acceptance. Finally, the apology offers conditions for the acceptance of the apology, “We ask that you receive the letter as received.” This implies that the parliament is offering terms for the acceptance of their apology.
Rhetorical Devices
In the use of the rhetorical devices, the apology employs numerous devices. Amplification has been used to emphasize the concept of asking for an apology. The speech repeats the phrase, “We apologize,” to emphasize the need for acknowledging their sincere apology. Other examples of repetition in the apology include; “A future, and we reflect.”
Audience Adaptation
Audience adaptation involves making insightful speech by considering all the possible audience. The speech understands the audience and begins by praising the indigenous culture by stating that it the “oldest culture in human history.” In this speech, the apology was not only directed towards the indigenous people, but also to the other Australian people. The speech should have incorporated parts that imply that even the other Australian people share in grief with the indigenous people. For this reason, the speech fails to compel the audience successfully.