>Plausible, but you could also say, “If governments know they’ll have to apologize when they repeal bad policies, maybe they’ll be more cautious about adopting bad policies in the first place.”
"Government" is not a person, it does not have emotions or the ability to calculate its self interest. It's made up of bureaucrats and politicians. Did you want Biden to apologize? Dr. Fauci? Would you feel better if tomorrow Trump apologizes for the US government's behavior, since he's president now despite not being so immeadiately after vaccines spread?
A department that has had significant turnover since the mistake was made would not have obligation to apologize. And commiting to make a department apologize would not be an efficient incentive because of turnover.
You beat me to the punch on the observation that governments are not people and therefore not subject to moral emotions like regret that would motivate apologizing. Moral emotions and behaviors are something that affect social interaction between individuals. That said, there are individuals within the government who make bad decisions, and it might be helpful if government policies required such individuals to issue apologies (even when they do not feel regret). As to whether such a policy would deter bad decisions is an empirical question for which there is no data in the US. Trump never admits being wrong, so there is not even a possibility of getting data there. If Dewwy is correct about apologies from government officials being frequent in the UK, maybe there is enough data there to investigate the question. Until we have data, Bryan's thesis is just speculation that seems to be based more on his own feelings of moral indignation than a rational prediction about apologies deterring future bad decisions by government officials.
I think it would in fact help if the heads of departments or the like apologized, even if just for the bad behaviors of their predecessors. Formally stating "This thing that was done turned out to be bad, for the following reasons, and I believe it should not have been done" does go a long way, primarily because it clearly states that something was wrong and should not have been done. That helps prevent it being done in the future.
> "Government" is not a person, it does not have emotions or the ability to calculate its self interest. It's made up of bureaucrats and politicians. Did you want Biden to apologize? Dr. Fauci? Would you feel better if tomorrow Trump apologizes for the US government's behavior, since he's president now despite not being so immeadiately after vaccines spread?
Maybe you or I wouldn't, but people do regularly engage in this kind of behaviour and do seem to genuinely value an apology from "the government" which they see as contiguous into the past officials who did whatever it is offended them.
At least they do in the UK, maybe Americans are different ? But if I google "formal apology UK" in the news tab I find (cutting out duplicate stories) on the first three pages:
- 25 June 2025 Campaigner lauds apology from First Minister of Scotland for "cultural genocide" of Gypsy Travellers in Scotland
- March 2025 Govt urged to apologise over 1919 massacre in India by backbench Conservative MP
- Oct 2024 Speculation over potential apology from UK govt over slavery at Commonwealth of Nations summit
- Feb 2025 Speaker for an organisation called "Movement for an Adoption Apology (MAA)" urges government to apologise for forced adoptions in 1950s, 60s and 70s
- July 2023 Govt apologises for pre-2000 ban on LGBT personnel in the Armed Forces
- Aug 2018 Home Secretary apologises for wrongful deportations of 18 Jamaicans spread from 2002 to time of issue.
- March 2022 First Minister of Scotland apologises for executions of accused witches from 16th to 18th century (spurred by campaign by The Witches of Scotland)
It'd still have to be the specific employees making the apology, not the department. No reason for the guy who helps set up Fauci's email account to have to be associated with the apology just because he works in the same office floor
During the last quarter of the 20th century the expert class propagated the mass delusion that humanity was running out of fossil fuels. Disaster was predicted leading to $billions wasted on the ill-fated Synfuels project and on mandates and subsides for ethanol.
Since then the experts flipped the script. Now they are sure that we have too much fossil fuels creating demon CO2. Disaster was predicted leading to $trillions wasted by countries worldwide who bought into the new delusion.
Not only has there been no apology, there has been incomplete repeal: Ethanol is still mandated in what is now a zombie pork barrel program that conflicts with the current delusion.
Worse are various legislative initiatives that trigger all kinds of compliance costs prior to implementation, only to be reversed before their effective date - e.g., Internal Revenue Code Section 89, or the CLASS Act and the Cadillac Tax which were part of the Health Reform legislation.
>Plausible, but you could also say, “If governments know they’ll have to apologize when they repeal bad policies, maybe they’ll be more cautious about adopting bad policies in the first place.”
"Government" is not a person, it does not have emotions or the ability to calculate its self interest. It's made up of bureaucrats and politicians. Did you want Biden to apologize? Dr. Fauci? Would you feel better if tomorrow Trump apologizes for the US government's behavior, since he's president now despite not being so immeadiately after vaccines spread?
A department that has had significant turnover since the mistake was made would not have obligation to apologize. And commiting to make a department apologize would not be an efficient incentive because of turnover.
You beat me to the punch on the observation that governments are not people and therefore not subject to moral emotions like regret that would motivate apologizing. Moral emotions and behaviors are something that affect social interaction between individuals. That said, there are individuals within the government who make bad decisions, and it might be helpful if government policies required such individuals to issue apologies (even when they do not feel regret). As to whether such a policy would deter bad decisions is an empirical question for which there is no data in the US. Trump never admits being wrong, so there is not even a possibility of getting data there. If Dewwy is correct about apologies from government officials being frequent in the UK, maybe there is enough data there to investigate the question. Until we have data, Bryan's thesis is just speculation that seems to be based more on his own feelings of moral indignation than a rational prediction about apologies deterring future bad decisions by government officials.
I think it would in fact help if the heads of departments or the like apologized, even if just for the bad behaviors of their predecessors. Formally stating "This thing that was done turned out to be bad, for the following reasons, and I believe it should not have been done" does go a long way, primarily because it clearly states that something was wrong and should not have been done. That helps prevent it being done in the future.
> "Government" is not a person, it does not have emotions or the ability to calculate its self interest. It's made up of bureaucrats and politicians. Did you want Biden to apologize? Dr. Fauci? Would you feel better if tomorrow Trump apologizes for the US government's behavior, since he's president now despite not being so immeadiately after vaccines spread?
Maybe you or I wouldn't, but people do regularly engage in this kind of behaviour and do seem to genuinely value an apology from "the government" which they see as contiguous into the past officials who did whatever it is offended them.
At least they do in the UK, maybe Americans are different ? But if I google "formal apology UK" in the news tab I find (cutting out duplicate stories) on the first three pages:
- 25 June 2025 Campaigner lauds apology from First Minister of Scotland for "cultural genocide" of Gypsy Travellers in Scotland
- March 2025 Govt urged to apologise over 1919 massacre in India by backbench Conservative MP
- Oct 2024 Speculation over potential apology from UK govt over slavery at Commonwealth of Nations summit
- Feb 2025 Speaker for an organisation called "Movement for an Adoption Apology (MAA)" urges government to apologise for forced adoptions in 1950s, 60s and 70s
- July 2023 Govt apologises for pre-2000 ban on LGBT personnel in the Armed Forces
- Aug 2018 Home Secretary apologises for wrongful deportations of 18 Jamaicans spread from 2002 to time of issue.
- March 2022 First Minister of Scotland apologises for executions of accused witches from 16th to 18th century (spurred by campaign by The Witches of Scotland)
It'd still have to be the specific employees making the apology, not the department. No reason for the guy who helps set up Fauci's email account to have to be associated with the apology just because he works in the same office floor
I'd say whoever bragged and took credit for the policy is the one owing the apology. I won't hold my breath.
During the last quarter of the 20th century the expert class propagated the mass delusion that humanity was running out of fossil fuels. Disaster was predicted leading to $billions wasted on the ill-fated Synfuels project and on mandates and subsides for ethanol.
Since then the experts flipped the script. Now they are sure that we have too much fossil fuels creating demon CO2. Disaster was predicted leading to $trillions wasted by countries worldwide who bought into the new delusion.
Not only has there been no apology, there has been incomplete repeal: Ethanol is still mandated in what is now a zombie pork barrel program that conflicts with the current delusion.
Remove your shoes.
Worse are various legislative initiatives that trigger all kinds of compliance costs prior to implementation, only to be reversed before their effective date - e.g., Internal Revenue Code Section 89, or the CLASS Act and the Cadillac Tax which were part of the Health Reform legislation.
This is a critical point missed everywhere. Bravo