The Lumumba Commission (1999-2002): Shame, Guilt, and the Post-Imperial Self

Abstract

This article aims to explore the process of colonial redress from the theoretical scope of ontological security. In this theory, shame denotes a challenge to the consistency of state self-narratives, compelling the state to actions that reaffirm its sense of self. However, other works on ontological security argue that post-imperial states are more likely to experience guilt than shame because of their historical connection to international society. By juxtaposing shame and guilt as characteristic of the process of colonial redress, this article gives insight into the challenges, opportunities, and constraints of colonial redress. Empirically, the article discusses parliamentary debates during the Lumumba Commission (1999-2002), a significant moment in Belgium’s struggle with its imperial legacy. To adequately trace the anxieties and narrative changes that ontological insecurity implies, this case-study is approached using a narrative and interpretative sentiment analysis. The analysis indicates that Belgian MPs deployed a comedic narrative, sided by discourses of serenity, objectivity, and guilt. This particular narrative countered Belgium’s anxiety, facilitated an apology, and restated its self-identity. Based on these findings, the article concludes that the conceptual borderline between shame and guilt is less distinct than is assumed in the literature and suggests that further research is needed into the relationship between narratives and emotions.