It is a good way to argue and base your argument on the premise that since none objected past therefore they shouldn’t bother about present and if they do then they should first wash their guilt by fighting for past and till then let the present take care of it self.The future so remains uncertain for those who strive to make present better.What possibly is the cause of this regressive stance? Present is present and though mistakes or deeds of past shall be brought to justice yet , present remains the most important event in life and , it is the duty of any individual to fight for justice if some event of injustice occurs in present. For example, If I did some wrong , or got caught doing some misdeed in past , does that means ,my reformation has no place in present society? If this is the case then , the one who raised arms against the state shall have no right to be rehabilitated ?
I fail to understand this argument where , one justifies his stance, he/she confirms that the action merely is a continuity of events and since none raised their voice in past therefore none should argue the present. What a folly of human reason it is , to evaluate present from the perspective of past ? what difference then present brought to the individual ? Is he not a prisoner of past then? Its like you wake up from a sleep and now you wish to work , so if u wish to work then first u should justify why u were asleep and whatever incidents took place during your sleep , you should first dealth with them no matter how much injustice being done in present? What then enlightenment means in a society like this? what then right to forget means in society like this? what then injustice means in a society like this?
The whole argument , That since u never spoke for that so morally you have no right to speak for this, shows a strategical move. The move can be broken in to few parts. One to have a moral superiority of action. Two Moral degradation of opponent. Confuse opponent in his own premise. Make opponent justify him/her self with a proof before he/she enters the argument there by breaking his will to resist or making his arguments weak.The effort is to take a moral upper hand while engrossing the opponents in pity counter accusation and diverting him/her self from the basic point.