This study takes a deeper look into the apologies the Dutch state made in 2021 for the role of The Netherlands in the history of slavery. This was done by the presentation of seven speeches by seven members of the Dutch government in the national archives in the European and the Caribbean part of the Dutch Kingdom. By means of a critical discourse analysis with a discourse-historical approach, we examined the different discourses in the speeches and the power relations that are hidden in them. The aim of the study is therefore to map out the different discourses within the seven apology speeches of the Dutch government and to track the power relations that are present in them. This is done by answering the following research questions: Q1. What are the dominant discourses in the seven apology speeches of the Dutch government for the state's role in the history of slavery?; Q1.1 What power relations can be found in the dominant discourses of the seven apology speeches of the Dutch government for the state's role in the history of slavery? Taken as a whole, the speeches show a willingness to take responsibility, but they also point towards the former colonization and the power relations that stand until this day.

On 11 June 2008 the Government of Canada delivered an official apology to former students of Indian residential schools for its participation in the schools’ creation and administration. The morally infused discourses of political apologies may at first seem to symbolize a progressive step towards a better and more egalitarian future. This thesis, however, will challenge and problematize such perspectives by presenting not only a critical analysis of the 2008 apology itself but also by contextualizing the apology’s narratives with the colonial framing strategies which have historically served to marginalize and dominate the Indigenous nations and peoples of Turtle Island. Through the critical exploration of the 2008 apology’s operability and political significance in Canada’s colonial context, this thesis intends to reveal both the message(s) that the apology got across to the Canadian general public and the forms of domination and political distraction that the apology’s seemingly moral and progressive narratives effectively belie.