the little I know:
(You assume that both rebbi and talmid are at equal fault here.)
Would you argue with this? – “This talmid has no obligation to wait for the rebbi to do so first.”
Or: On what basis do you insist to the talmid that he not go first?
Is “the expectation that the other has the obligation to give kavod and therefore must humble himself” really a “purely ignorant” “exploit[ation of] honor?”
You’re not even talking about the rebbi not apologizing at all,
only him not going first. What’s the big deal?
Please quote me instances from Chazal of a rebbi humbling himself
before his talmid, seeing as you believe this to be the correct practice…
You appear not to take the rebbi’s pride into account, which does not seem sensible. It’s well and good for you to argue your opinion, but what’s going to happen? Who has more face to save here?
The power thing is also irrelevant. Does the weaker one always need to bow in submission to the bully? What a bizayon!
Yes, it’s such a bizayon that the powerful are powerful, and the weak are not… I’m being sarcastic, of course. At the end of the day, for whom does it pay to be in the other’s good graces?
Consider: Which side are we talking to, and whose obligations are you focusing on?