The Prime Minister to apologize for executions?

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau continues his apologies. Last year, he apologized for Canada's exclusion of Asians a century ago. These would-be economic migrants attempted to enter Canada illegally. In other words, they attempted to break the law of the time.

The Prime Minister will soon meet the demand of gay activists for compensation and apology for the incarceration of homosexuals when that behaviour constituted a breach of the Criminal Code. In other words, they broke the law of the time.

Capital punishment has been abolished. The Prime Minister must compensate and apologize to members of the families of those who were executed. Taking the lives of convicted murders is now punished by prison. Applying the Prime Minster's logic, the lives of those executed were ended wrongfully even though hanging was the law of the time.

Let us end the apology binge

"The idea of apologies is demeaning of those at whom it is directed," according to Andrew J.M. Wheatcroft of Stirling University, Scotland. "They also deny the notion of the past and simply extend the present backwards."

Prime Minister Justine Trudeau recently issued an apology for Canada's denial of entry to a boat-load of Asians more than a century ago. He said, in part, "Canada's government was, without question, responsible for the laws that prevented these passengers from immigrating peacefully and securely."

A Toronto Star columnist complained that law was discriminatory because it prevented their entry.

Of course, the government was responsible for our immigration laws. Of course, the law prevented their entry. Of course, laws are discriminatory against those who seek to violate them.

The legislation was enacted for the benefit of Canadians, not would-be illegal economic migrants.

Let us hope this ends the recent binge of misguided apologies.

Another unwarranted apology

On April 12, 2016, the Toronto Star reported that Prime Minister Justine Trudeau will in the near future apologize in the House of Commons for an event of 1914. My letter to the Star with copies to Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and International Trade Minister Chrystia Freeland. No reaction expected -- the Star censors anything that questions any of its target markets, the PM ignores everything not on his agenda and my Member of Parliament does not reply to any of my communications.

No more anachronistic apologies (Trudeau to formally apologize for Sikh tragedy, Apr 12). 

No Canadian alive today is responsible for the immigration law of 1914. The ship Komagata Maru was turned away from Canadian waters at that time because it posed illegal entry according to the law of the day, unfortunately to the detriment of many Sikhs aboard. 

Canadian immigration laws protect Canadian interests, not those of would-be illegals.

In her book, The Uses and Abuses of History, Margaret MacMillan asks, "Is it healthy ... for societies to apologize for things that were done in different centuries and under different sets of beliefs?"  The warden of St. Anthony's College at Oxford University continues, "It is all too easy to rummage through the past and find nothing but a list of grievances."

Should anyone think differently, the memory of abused British prisoners then deserves an apology. 

During the Second World War, 25,000 Sikhs deserted Britain to join the Japanese-inspired Indian National Army. In his book, To the Kwai and Back, War Drawings 1939-1945, Ronald Searle graphically depicts the horrors inflicted on British prisoners. In one sketch, a captured British officer on his knees is about to be beaten by a Sikh guard for failing to salute. Searle writes, "The most visible guard duties outside the wire were taken over by Sikhs who gratuitously thrashed any unfortunate who caught their eye."

No apology demanded.

* * *

Later additions:

"One should not demand that past epochs conform to current prejudices, and thus commit the sin of excessive 'present-mindedness,' distorting the past by forcing it into a mould of recent construction."
     Roland N. Stromberg
     European Intellectual History since 1789

* * *

Was it necessary in 2007 for a tribe in Papua New Guinea to apologize for eating missionaries in the 19th century?

Unwarranted Apologies

Letter in the Toronto Star, January 21, 2014

By declaring John A. MacDonald as "racist," the writers of an op ed have fallen into the error of "presentism" -- judging the past by today's standards. Some today may consider the actions of Sir John A. racist. We do not know if that was the case 150 years ago.

In her book, The Uses and Abuses of History, historian Margaret MacMillan asks, "Is it healthy for societies to apologize for things that were done in different centuries and under different sets of belief?"

She cautions, "It is all too easy to rummage through the past and find nothing but a list of grievances."

Sir John was a person of his time. Judge him only by the standards of that time.

* * *

"One should not demand that past epochs conform to current prejudices, and thus commit the sin of excessive 'present-mindedness,' distorting the past by forcing it into a mould of recent construction."
     Roland N. Stromberg
     European Intellectual History since 1789

* * *

Was it necessary 2007 for a tribe in Papua New Guinea to apologize for eating missionaries in the 19th century?