Rename Halifax Regional School Board

SHOULD MACKENZIE KING’S FACE BE TAKEN OFF THE $50 BILL?

If Cornwallis Junior High School is to be re-named since Edward Cornwallis authorized bounties on aboriginal scalps, should Mackenzie King’s face be taken off the $50 bill as well since he authorized the removal of Japanese-Canadians from coastal BC and their transport to the interior of the province? At one level, both deeds are dastardly and their perpetrators should be disowned. But at another level, things are not so simple.

Cornwallis (more properly Governor Lawrence) authorized a bounty on aboriginal scalps in retaliation for their French-led (cf. Fr. La Loutre) raids on British settlements in Nova Scotia. Scalping was common among the aboriginals but was done for trophies rather than bounties. But the historical context provides a measure of understanding if not complete justification.

Britain and France were about to engage in a world war (The Seven Year’s War, 1756-1763) for global colonial supremacy, a war which was fought not just in North America but also in India and on the seas. It was to prove decisive for British aspirations. However, in Nova Scotia there was a numerically superior population of Acadians who constituted, in effect, a hostile fifth column, ready to co-operate with their compatriots in France when the occasion arose. The real issue then was not the very marginal one of scalping but rather the legitimacy of the deportation of the Acadians to Louisiana, back to France, and so on. Halifax was a military outpost designed to counter-balance Louisbourg (by the way, did I mention that I led a team of students to Louisbourg to participate in archaeological excavations?). The decision was purely military and not just vindictive but nonetheless it has drawn cries of outrage from current “bien pensants” who see the event as a violation of their rights. So, with this in view, does it make sense to re-name Conrwallis Junior High School?

Flash forward to the Second World War. The Japanese advance in Asia had been inexorable and it seemed that their “Greater East Asia Co-Porsperity Sphere” was well under way. They controlled Korea, the Malay Peninsula, large part of China (Manchukuo) and Australia and New Zealand looked to be next in the south Pacific. After the successful suprise strike on Pearl Harbour, however, a further strike on the Pacific coast of North Anmerica seemed imminent. Vancouver had a large ethnic Japanese population and there was documented proof (in the Japanese-Canadian press) that there was considerable support for Japan’s war effort. (By the way, the Japanese consider anyone born in Japan or of Japanese parents ALWAYS to be a Japanese, regardless of country of domicile. Conversely, don’t try to apply for Japanese citizenship if you don’t meet those conditions which, I suspect, you don’t.)

Anyway, what was Mackenzie King to do? What he did was to repeat the scenario of the explusion of the Acadians in 1755. He dispossessed the Japanese-Canadians of their homes and property and had them transported to the interior of BC where they would not be any threat. As with the Acadian Deportation, many “bien pensants” from the current point of view were outraged at this violation of their rights. However, things looked different then. They didn’t have the advantage of 20/20 hindsight.

But, I suppose, what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. If they are going to re-name Cornwallis Junior High, perhaps it’s time they also took Mackenzie King’s face of the $50 bill.

A pleasure as always.

Cheerio!

RSVPs

: Donk (June 29, 10:48AM) – “Don’t even pretend that your argument was enlightened…”

Donk, I will not pretend that my argument was enlightened if you will tell me HOW it wasn’t. Don’t confuse an INTRODUCTION with a CONCLUSION. DEMONSTRATE your assertion, Donk.

: Fear & Regret Kitty (11;15AM) – “You guys DO realize that history is all about interpretation and not so much about fact, right?” Wrong. Don’t confuse history with literature. Things DID happen and attempting to answer WHY they did does involve interpretation, but there is a rational limit to any such interpretation.
Visitors from outer space, anyone?

“It’s all a guessing game and the outcome for us all depend on the politics and the viewpoint of whomever is INTERPRETING primary sources, right?” Wrong. History is no more a “guessing game” than science or any other discipline. There is something called historical truth which is the outcome of compelling reasons given to explain any historical event. Your view leads downward into the empty vortex of utter relativism which is untenable. You did see your own “performative contradiction,” didn’t you? If everything is a “guessing game,” how is it that knew this? Clearly, where you are concerned, it is not a “guessing game” at all since, of course, you have privileged and direct access to the TRUTH.

: Fr. Ivan (10:30AM ff) – Fr. Ivan has taken the opportunity to engage in his usual masturbatory fantasies, assisted by Paingirl, and I won’t disturb him.

A pleasure as always.

Cheerio!

RSVPs (Cont’d.)

:Donk (June 30, 11:09AM) – Ah, since you we referring to Father Ivan’s post (June 29, 12:02PM) I can see where I went wrong. Many posts had intervened between his post and your subsequent one which commented on it but yours immediately followed mine. As we say in Latin – I always use Latin on these occasions – I was following the principle of “Post Hoc Ergo Propter Hoc” (After Which, Therefore Because Of Which” or, more colloquially, something which immediately precedes something else is understood to be the cause of that something which follows it), I assumed there was a cause-effect relationship between the two contiguous posts, i.e., yours and then mine. I trust that is clear. Still, it would be a good idea to absorb my previous instructions so as to AVOID WASTING VALUABLE BAND WIDTH!

: Paingirl (11:22 AM) – Similar confusion, similar results. Learning that Troondonk4 was “the critter guy” was certainly a relief but after scouring his most recent post for references to “critters” I was still baffled until I saw his avatar which, I suppose, could be called a “critter.” No, I politely decline the offer of being called “critter guy” but thanks all the same. However, do try and avoid abstruse references in future so as to AVOID WASTING VALUABLE BAND WIDTH!

A pleasure as always.

Cheerio!