A reader finds fault with The Expositor editorial

To the Expositor:

After reading your editorial I am compelled to respond (‘Canada watches its naval as the global order is shaking,’ February 16, Page 4).

The common term is “navel gazing” not “watches its navel” no?

Your Nazi reference to the current situation in Europe involving Russia and Ukraine is historically inaccurate. Both pre-war expansion (Austria, Czechoslovakia, The Rhineland etc.) and the expansion attempted via the invasions of Poland and The Soviet Union would have been more accurate but still problematic in the context of your editorial. The phrase “pre-war expansion” is quite simply not accurate.  Specifically, if you are referencing lebensraum in that way as the policy was pursued before and war and was also the reason for the war from the Nazi perspective.

Your oversimplification of the conflict is dangerous and disturbing as the history between the two countries is long and complex.

Isn’t the translation “living space” not “elbow room?”

Ukraine, not “The Ukraine.”

The Second World War began in 1939 not 1938.

How is the US “descending into isolationism?”  They remain as active as ever on the world stage and are (for now) the largest military and economic power on the planet.

How about China and Russia (if those are the countries to which you are referring) not the dragon and the bear?  What does that even mean?

“Russian pogroms of the time”?  What time? Ukrainian immigration to Canada took place over many years spanning at least two centuries (19th and 20th) and was not limited to the prairies.  

The last paragraph remains a mystery to me as do most of the Olympic references and references to the so called freedom convoy.

I read and enjoy The Expositor every week, I am respectfully requesting more journalistic integrity on your part which is as it should be.  We readers depend on your integrity in all facets of the newspaper, especially editorials.

Thank you,

Chris Smith


EDITOR’S NOTE: While a detailed response was sent to Chris Smith on the issues about which he voiced concerns in the editorial cited, the only note we will respond to here is that the matters referenced in the editorial dealt with pre-war events—hence the date of 1938.