COLUMN: On Parliament Hill – The danger in rewriting history

In George Orwell’s 1984, a prominent theme is that the one who controls the past controls the future. The machinery of the “The Ministry of Truth” symbolizes the continuous rewriting of history so that all records align with current Party claims. The book, published in 1949, is a cautionary tale about totalitarianism and the manipulation of history by the state.

To Canadians, the book can serve as an alarming warning about the danger of reinterpretation and rewriting of history. Unless we can face the mistakes of the past, we repeat them. Unless we allow for history to speak within its context, we can impose sensitivities and create inaccuracies that weren’t part of that story. Otherwise, historical figures, important events and critical moments in the development of Canada might even be erased!

This past week was the 25th anniversary of 9/11. For those of us old enough to remember that day, it was horrific. The repeated images of planes flying into the Twin Towers is imbedded in our minds. It was a day of somber, horrific tragedy. The deliberate loss of life and destruction that occurred can never be underestimated. Children were instantly orphaned. Married couples were forever separated. First responders sacrificed their lives to save others while chaos and confusion ensued.

The event was a terrorist attack. Thousand of innocent Americans including 24 Canadians were senselessly killed by al-Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden.

Despite these facts, this past summer, CBC’s Senior Director of Journalistic Standards and Public Trust reportedly instructed journalists not to call September 11 what it was: a terrorist attack. This is not simply a debate over terminology—it raises the disturbing prospect of a public broadcaster sanitizing history and shaping the narrative Canadians are permitted to hear. It is difficult not to see echoes of Orwell’s Ministry of Truth, particularly when Mark Carney’s government is simultaneously proposing a formal fact-checking role for CBC. A government-funded broadcaster should report the facts—not decide which version of the facts Canadians are allowed to believe.

Following public outcry, the CBC changed its position. On Aug. 28, CBC clarified that journalists could now describe the 9/11 attacks as terrorism and the hijackers as terrorists.

But consider how the original directive diminishes the historical reality of what happened that tragic day. Rewriting history insults the victims, the families and frontline workers who gave everything of themselves.

CBC isn’t alone in misguiding readers. CTV focused on Islamophobia after 25 years instead of the brutal acts committed by extremist terrorists. Its actions like these by the mainstream media that cause Canadians to distrust.

What we should be talking about are the Canadians in Gander, Newfoundland, who stepped up and welcomed nearly 7,000 stranded passengers and crew into their community and homes due to closed U.S. airspace. Even here in Manitoba, 17 aircraft carrying approximately 1,500 people were diverted to Winnipeg. In total, 224 flights carrying more than 33,000 passengers came to Canada that fateful day. We should be talking about how Canada contributed more than 40,000 personnel to the war in Afghanistan that was launched to dislodge and dismantle al-Qaeda. We should remember the 158 members of the Canadian Armed Forces and seven Canadian civilians who lost their lives during Canada’s mission.

Anyone who has played the game of telephone as a child knows how easy misinformation can be conveyed. Recycled stories can be amplified, tweaked, even reinterpreted. Preserving historical truth takes work, intentionality, and effort. When facts are omitted or reframed, our understanding of the past can change as well as our judgment of the ideas that shaped it.

Another striking example occurred in 2005 over in the U.K. The BBC ran a competition where voters could crown the greatest philosopher of all time. Thirty thousand people voted and Karl Marx was granted the title. The voters chose a philosophy that has produced catastrophic results in numerous countries. That result should cause us to pause—not simply because of who won, but because of how easily historical context can be separated from an idea and replaced by a modern interpretation.

The Communist Manifesto, one of the foundational texts of Marxism, contains ideologies such as the establishment of a new world order, abolition of all national governments, abolition of inheritance, abolition of private property, abolition of the family, and the abolition of all religions. The truth is many in the western world have given their lives to fight against Marxism. Yet with the passing of time, BBC voters now believe Marxism is good—even though soldiers, including Canadians, gave their lives to fight against it.

This past week, Chrystia Freeland appeared on a U.S. network and claimed that American democracy was “on life support.” Regardless of what anyone thinks of Donald Trump, he was twice freely elected by American voters. Yet Freeland suggests that their choice itself is evidence that democracy is in jeopardy. Isn’t that the contradiction? If democracy means allowing people to choose their leaders, shouldn’t we respect that choice—even when we strongly disagree with it? A free and democratic country is was what we fought for.

Truth matters. History matters. September 11, 2001, was a terrorist attack and we should never allow the horror, sacrifice, and consequences of that day to be softened or forgotten. Marxism should be judged not only by the theories written on paper, but also by the consequences of those regimes that embraced those ideas and the sacrifices made by those who opposed them. And democracy must mean more than accepting elections only when the outcome is convenient. If we allow history to be rewritten, ideologies to be detached from their consequences, and the meaning of democracy to change with our political preferences, we risk losing the very truths that previous generations sacrificed to preserve. That is why we must remember—not to live in the past, but to ensure we do not repeat the mistakes of the past.