Bruce Charleton explains the spiritual significance of refusing to apologize on demand and why the forces of evil are less interested in the physical destruction of good men than their spiritual corruption:
The problem with The System killing someone Good; is that when a Man accepts death rather than abandon Good when he could have saved himself by succumbing to evil: a literal martyr, a ‘spiritual martyr’, is the result.
In other words; such a Man ‘certainly’ attains salvation after biological death: A spiritual martyr chooses salvation and rejects damnation as certainly as we can know about such things, this side of death.
Such an outcome constitutes a disaster for the powers of demonic evil.
From Their perspective this is not just a soul lost to Them; but an enhancement of the power of Goodness; and this is a power that is available (by direct, intuitive apprehension; and through prayer) to inspire and sustain mortal Men on this earth in their own resistance to evil and commitment to Good.
Therefore, when an enemy of The System is identified… When any person resists (in any way) plans of the totalitarian global leadership… The objective is that he should be corrupted, not killed.
This is the deep reason why anyone who tells the truth in a situation when lies are mandatory, or who does the right thing when public compliance with the agenda of evil, is always pressurized to ‘apologize’.
And, conversely, the reason why he should Never Apologize.
Because when someone apologizes for saying the truth, or for doing the right thing, or for resisting public displays of support for that which is motivated by evil intent… then that person has been corrupted into taking the side of evil.
When anyone lies publicly, in some way that is expedient for him rather than truthful – that person is corrupted.
When a public figure caves-in to pressure (which may, of course, be immense) – but does not admit he has caved-in, and instead dishonestly rationalizes his behaviour as the right thing to do – he is corrupted.
And, in more general terms; anyone who sins and does not repent it – especially if he denies the sin or defends his compliance rather than repenting – then that person has been corrupted.
This is an even stronger argument for never apologizing than the pragmatic one I made in SJWAL. To apologize out of fear instead of genuine remorse is intrinsically corrupting, and thereby any such pressure to do so should be rejected out of hand.