UK, Ireland /
POLES SUPERIOR TO BRITS? [260]
gumishu:
autonomy to the Ukrainians within its borders.
;) Should I say anything or just let it go? ;)
Nathan Ukraine could not stand for itself in 1920. And it would not any time soon without substantial help from Polish state. Did not Poles defend at least some Ukrainian lives in 1920 by not letting them into the hands of the Soviets. (Remember Holodomor?) Having in mind the persecution of national Ukrainian movement in the second half of the 30's (also the Orthodox church) it is no comparison to what happened as a result of forced collectivization.
Anyway strict cooperation was the only way to go in the 20's. And some Polish political circles did try to get it going. Not giving the Ukrainians broad autonomy was a mistake. I guess there was also fear that completely independent Ukraine (the remainder that could have been cut out of Poland I remind) would be somehow turned against Poland (for example through communist infiltration) (to back some of these I would give an example of the chief of the Eastern department of Polish foreign ministry in1939 who was most probably a Soviet agent and effectively blinded Polish diplomacy or/and intelligence to the aims and intentions of Soviet policies - I know it is a a posteriori knowlegde)
gumishu:
Nathan - never mentioned it was in Ukraine - it was mostly in Podlasie, Litwa parts of Białoruś - don't know the circumstances in Ukraine
You quoted Yoshi who was talking about Ukraine. Maybe, you haven't noticed that only two countries were mentioned Ukraine and Sweden; nothing was said about Lithuania or Byalorus
I have reffered to the general remark about Polish nobility by Yoshi- that 10 per cent of the nation claimed to be nobles - i would not be surprised 30-40 per cent of those nobility where working their own land so were like todays village people. I know the realities in Ukrainian parts where different i.e. hardly any nobles working their own land relying on the labor of their local serfs.
Guest:
Poland was OCCUPIED country, Britain and Germany were not - that's the difference. And it is also my main argument.
When it wasn't OCCUPIED it always tried to OCCUPY, so stop pretending there was no colonialism in Poland's politics.
it was not that simple most of the time - the lands of Ukraine that lay within the borders of the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth were first a part of Lithuania in a personal later more strict union with Poland. These lands had their own nobility who were sworn to Lithuanian rulers. These people were Ruthenian gentry and the most of Lithuanian state was ruthenized. There were local princes (knjazi) like Wiśniowieccy, Ostrogscy and other - don't know the Ukrainian versions of the surnames. Until the Cossacks uprisings (or at least until some peasant revolts in the Ukraine not long before) you cannot talk of any Polish invasions of Ukraine (though you can talk of Polish invasions in the middle ages the times of Casimir III (Kazimierz Wielki) - but these were feudal things)
Anyway the Ukrainian (or Ruthenian) nobility were the lords of the local populace - they gradually polonized, there was also some eastern shift of Polish property - original Polish gentry bought lands in Ukraine or intermarried there (but there was no talk of forceful overtakes). And eventually the contrast emerged between noble classes who for the most part identified themselves with Polish culture and the local people - their serfs who held onto their language and faith. Btw polonization of the nobles did not as far as I know happen simulatnously with them accepting catholicism. And and important fact - it was far from complete in the times of Cossack uprisings - was not Chmielnitsky a noble man himself (of Orthodox faith and considering himself Ukrainian or Ruthenian). You should also take into account that some time before the Cossack uprisings the lands in question were transferred from Lithuania to Poland (Korona) (on both parties consent) mostly for inability of Lithuanian state to effectively defend the southernmost reaches of the land against Tartar incursions that plagued the land for quite long. So when the peasant revolt broke out and later Cossack uprisings Polish army acted on behalf of home rule of Poland (on behalf of nobility who were the political nation as they would call themselves - Ukrainian polonized or not nobility included)
There were also attempts at making the Commonwealth tri-fold but the Sejm (read rich nobility - don't know the stance of Ukrainian princes and magnates on this) opposed and the turmoil started for good.
gumishu:
hussaria was superior to anything in their age :P )
:p yes , until they decided to fight Cossacks :p
i'm sorry but to my knowlegde you are quite misinformed (or base your opinion too much on a flim story) ;) this is not to state Poles were generally superior just defending the case of hussaria :P
uuufff a long post :)
Is that why Lithuania and Ukraine so much wanted to be part of Poland?
the lands in question where one state then - a state of (Grand Duchess of) Lithuania whose ruling classes joined the union with Poland out of choice. it is somewhat simplifying the issue but it is not far from the truth. The two states actually grew into one organism in time.
f the conversation is going to focus on 'colonialism', one might ask exactly how Poland got to be the biggest force in Europe at one point (reaching upto Estonia, I believe). Somehow I don't think it was because all these little groups and tribes were rushing to join the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth without a bit of coercion.
I doubt it was ever the biggest force - perhaps largest country in Europe once - but the more territory the more forces you need to defend it and actually Poland (the Commonwealth) was sort of always short of these. (unwillingness of the nobility to get taxed)
