Return PolishForums LIVE
  PolishForums Archive :
Archives - 2005-2009 / News  % width 264

The most spectacular errors in Polish politics.


Sokrates 8 | 3,346  
4 Sep 2009 /  #91
IMHO, Piłsudski was extremely important for Poland's independence, but without Wilson's 14 point speech and the subsequent Treaty of Versailles,

The point is the West only acknowledged the existing state of affairs, after the war with the Soviets Poland was untill about 1930 absolutely dominant militarily in regards to both Soviets and Germany so its obvious that Wilson wouldnt ask the Poles to get back to being occupied since he'd got a finger.

Now if you said that Western powers acknowledged Polish indepence and helped Poland maintain political legitimacy on the international level then yes i agree but in regards to independence no one gave it to Poles, they took it by force of arms themselves.

That's why I said that Poland was "granted" independence.

Acknowledgment, unless we're saying that WW1 created an enviroment for that kind of action which is obviously true.
TheOther 6 | 3,692  
4 Sep 2009 /  #92
see you do not understand Polish people

See my response to you in #129.

the same add as Poles had against Russia in 1920 war

I beg to differ...

absolutely dominant militarily in regards to both Soviets and Germany so its obvious that Wilson wouldnt ask the Poles to get back to being occupied since he'd got a finger

I don't agree here because the hands of the German military were bound after 1918. Without the Treaty of Versailles the Germans would have dealt with Piłsudski differently.
Seanus 15 | 19,706  
4 Sep 2009 /  #93
TheOther is spot on. Poland cannot reap the benefits of the EU and masz w dupie the views of others who help its sustenance. Also about Piłsudski. This man was courageous but he needed other developments to personally thrive in his quest.
Ironside 51 | 11,510  
5 Sep 2009 /  #94
Whow !?
What is has to do with EU?

Commandant was cool!
I doubt it could be done more in the antebellum period to bust Polish military and economical power!
Seanus 15 | 19,706  
5 Sep 2009 /  #95
There are inextricable ties and many wouldn't have it any other way. The world wars created a NWO that reflected the balance of power. Ironside, you are smart enough so I assume that you see the indubitable correlation between the wars and the taking off of the EU. Do you think the wars were by accident?
Ironside 51 | 11,510  
5 Sep 2009 /  #96
No, I don't !
But I have no prove .....so I keep quiet :)
Seanus 15 | 19,706  
5 Sep 2009 /  #97
Never underestimate the power of global shaping through hegemonical concerns.
Ironside 51 | 11,510  
5 Sep 2009 /  #98
I wonder .....economic situation in Poland ......emigration to UK......somebody is playing again?
Seanus 15 | 19,706  
5 Sep 2009 /  #99
What you must remember is that well-qualified Poles thought long and hard about their move to the UK. They looked at Sweden and other options but weighed up that the UK presented the best offer. Many fools jumped on the bandwagon in search of utopia. Little did they know that dystopia is often just round the corner.
MareGaea 29 | 2,752  
5 Sep 2009 /  #100
"Everybody" was limited to nobility though

That's what I meant with "Everybody". Everybody in the Landdag. Everybody who was (in name) part of the Polish government. Even if you were Baron of your own backyard, you would have the opportunity to basically block every decision made. It was the most democratic form of government at the time, but it proved unworkable. And it is still unworkable today. That's why they invented the "dictatorship of the majority".

What you must remember is that well-qualified Poles thought long and hard about their move to the UK. They looked at Sweden and other options but weighed up that the UK presented the best offer.

Seanus, I have to correct you on this one: when Poland joined the EU, it was to be expected that an exodus would follow to the Western states. It was not that Poles, even the well-educated, really had a choice: the only countries they could go were Ireland, Sweden and the UK. There were no other options for them, because the rest of the EU had closed their borders to them. So I wouldn't say they really were spoiled with options and had to think about it really hard.

Oh, and Britain does not have the hegemony anymore since the end of WW1. Sorry, but it's just a Western European country, not a superpower anymore. The US took over.

M-G (that's how I learned it at university, at least)
Sokrates 8 | 3,346  
5 Sep 2009 /  #101
I don't agree here because the hands of the German military were bound after 1918. Without the Treaty of Versailles the Germans would have dealt with Piłsudski differently.

You mean the same Germans who got disarmed by Poles before the treaty or do you mean the same Poles who raised a nearly milion strong army and beaten the largest standing military force?

Warsaw was free in November 11, Versailles covered Poland in June, Poland was free weeks before the West even started acting, Germans couldnt deal with Piłsudski because after WW1 they didnt have the military to fight Poles Versailles or not so we're back to square one, West had nothing to do with Poland reganing its independence and Germans were a complete non factor as a post war country.

To be specific Poles announced independence on 7th of October, Piłsudski returned on 10th of November (Germans released him in hopes that he could restore order which their armed forces failed to do).

So again the Versailles only confirmed and acknowledged what was already achieved as for Germans if they tried something before or after the Soviet war they'd just lose.
Seanus 15 | 19,706  
5 Sep 2009 /  #102
I meant that they had to think long and hard about leaving Poland. Many didn't really want to but they figured that it would be better for them to do so. There were other options, some more viable than others. You find Poles in many places these days.
MareGaea 29 | 2,752  
5 Sep 2009 /  #103
You find Poles in many places these days.

True, the other countries were forced after a while to open their borders to Polish ppl. Or at least not limit the number of them that were allowed in. I don't know the exact number in other countries, but I know for the Netherlands it was limited to 20.000 a year until, I think, 1 January 2007. But I am not sure about that date, though.

Indeed, well-educated ppl tend to think harder and deeper about things like this as they could provide an asset to any society where they land. Less or non-educated ppl just go where the money is to be made.

M-G (going to take a shower - busy day today as it looks now)
Seanus 15 | 19,706  
5 Sep 2009 /  #104
Very true, there are quite a few 'praca w Holandi' agencies here in Gliwice even and I talked to a Pole about his time in Amsterdam as a worker. He said that more Poles want to come but are aware of the restrictions.

Anyway, Polish politics. Well, Tusk is guilty of what Scotland has done. We seem to dispense with practicalities and neatly attach labels to things these days. In Scotland's case, we call 2009 'The Homecoming'. What a nonsense! My Scottish friend went there to enquire about work and JSA (dole money). He found that he wasn't entitled and wouldn't be subsidised for almost anything. A large share of the money is going to immigrants and some Scots aren't getting a look in. Tusk hardly presented the best package to Poles either as many returned to the UK again, disillusioned.
MareGaea 29 | 2,752  
5 Sep 2009 /  #105
A large share of the money is going to immigrants and some Scots aren't getting a look in.

Unfortunately this is a general European thing. It will lead (and has already led) to growing dissatisfaction amongst the locals and in the Dutch case it has led to political abcesses like Geert Wilders' popularity, which is very frightening.

M-G (one big happy family?)
Seanus 15 | 19,706  
5 Sep 2009 /  #106
Another important dimension here is the temporary nature of handouts, as opposed to receiving a regular, steady flow beyond set-up costs.

Staying on topic, I wonder what provisions were made in reverse. I'm not gonna fall into the trap of judging Poland by British standards. Although our nanny state and NHS core concepts were diluted somewhat, we still provide well for newcomers. Poland has long been a homogeneous culture and cannot make a transition of that magnitude overnight. I don't expect Poland to cater for immigrants that much but, being in the EU, it would be nice to know that they reciprocate and bear some of the social costs.
MareGaea 29 | 2,752  
5 Sep 2009 /  #107
Poland has long been a homogeneous culture and cannot make a transition of that magnitude overnight. I don't expect Poland to cater for immigrants that much but, being in the EU, it would be nice to know that they reciprocate and bear some of the social costs.

Totally agree on that. I'm only wondering how it was before they joined the EU. Was there some sort of installment in place as one can expect that after the revolution foreigners would also flock to Poland wether she is in the EU or not. I think it will take a few generations before Poland is fully adapted to her new role and new position (within the EU). I guess they somewhat overlooked this side of the membership of an organisation like the EU and are somewhat reluctant to adjust to that section. But sometimes it strikes me how Poland seems to expect to receive all the benefits, things the other memberstates have been fighting for for decades, all at once and starts to complain when it is explained that this simply is not pssbl without first adjusting to those other standards. In other words, they want to benefit as much as pssbl and as quick as pssbl, but whereas the other things are concerned, it suddenly doesn't have to be in such a rush.

The fact that Poland has been a homogeneous state for such a long time and is apparantly not used to (mass-) immigration poses a problem, or better a question: if they are not capable yet to adhere to those standards, haven't they joined the EU too early? I'm leaving the economic demands for membership deliberately out of this for now.

Other thing is: take the current situation between Slowakia and Hungary and this mess about language and stuff. This issue and the above mentioned issues should in my opinion not be present at all, since the EU is supposed to be a kind of monolith and internal struggles would only undermine the concept of the EU as a whole.

So, in short, I would say that Poland, as well as some other countries in the region, get their business straight and quickly so as one can foresee internal trouble within the EU if it doesn't manage to do so within a reasonable timeframe.

M-G (just came back from rip-off Dublin downtown)
Seanus 15 | 19,706  
5 Sep 2009 /  #108
I go along with that. Nothing significant to add really, you've summed it up nicely. It'd be interesting to see the level of accepted foreign applications for university study here. It's absolutely incredible in the UK, staggeringly international.
TheOther 6 | 3,692  
5 Sep 2009 /  #109
so we're back to square one

Yeah, I guess we have different opinions here... :)
Sokrates 8 | 3,346  
5 Sep 2009 /  #110
that they reciprocate and bear some of the social costs

I'm completely happy to pay for immigrants abroad. I'm unhappy with opening our borders like UK did, i think its stupid, if our people to capitalize on stupid decisions abroad let them but no need to copy them here.

Yeah, I guess we have different opinions here... :)

There's no place for opinions in our discussion, there's historical facts and dates, Poland freed itself months before Versaiiles took place, you can think otherwise but that amounts to people thinking WW2 didnt happen, you can have an opinion but historical facts are written already.
Seanus 15 | 19,706  
5 Sep 2009 /  #111
Aha, but pay for what exactly?
Sokrates 8 | 3,346  
5 Sep 2009 /  #112
Support unemployed Poles in UK for example (and make their return possible) but after staying in UK i'll be the first one screaming wolf if some idiot decides to open our borders like that.
Seanus 15 | 19,706  
5 Sep 2009 /  #113
I meant pay for immigrants into Poland, Sokrates. You know, Africans, Romanians and former eastern bloc countries.
Sokrates 8 | 3,346  
5 Sep 2009 /  #114
No? No Africans, no Muslims, as for Eastern countries a brain drain is fully acceptable when we can afford it and need it (which is in about 20 years).
Seanus 15 | 19,706  
5 Sep 2009 /  #115
How about Romanians then? They are in the EU now.
Sokrates 8 | 3,346  
5 Sep 2009 /  #116
Yeah in about 20 years when we have the economy of todays Germany why not.
Seanus 15 | 19,706  
5 Sep 2009 /  #117
Well, it would be an interesting transformation.
TheOther 6 | 3,692  
5 Sep 2009 /  #118
There's no place for opinions in our discussion, there's historical facts and dates

Then I suggest that you read up on the Poznan uprising 1918/19 and where most of the German army was stationed in the east at that time. The Germans refrained from attacks on the Polish fighters on February 16th, 1919 after additional negotiations with the Entente.
Sokrates 8 | 3,346  
5 Sep 2009 /  #119
Since we're on educating me i'll do the same for you.

The reason Germans could not defeat the uprising was because at the same time there was something called "German revolution" aka November revolution, by Januray Germans already lost and if you're referring to German army and Grenzeshutz stopping the attacks its because Poles were already controlling almost entire Poznań province which they first took from said German army.

The reason Germans stopped was two fold, first they were very aware that they're unable to take it back by force (they had enough time to do it by then and failed) and second Germans were very aware of the forces forming deeper within Poland, post war Germany was in no shape to fight Poland (especially since Poland popped a near milion strong army out of nowhere within months).

Germans did prepare to use all forces against Greater Poland except that in 1919 the Reiswechr numbered 400.000 men which represented the maximum of German mobilisation capacity directly after World War 1, at the same time Poles had 800.000 men so eventual war could end only one way.
MareGaea 29 | 2,752  
5 Sep 2009 /  #120
Yeah in about 20 years when we have the economy of todays Germany why not.

But isn't the whole idea of the EU that a certain standard and equality should be in place in every member state? Doesn't this apply to immigrants as well?

What you are advocating here is a sort of protectionism. And that is what the EU does as a whole, not the seperate member-states.

M-G (goes for a drink after being frustrated that the design of his CD box didn't turn out the way he imagined it)

Archives - 2005-2009 / News / The most spectacular errors in Polish politics.Archived