Poland's post-election political scene

So you'll agree that having a Soviet-trained officer in the cockpit of the flight that crashed in Smoleńsk was a bad idea, then?

Come on Ironside, it's absolutely irrelevant if someone received some training in Moscow 30 years ago.


Actually by the British MI6, but you know, one of the best intelligence agencies in the world must be clearly anti-Polish.


The sad thing is that you're so blinded by partisanship that you're willing to let Macierewicz destroy Poland's security for the sake of him not being from PO. Duda clearly hates him, Szydło never wanted him, the public hate him - what more proof do you need that he should go?

Tell me, why does he need such a large security force around him? Why does he have more protection than Duda or Szydło?

Just to remind everyone about Macierewicz's history:

oko.press/1992-r-doszlo-zamachu-stanu-wojsko-posluchalo-macierewicza-wojska-ot-tez-by-sie-oparly/

Quick summary - in 1992, Macierewicz already attempted to use military units to preserve the power of Olszewski and prevent him from losing power. It's well worth a read.

first democratically elected government after commie rule. was unlawfully removed by SB agent Walesa ,crook D.Tusk and their communist allies.worth to mention that after that coup,commies were installed back to power.

not that am fan of this maniac macierewicz

Claims to be Kukiz supporter, repeats PiS mythology.

Unlawfully removed? It was a minority government that lost a vote of confidence in the Sejm. Are you seriously suggesting that governments should be allowed to remain in power if 231 or more vote against it in the Sejm? It was perfectly legal - the only illegal thing here was Macierewicz attempting to use forces against Wałęsa.

Olszewski's government fell because he got involved in a battle for power with Wałęsa. He lost that battle when the majority in the Sejm decided to support Wałęsa over him. It's that simple. His government had what, 120-something votes out of 460?

Seriously, there's nothing undemocratic about an unpopular and hated minority government falling.

Let's give you a history lesson, eh? Olszewski's party came *sixth* in the 1991 election, and only had 9% of the vote. The government had 114 votes, and they were so weak that they couldn't even find a finance minister. He was fighting with Wałęsa and the leader of his party - Jarosław Kaczyński. He failed to put together an absolute majority to back his government, and therefore - the only result was him going. The failed attempt at lustration by Macierewicz only added to the hatred of Olszewski.

Oh, let's go on. There was an attempt to get the KPN to join the coalition, but he sent...Macierewicz, who immediately pissed off Moczulski. That was 46 potential extra votes for the government lost right there. Had they joined the coalition as well as keeping the confidence of the PSL, the government probably would have survived.

Olszewski managed to annoy the PSL and SLD, he annoyed the smaller centrist parties, he annoyed some right wingers, and he even attempted to blackmail a potential coalition partner. In which reality does such a deeply unpopular government retain power?

Still, tell us Gregy, do you support governments staying in power by force even if they lose a vote of confidence in the Sejm?

yes,we know about that battle very well.. about decomunization and exposing SB criminals -Walesas colleges from work


not hated,it was popular among people,but crooks and communists under Walesa and Tusks leadership,ganged up against it.red trash


he didnt **** him off. Moczulski was SB agent and collaborator. fearing of being exposed,as did SB agent Walesa and the rest of this red scum


failed,cus parliament was full of red scum and collaborators such as Tusk

Not when they joieed, but whom they served and what they did, i.a. during martial law. The III RP smokescreen was so cleverly consrtucted by the post-commie clique that even Lech Kacyzński could have been fooled and may have rewarded some ex-PZPR stooge who slipped under the wire. In fact, until quite recently, many Poles did not realise that III RP was a façade to provide safe haven and a career bandwagon for every manner of collaborator, traitor and Soviet agent of inlfuence. That only proves that Poland has paid and will continiue to suffer for Wałęsa's 1992 folly that put paid to any honest attempt at de-communisation.

Who knows what Soviet-tainted generals are really after in NATO. Their background would make them quite likely Putinesque agents of influence. If they carried out warfare against their own nation during martial law for 30 pieces of siłlver, who knows who is now lining their pockets. National security is too sensitive a field to let such stooges anywhere near command posts in NATO.

That was nothing to do with it. It was everything to do with Olszewski trying to make the Premier's job superior to the Presidency. The botched job at "lustration" was simply a dreadful attempt to try and hold onto power as it became clear that his government was about to fall.


It wasn't popular at all. Olszewski was doing nothing, his 'economic' plan consisted of nothing at all, and he was struggling to even win support among his own fellow party members. You're just repeating the tired old PiS fantasy version of events that fails to mention the reality: 273-119. Much of what you're saying was invented by Kaczyński in the coming years, but those who actually know history know that Kaczyński himself was partially responsible for the fall of the government.

May I also remind you that the vote of confidence came after Olszewski signed a cooperation agreement with Moscow? Wałęsa in particular was enraged by this, considering it an irresponsible move.


Doesn't matter what Moczulski was - what matters was that he had more than 40 votes available and Macierewicz made an enemy out of him. Olszewski fell because he couldn't get the support of the Sejm, because he was absolutely useless and was doing nothing as Poland was struggling.


I love the way that you keep repeating the tired line that Tusk was a collaborator. It really does show your poor understanding of Polish history and politics.

Lustration failed because it was a poorly handled attempt to keep control of the Sejm. All it did was enrage people, especally once it was discovered that Macierewicz had issued a list without even checking it properly. Also, as we can clearly see - Macierewicz attempted to create a coup to seize control of the country and depose Wałęsa.

Polly, perhaps you'll find this interesting.

multinationalmonitor.org/hyper/issues/1993/09/mm0993_01.html

it's an interview carried out with Olszewski in 1993. He quite correctly accepted that the transformation of the old Communist industries required money, which was either going to come from abroad (privatisation) or domestically (which would take time).

I can't say I agree with most of what he says, but there's an interesting quote here -


It's a pity that no government since the time of this interview has had the guts to follow through on this policy.

The fascinating thing here is that Olszewski shows himself to be a socialist through and through with his comments. He wasn't conservative at all, but rather he was thinking about how the economy could realistically operate in early 1990's Poland - which meant accepting that the weakest farms, industries and businesses had to fall, while trying to support the stronger ones in some way. Very 1980's Labour in the UK, if you ask me.

But that was precisely the key difference between him and the Balcerowicz whose claim to fame was the unbridled destruction/sell-off of Polish assets. The victims of large-scale unemployment were not his problem. By contrast, Olszewski's concern was to find alternative employment for those dislodged from their previous livelihood.

You probably don't know what a folkloric wydmuszka is? It is an egg from which the contents are blown out through pin-holes at top and bottom. Then the egg is painted and hung up on pussywillows as an Easter decoration or on an evergreen for Chrsitmas.

That name was given to much of Balcer-style "privatisation". Under the cover of night a factory was stripped of its contents (machinery, stock, etc.) and the worthless shell was slated for demolition or simply abandoned. Incidentally, the removed equiment was not sold to enrich the state budget but kind of evaporated or vanished to the benefit of clique members.

Realpolitik taken to the extreme -- sign a pact with the devil himself if only to stay in POWER!

Certainly would have made sense in Olszewski's case, particularly as it would have left him only needing to convince Pawlak to support his government in order to survive the vote of confidence.

Remember that Olszewski fell because he *couldn't* put an economic policy in place. He was and is a socialist, and he was looking for Russian money to prop up Poland at a time when liberal parties were looking West and the President was also very pro West.

Olszewski fell mainly becuase the SB snitchers' club were shaking in their boots that their dirty deeds would get exposed. Wałęsa & Co, weren't worried about the economy or the nation but only about the prospect of losing the perks, prestige and privileges of power and maybe even getting penalised in some way. All the other considerations were marginal -- that was the crux and moving force of the whole parliamentary PUTSCH (and you can deny it all you want, but under the cirucmstances it was a true coup or putsch)!

A vote loser here if ever there was one.

PiS supporters often fail to mention this little fact about Olszewski, but it played a major role in the Sejm and President Wałęsa finally snapping and putting an end to his government. He also failed to enact a new Constitution that was badly needed, and his (lack of) an economy policy meant that he had to force through transportation and energy price rises that caused considerable pain.

Olszewski simply couldn't navigate the maze that was the post-1991 election. He refused to give control of the economy to the liberal parties that wanted it in return for their support of the government, and him, Macierewicz and Jan Parys also enraged Wałęsa. Poland was still a Presidential republic at that time, and losing the support of the President was pretty much the end of him.

Perhaps Polonius can explain why Olszewski's government attempted to use armed forces against the Sejm and the Presidency.

Why? have you been there at the time? If not what are you jabbering about?


I'm sure it isn't in your eyes but you don't have a clue about many things.


care to provide link.

Blinded by partisanship? Don't make me laugh you are commie and naturally you're ideologically biased against. On the top of it you don't fully grasp quirks and deep roots of polish politicks.

Sure -- several months into his term a brand-new consitution!? Miller's and Kwaśniewski's neo-commies took their sweet old time to introduce a new constitution, didn't they.

Because you have only read about all this, I was there. There was electricity in the air and most everybody was sure that the parliamentary putsch would turn into an armed one. Olszewski in fact did step down, but who knows if that was the right thing to do. Was Piłsudski supposed to watch run-away Sejmocracy destroy Poland in the 1920s? He had to stage what in terms of fatalities turned out to be a farily mild coup, but he saved the country. Perhaps enforcing Olszewski's open-files campaign would have saved Poland from the misrule, misapprorpriation and downright theft of the neo-commies and the roundtable clique in general.

There often is when sane people are dealing with mentally unbalanced ones....


You don't believe in rule of law (preferring rule by party leader) and now you're in favor of violence to prevent the normal functioning of parliament?

Was Piłsudski a patriot or traitor? Yes, he betrayed the troublemakers destroying the republic -- the parliamentary bribe-takers and brawlers (yes, police had to be called in to restore order!), German fifth column, red Jewish fifth column (KPP), Ukrainian terrorists, Soviet spies) -- it was a real mess! Incessant squabbling led to the rise and fall of 13 cabinets between 1918 and 1926! On rare occasions when the façade of democracy is being used to cover up corruption and other public misdeeds, radical measures may be justified!

The ends justify the means..... who was it who said that?

Suchocka managed, didn't she?

As for Olszewski, he had no choice but to stand down. The plan to capture Wałęsa failed, Macierewicz had made so many enemies that there was no way the security forces were going to cooperate with him, and he simply didn't have the strength needed to pull off such a plan.

So tragic that a parliamentary system worked.... if only they hadn't abandoned the PRL principle of rule by party leader!

So tragic that a parliamentary system worked to entrench the dominance of a post-commie clique that milked the naiton for what it was worth and ensured the good life for no more than one-fourth of the counttry, keeping the rest in want and poverty.The majority faced unemployment, dead-end jobs or the prospect of washing dishes in a British pub or German restaurnat. No wonder the losers' camp want to restore the status quo. But time never stands still. The good.change government marches on leaving the nitpickers and grumblers to stew in their own frustation.

Do you live in a garden shed or something? No honest observer can look at what's happened over the last 25 years and claim that some shadowy elite was "milking the country for what it was worth". Maybe those formed in the PRL (and thus prone to see the world through a prism of victimhood) without marketable skills or the mental acuity or agility to thrive in a capitalist system would think that because they suddenly expected German style prosperity without actually having to do anything.

There are plenty of countries that fit your description but... Poland is not one of them (for starters no where close to one fourth of the population thrives in such places).

Of course there were mistakes and wrong turns in the process, those are a normal part of any political evolution, but I am _so_ sick of people who blame their own unhappy lives or failures on some weird idea of a shadowy cabal (with no real, verifiable evidence of its existence). Why don't they just stam "I'm a big fat loser!" on their foreheads and spare the rest of us their drama?

It was shadowy in the sense that it's post-truth "narration" pulled the wool over most people's eyes. The story-book version was that "for the first time workers and the intelligentsia joined forces to peacefully overthrow a Soviet-imposed regime." That version was eagerly parroted by mainstream Western pundits, media and politicians because it served those foreign interest groups as well as the EU, a hub of the great corporate mafia. They therefore did not bother to show that the roundtable deal was struck by largely KPP/PZPR-linked or influenced "dissidents", the PZPR ex-ruling establishment and those Solidarity activists willing to play ball with the new "system". They were supported by legions of SB snitches in the media, academia and entertainment industry. Totally ignored until recently was the widespread injustice of victimiser progress and prosperity as opposed to victim poverty and misery as well as the growth of economically depressed areas where Balcereite "privatisation" detsroyed local employers. There was no thought to building an indigenous entrepreneurial class but rather the economy was placed at the service of foreign interest groups. Naturally the minority benefactors were full of praise for "the new democratic Poland". "Be grateful to us," they seeemed to be saying. "The shops are now bursting at the seams with once hard-to-find goods." They failed to explain how the unemployed, wofeully underpaid and pensioners could afforfd them. "You now have the freedom to travel and to keep your passport at home," the propagandists of what was passed off as III RP trumpeted. They failed to add: "To travel to a street-sweeping job in Glasgow or a nanny post in Berlin." No wonder the clique, the elite, the system, the haves, the victors of transformation, whatever are shaking in their boots and clamoring for a return of their beloved comfy and cushy status quo. Contrary to the lessons of history since time immemorial, these supposedly educated elites somehow actually believe they and they alone are predestined to eternally be the "nachapani", whilst the majority of the nation should know its place and resign itself to "wyjebani" status. No wonder they seeth with hatred and impotent rage when they see the good-change government gradually introducing a more eqjuitable state of affairs which also benefits "the salt of the earth".

It was shadowy in the sense that it's post-truth "narration" pulled the wool over most people's eyes. The story-book version was that "for the first time workers and the intelligentsia joined forces to peacefully overthrow a Soviet-imposed regime." That version was eagerly parroted by mainstream Western pundits, media and politicians because it served those foreign interest groups as well as the EU, a hub of the great corporate mafia. They therefore did not bother to show that the roundtable deal was struck by largely KPP/PZPR-linked or influenced "dissidents", the PZPR ex-ruling establishment and those Solidarity activists willing to play ball with the new "system". They were supported by legions of SB snitches in the media, academia and entertainment industry. Totally ignored until recently was the widespread injustice of victimiser progress and prosperity as opposed to victim poverty and misery as well as the growth of economically depressed areas where Balcereite "privatisation" detsroyed local employers. There was no thought to building an indigenous entrepreneurial class but rather the economy was placed at the service of foreign interest groups. Naturally the minority benefactors were full of praise for "the new democratic Poland". "Be grateful to us," they seeemed to be saying. "The shops are now bursting at the seams with once hard-to-find goods." They failed to explain how the unemployed, wofeully underpaid and pensioners could afforfd them. "You now have the freedom to travel and to keep your passport at home," the propagandists of what was passed off as III RP trumpeted. They failed to add: "To travel to a street-sweeping job in Glasgow or a nanny post in Berlin." No wonder the clique, the elite, the system, the haves, the victors of transformation, whatever are shaking in their boots and clamoring for a return of their beloved comfy and cushy status quo. Contrary to the lessons of history since time immemorial, these supposedly educated elites somehow actually believe they and they alone are predestined to eternally be the "nachapani", whilst the majority of the nation should know its place and resign itself to "wyjebani" status. No wonder they seeth with hatred and impotent rage when they see the good-change government gradually introducing a more eqjuitable state of affairs which also benefits "the salt of the earth".

What's the reason for publishing the same post twice? And this was not accidental since the second post appeared three hours after the first one. It does look like propaganda of the PRL period. Comrade Gierek said this, comrade Gierek did that, comrade Gierek ... and so on.

Let's be serious about it: the PF is not a "Trybuna Ludu". I think that posters who deliberately perform such an action should get a warning.

@Ziemowit
PF is not "Gay Lefty Sissy Tribune" either yet your posts (and posts of many of your forum collegues) are usually what would easily fit in that theme. It's like some gay leftard propaganda. You all should get warned.