"To understand Poland you must understand Frederic Chopin" (Stratfor Friedman)

I'm no fan of Friedman and he wallows in clichès and stereotypes with the occasional
wrong fact thrown it but that is for the Poles to decide.

Read for yourself:


stratfor.com/analysis/20101202_geopolitical_journey_part_7_poland

I've read it before and have mixed feelings about it. I mean this intermarium aliance idea is unrealistic in the first place. The main idea behind this article is: Poland is f..ked because of geopolitical position sooner or later... If that is the case the only obvious and logical conclusion would be to get some nukes, many of them not some fragile aliance...

But what strikes me the most in Friedman thinking is kind of archaizm in it. I'm almost sure that this guy reads some stories about ancient nobility and knights and their dominions before he goes to sleep. Of course if something is archaic it doesn't mean it cann't happen. I just think that the internal dynamic in the systems made of modern countries is entirely different than it was the case between even XIX or early XX entities runed by nobility or some kind hard dictatorship. What I mean basically is that as long as Germany, Poland and Russia will have reasonable per capita and literacy levels and high trade turnover then there is no way either Germany or Russia will be able to turn its societies into full scale war with Poland, because regardless of how fast it would take to conquer teritory, pacification would be long, bloody and costly especially considering how easy is today to become a terrorist. As I'm writing this it becomes clear to me that oversimplification in Friedman analysis lies in thinking about Poland, Germany and Russia as a separate blocks. The current reality is different though. So to recreate world fit to Friedman view we would need total impoverishment of societies, total halt in trade and demographic boom, ie. pre WWII conditions. What we have is stability or growth in terms of HDI, growing trade and what is more important interconnection between economies, and demoghrapic decline. Maybe economic decline can be rapid, but demography is hardly movable object. So I think we don't have to worry to much for a couple of decades especially if we add Asian rising powers pressure on Russia far east.

Who...?

!


Absolutely....
I don't know in what world Friedman lives in but it's not mine nor yours!

But what struck me positively was that he hadn't found much support for his generic, archaic thinking by the contemporary Poles he spoke with. He was dumbstruck by that!

Maybe him commenting from far away America might have something to do with it...

I like Friedman actually. He says good things about Poland sometimes but he is a bit of a fear monger. I thought the article was interesting although I don't like how he believes Poland only had a horse cavalry at their disposal during the war. Very simplistic comment from him.

I kind of agree that you can't help a country militarily if it can't even help itself. Poland's gotta nuke up I think eventually. Remember who the neighbors are.

Do you guys think it's true that the Northern European plain will never truly be a place of perpetual peace (as he claims)?

Sometimes I think he talks wishful thinking, seriously.
I doubt he wishes for us to live in perpetual peace. He is decidedly anti-european, he wishes for
Europe to split...

I don't trust him.

If there is anything to take away from all this, it's that no developed countries will ever enter conventional warfare again. The bomb kept the US and the Soviet Union from going to war...

Well..that's exactly what Friedman denies.

He is quite sure the next Molotov-Ribbentrop pact is only a matter of time because we can't help it...being neighbours on the great northern plain, it's our fate!

Gah!

What crap!!! :(

From what I know about him: He's a Hungarian Jew who immigrated to the USA as a youngster. His mother was from Bratislava and his father from Uzhgorod (Ukraine I think). I have his book, "The Next 100 Years". I think he genuinely wants Central Europe to do well, especially Poland. He believes with American military aid Poland can achieve great things. He believes Russia will become unstable and break up even more. I don't know how realistic this is at the moment. He has analyzed how much Europe has changed since the year 1900 (20 years by 20 years and so on to the year 2000) and promotes the idea of "expect the unexpected". He is definitely a person that thinks outside the box.

Maybe...but then he should stop talking about Polands impending, inescapable doom.


Maybe...but then he better stop talking about Polands failure in believing in far away countries alliances and help. He himself agreed that Poland can't be helped from far away...


Actually he doesn't! He talks more about the "same old". As if WWII would be upon us again, totally ignoring the groundbreaking changes which happened.


Maybe....but if he only would stop selling his fantasies and personal opinions as "analysis"!

(We have better analysts here on PF)

The Chopin music I have heard is very ornate and flowery, with a lot of chromaticism. This can make the music sound overly busy.

Stravinsky said that music, of itself, does not imply any specific emotion. It is an abstract.

Therefore, it could be stretch to attribute to music a description of a particular historical period,
or rage, or despair.

I don't completely agree with Stravinsky, as certain musical devices can evoke emotions, feelings...I know this as a player and a composer.

These pieces of Chopin's have very specific titles referring to certain historical events...I would have to listen to them closely.

Sometimes critics can get carried away with their own imaginations.

Interesting topic however...I think that certain sounds, rhythm and inflection can paint a you a mental picture of certain times and places, but you need some kind of reference point...The feeling conveyed is the important thing.

An interesting take, given that Chopin was half French and spent most of his adult live choosing to live as a Frenchman.

I have never really listened to Chopin or much of classic music in general, but this summer me and a friend of mine stumbled on a Chinese guy playing some Chopin chords from a piano practice set and Wow..I was really amazed. Powerful. So, maybe, he is not that flowery, Joe :)


The French had a revolution of their own in 1830 and very busy with economic and political instability. I don't see any sane reason for them to cross the German states (who were burning with love to the French after Napoleon's successful battles just two decades before)in order to fight with Russians. Completely unjustified expectations. Again another example - weaken your potential allies and then cry for help across the oceans - ridiculous.


I completely disagree with him. If music is abstract, then what is emotion? Concrete tangible thing? No, you cannot touch it or measure. So, if both are abstract, then why one cannot be represented or caused by the other. National anthems stir emotions, for example.

The Chopin bit is correct, as for Friedman you know my opinion of the guy, he's an idiot who either does not know his history or willingly lies and spins it about, in the long run its 2/3rds bullsh*t.

He's 100% spot on about EU and Germany though.

The Chopin quote wasn't by me...the mods put it in there.
I don't have a problem with Chopin...but with Friedman! ;)


Well Sok, you can't have it both ways....he is wrong on the EU and Germany too!
He is consistently wrong...not only on certain topics! ;)

He is the Ambrose Pritchard of the geopolitics. Whenever I read economy "wizard" Pritchard I know I only have to take the exact opposite of his opinion, analyses and predictions and I will

be mostly right! :)
(I do that for years now)
Friedman is to take similiar! ;)

He's not stupid, his analysis of EU, german and polish situations is spot on, however i dont believe we could benefit from an alliance with US, US is unwilling to invest money in us regardless of how much Friedman masturbates over our so called friendship.]

The Germans and Russians are not monsters at the moment, nor do they want to be. But as Chopin makes clear, what we want to be and what we are are two different things, a subject to be considered in my concluding essay.

Awesome quote, and true.


Which bits according to you is he wrong about?

That what I mean...there is personal bias and wishful thinking and then there is objective evaluation.

That you declared Germany dead for as long as I have known you is no secret either. Of course you will like those parts of Friedmans "analysis" which fit you where you will deny others.

That's also only wishful thinking and personal bias. Don't mix them up!


Okay...gimme some time...I'm giving you the quotes

Absolutely but i still agree with him in many points and i'm nowhere near as biased as he is.


Dying, physically, you're going to lose over 15-20 milion Germans and gain 6-8 milion Turks in the next 50 years, how do you call that if not dying?


You didnt even read his arcticle BB jump down from your high horse, he claims Germany can and will have all the power as EU goes south which can be bad for Poland, i completely agree.


What? Do i wish for EU to fall apart, Poland stop getting the money and Germany revisiting its genocidal tendencies? Your helmets cutting of the circulation BB...

The guy essentially says that if EU goes down which it seems to be than Germany will survive since it has the economy to give it a large margin error, at the same time Poland between Russia and Germany and developing is going to be caught naked in a sh*tstorm, whats not to agree?

Where Friedman is wrong:


Crap! The EU is darn good for german interests! We are an export nation which flourishes on open borders, free movement, one currency!
Most of our export is with the EU...it's been GREAT for Germany!


Only if they mess it up...doesn't look like it now.


But what else does?


What crap! What is he implying here? Poland the mouse is doomed whatever the neighbours do?
Just because they exist??? What does he mean with "harmed".


More crap!
He likes to swallow in misty descriptions...what does he mean with "surviving".


And out comes the american nationalists! We are leaving the time of the US as the global
hegemon...he seems to deny/ignore that development too!


Absolutely crap on all counts!!!
This man is ridicoulous.

WWI was fought on behalf of GB and is seen as a big stupidity now by most. Also Germany
and Russia had been enemies then, no entente.

WWII was fought against the Nazis after they declared war on them. Russia had been
allies...no Russian-German entente then either!

He should read up about the most recent NATO summit in Lisbon where Russia is no longer the enemy but a partner and big cooperations are subscribed.

Also the US can very well live with a dominant power in Europe as long as this power is another democratic country. Or as Kissinger once asked so famously for a phone number to call in all things Europe.

They have no problem with a number in Berlin at all!


Well...then what about your USA, dear Mr. Friedman. If you believe countries are beings which can't help themselves and are victims of a certain fate you surely would agree that the US can become a monster too, regardless of it's intentions...

Crap!

It's another romatic sterotype of Poland. Actually I hate it. I would rather my counry to be associated with "positivism" tham "romantism" (both in literal and metaphorical sense)...

You're also the primary welfare giver, EU costs you more than you make on it for some time now.


Spain, Greece, Ireland, yeah it looks like EU is slowly going south.


Economic and political sovereignty.

As for the US bits i absolutely agree its hogwash.

Poland has 38 million population, compared to German 82 million. Hardly the elephant-mouse
proportions. More like tiger (about 300 kg) and moose (about 650 kg), he he ;)

The increase in economic output more than makes up for it.


Yup, and that's the problem with the European experiment. Either full on single entity, or a huge freetrade/movement zone (which would make more sense...).

Look at Germany Sok...does it look as if we are on the brink of destruction??? Around us periphery states are breaking up, with us paying for them and still our economy flourishs, our consumer spending us up and our unemployment numbers are down like 18 years back!

Think!!!!


What is it! First he berates Poles for giving up economic and political sovereignity as being members of a german led EU but once the EU goes south they won't survive because they lose their economic and political soverignity???

My head hurts only from trying to follow Friedman!

(I need my helmet!)


Well..then the future looks bright! As Sok said there will be only 38 million Germans soon anyhow...:)


Right now we are stuck in the middle..

I need to research it before i pick up the subject.


My point is nobody likes to give money away, least of all people who hold them.


Essentially, his point and a good one is that there's different kinds of dependancy, i'm happy that Poland is a german client (which it is) the way its happening now, you pay us good money, we bend over in a lot of matters we normally shouldnt and its a good deal, the question he poses, albeit in a rambling manner is what happens when/if Germany stops paying but demands Poland keeps letting itself be f*cked.


65 milion german citizens to some 30 milion Poles, we're both losing pop at a same rate the problem Germany has its much farther beyond the return treshhold and then there's the Turks.


Which is somehow bad?

Now who is benefiting from the economic output...and the type of economic output...hell, lets call it the quality of the economic output, that's debatable..


Paying vs. investing. But again, going back to the first point...


Terrible. You don't see the benefits of full sovereignty or the economies of scale of a single state (single government for instance).

Of course not! But knowing that every cent given away makes sure the Euros keep flowing they will pay!


How and why?
The problems with the Friedmans of this world is that they prefer to write misty and generalizing things. I prefer clear words.


Then make babies! ;)
The Turks are actually leaving more than they come and they get increasingly less babies the longer they live here...I don't see it so dramatically!


In the way that we have all the disadvantages of a transfer union and none of the advantages of a real union like...say...the United States of America.

Even as they also all together b*itch about the dumbos and arseholes in Washington as we do with Brussels, no citizen there talks of kicking out California or complains about supporting Idaho for example, as they feel as one country under one flag...a real union.

Europe is still far from a United States of Europe!

Stravinsky would say a national anthem stirs the emotion because of the 'context': people associate it with feelings of dedication to country, patriotism, and the like....He would say THE MUSIC ITSELF has no such emotional content.

But, thing is, music cannot be seperated from certain reference points, including composer's spirit, what the particular music was supposed to symbolize, and the listener's reaction...

Stravinsky's mindset was a typical of a certain aloof 'cosmopolitanism' prevalent in cultural circles/critiques during the past 120 years or so...He may have just been running his mouth.

Very interesting, indeed. I just remember when back in my ado years I listened to songs in English, knew nothing what they were about and still it raised various emotions, thoughts,.. Music is not detached as you said. It is a part of who wrote it as well as one who listens to it.


Seeing what times and regime he lived under it is not a surprise that he kicked the notion of emotions from his songs. Tawarishch cannot have emotions or thought besides the Party and Lenin - Stravinsky preferred, probably, to better have no thoughts to evoke in his songs.