|
Post by kaima on Dec 11, 2009 18:47:48 GMT -7
Yes, the Homo sovieticus. ....Slovaks are the relatively new nation, which kind of evolved into self-consciousness as a nation inside Austro Hungarian Empire. Thanks to liberal rules of this empire. So the the Homo sovieticus existed, p.... The strange kind of liking the communism exist in East-Germany, and probably some parts of And I remember Slowakia's past: Slovakia seceded from Czecho-Slovakia in March 1939 allying itself, as demanded by Germany, with Hitler's coalition. The government of the First Slovak Republic, led by Jozef Tiso and Vojtech Tuka, was strongly influenced by Germany and gradually became a puppet regime in many respects. Most Jews were deported from the country and taken to German labour camps. Thousands of Jews, however, remained to labor in Slovak work camps in Sered, Vyhne, and Nováky. Under Tiso's government 83% of Slovakia's Jewish population, a total of 75,000 individuals, were murdered. Tiso became the only European leader to actually pay Nazi authorities to deport his country's Jews. Jozef Tiso (13 October 1887 – 18 April 1947) was a Slovak politician of the SPP and priest, who became the fascist leader of the WWII Slovak Republic, a satellite state of Nazi Germany existing between 1939 and 1945. After the end of World War II, Tiso was convicted and hanged for his activities in support of nazism and treason...., atheism and communism do not necessarily come together. The second explanation is ... perhaps there were not so much less 'real'i ideological communists in the West than East initially? ;D In fact in the past 20 years I get an impression there are more communists in the West than in the East, Pieter! Now I will answer to your two explenaitions you could think of. You are absolutely right atheism and communism do not neccessarily come together. Yes, both the Communists and the Church abused the masses, ... Pieter[/quote] First, I must say I wonder where you two find the time to compose and say so much! I am retired and don't have the time to read through all of your postings, much less to join in the discussions. Well, from my postings it is obvious I also don't get into the depth that you two do. However, occasionally ... I have always had a soft spot for homo sovieticus. I met him first after the fall of communism and seem to have learned only a small part of his personality. Homo sovieticus I got to know was "survivor", the one who could occasionally beat the communist system, could game it or play it to his own and his family's benefit. That is the homo sovieticus I know. The philisophical or political side I did not get to know. "Slovaks are the relatively new nation, which kind of evolved into self-consciousness as a nation inside Austro Hungarian Empire. Thanks to liberal rules of this empire. " Please do not try to tell that to a Slovak who knows the A-H history or Hungarian history! We may agree that during the Partitions the Austrian part of Poland may have had the most liberal of governments, but the Slovaks never enjoyed such a liberal government under the Hungarians! They suffered under repression and oppression and chauvinism from the beginning up to the very end - and the end of the chauvinism PERHAPS came during the reign of communism, certainly not before WW II. "The strange kind of liking the communism exist in East-Germany, and probably some parts of ..." I believe this came about because of the suffering during the adaptation to capitalism during the last 20 years, years in which the worker was suffering from depressed wages and crippling purchasing power. Survival under capitalism was success, and suffering was great and long. That I believe is the prime source of this nostalgia for the old communist days. "Jozef Tiso and Vojtech Tuka" ... A conflicted history. The first opportunity at self government, and one that came under the perversion of Naziism. Generally it seems that Clerico-Faschist is the term that most accurately describes their reign. Supposedly Tiso was more sympathetic to the Jewish problem, while Tuka led the anti-Jewish part of the Party. It was a one-party state. The damned religious people should stay out of politics and busy themselves with theology and how many angels dance on the head of a pin! At the same time I will say Pope John Paul should have encouraged the liberation theology in South America, I feel they were leading a social movement to overcome the feudalistic society on that continent. Instead he opted to support oppression, simply because it was not communist oppression. I feel that was a fatal mistake in his activities. Weren't a fair number of the early Christian churches socialist? Certainly they bound together and helped support one another during the centuries of persecution. I don't see that communist must necessarily be atheistic. It happens that the Soviet and Chinese forms we are familiar with were so. In Poland I cannot say they were so, even if the party leaders had to pay lip service to it because of Soviet domination. Kai
|
|
|
Post by tuftabis on Dec 12, 2009 2:26:42 GMT -7
Yes the Homo sovieticus did exist. The notion, the idea was created by Russian sociologist and writer Alexander Zinovyev. In Poland our great philosopher-priest Józef Tischner popularized it (mind the last name! his family was most probably German immigrants polonized a long time ago, lot's of such last names of foreign - German, Italian, you name it, origin in Poland). In classical understanding of the word it depicts a person who is used to state caring for him (the price is that the state controls the person totally), provides work and all the social profits, health care, cheap entertainment, all is to be provided by the state. The person suffers from kind of learned helplessness when such total care ceases. Such persons were present in Poland too. How many it was shown after the transformation 1989-1991, with shock reform by Balcerowicz-Mazowiecki (whom the next generations will probably cherish just as we do Mieszko and Chrobry, Władysław Jagiełło, Kazimierz Wielki, Piłsudski-Dmowski-Grabski, the great buiders-reformers of Poland). Many many people were totally helpless, especially in the North-Western parts of Poland where a lot of collectice agricultural farms existed.
Your knowledge about Slovak past is correct. It was very unfortunate that the first Slovak state could arise solely thanks to Hitler and remained Nazi Germany's satellite. However it would be even more unfortunate if you get an impression that Slovaks are in some way the black sheep among the Slavs. On the opposite. They are generally charming, open people, with recent great success economically (although now diminished by too early advance to Euro zone and the tragic rule of a populist PM).
|
|
|
Post by tuftabis on Dec 12, 2009 2:53:41 GMT -7
Kai, great you have joined! As to homo sovieticus I think you understanding is not classical although I did like it very much. I think you will greatly enjoy reading Alexander Zinovyev, if you haven't, Kai. To not telling what I said to Slovaks. I do tell them You are of course right about the suffering and opression in AustroHungary. It did exist but at the same time it existed less than in other empires, and was two-fold, the national oppression (slight in AHE), and the class opression, where peasants suffered of course the most (in all Europe). The Slovaks suffered twice as they were both the peasants and Hungarian were the lords, and they were the minority and not the leading nation. But I have addressed something else, namely the relative freshness of Slovak nation. It is usually asumed that 'hallmark' trait would be the language. In this case Ludovit Stur proclaiming the central-slovak dialect as the official Slovak language somewhere around 1840-1850 would be the date, am I correct?
|
|
|
Post by pieter on Dec 12, 2009 10:19:17 GMT -7
Tuftabis, Terrible guy this Neo-Stalinist and Milosevic supporter Alexander Zinovyev. As if the ordinairy ideologies of Marxism-Leninism and Stalinism were not worse enough with it's National Russian, East-German, Polish, Czechoslowak, Hungarian and Bulgarian flavors of opression this guy went further supporting and understating the existing Marxists economical, philosophical and political teachings. In 1996, he appealed to the public to support Gennady Zyuganov, a Communist candidate who eventually lost the presidential election to Yeltsin. According to Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Zinovyev spoke of collectivisation in the USSR as of a “ long-awaited gift to the Russian peasantry”. Sure a great gift: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Holodomor / pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wielki_g%C5%82%C3%B3d_na_UkrainieTherefor these kind of social scientists brought it to the level of sociology, psychology and education, to secure, confirm or connect the existing system to the enslaved people who had to live and work in that same system. All those skilled people, academics, intellectuals and scientists who worked in the 20th century in creating and supporting totalitarian regimes, where as bad or even worse than the secret agents, politicians and soldiers of these system, because these Sovjet intellectuals institutionalised an ideology of opression and mental torture, gave the further foundations of opression. They cooperated with the clerks and bureaucrats in perfecting an opression sytestem of an imperfect sytem, society and state(s). Regarding Joseph Stalin, Zinovyev declared: “ I consider him one of the greatest persons in the history of mankind. In the history of Russia he was, in my opinion, even greater than Lenin. Until Stalin’s death I was anti-Stalinist, but I always regarded him as an outstanding personality.” Its like in the eightees or ninetees a German sociologist or philosopher would have said: I was against the Tird reich in my youth, but I have to say now I am wiser and older Hitler was a great leader and from a social-economical point of view and a financial perspective Nazism was very good for Germany. Homo SovieticusHomo Sovieticus (pseudo Latin for " Soviet Man") is a sarcastic and critical reference to a category of people with a specific mindset that were allegedly created by the governments of the Eastern Bloc. The term was coined by well-known Soviet writer and sociologist Aleksandr Zinovyev as the title of his book of the same name. A similar term in Russian slang is sovok ( совок), which is derived from Soviet but also means scoop. The idea that the Soviet system would create a new, better kind of person was first postulated by the advocates of the Soviet system; they called it the " New Soviet man". Homo Sovieticus, however, was a term with negative connotations, invented by opponents to describe what they said was the real result of Soviet policies. In many ways it meant the opposite of the New Soviet man, someone characterized by the following: * Indifference to the results of his labour (as expressed in the saying " They pretend they are paying us, and we pretend we are working"), and lack of initiative. * Indifference to common property and petty theft from the workplace, both for personal use and for profit. A line from a popular song, " Everything belongs to kolkhoz, everything belongs to me" (" все теперь колхозное, все теперь мое"), meaning that people on collective farms treasured all common property as their own, was sometimes used ironically to refer to instances of petty theft. The Law of Spikelets, which made stealing from the collective punishable by ten years’ imprisonment, was a failed attempt to break this attitude. * Isolation from world culture, created by the Soviet Union's restrictions on travel abroad and strict censorship of information in the media (as well as the abundance of propaganda). The intent was to insulate the Soviet people from Western influence; instead, " exotic" Western culture became more interesting precisely because it was forbidden. Soviet officials called this fascination " Western idolatry" ( идолопоклонничество перед Западом). * Obedience or passive acceptance of everything that government imposes on them (see authoritarianism). Avoidance of taking any individual responsibility on anything. Following the collapse of the Soviet Union, many social and economic problems in Russia were blamed on Homo Sovieticus’ alleged failure to adapt to a capitalist society. Links: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksandr_Zinovyev (Eng) / pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aleksandr_Zinowjewen.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%B3zef_Tischner / pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/J%C3%B3zef_Tischner (PL) pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homo_sovieticus
|
|
|
Post by pieter on Dec 12, 2009 10:35:52 GMT -7
New Soviet man
The New Soviet man or New Soviet person (Russian: новый советский человек), as postulated by the ideologists of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, was an archetype of a person with certain qualities that were said to be emerging as dominant among all citizens of the Soviet Union, irrespective of the country's long-standing cultural, ethnic, and linguistic diversity, creating a single Soviet people, Soviet nation.
Leon Trotsky wrote in his Literature and Revolution:
"The human species, the sluggish Homo sapiens, will once again enter the stage of radical reconstruction and become in his own hands the object of the most complex methods of artificial selection and psychophysical training... Man will make it his goal...to create a higher sociobiological type, a superman, if you will"
The questions about the forming of the "new" Soviet man were posed from the first days of the October Revolution. As Wilhelm Reich wrote: "Will the new socio-economic system reproduce itself in the structure of the people's character? If so, how? Will his traits be inherited by his children? Will he be a free, self-regulating personality? Will the elements of freedom incorporated into the structure of the personality make any authoritarian forms of government unnecessary?"
The three major changes postulated to be indispensable for the building of the communist society were economical and political changes, accompanied with the changes in the human personality.
The Soviet man was to be selfless, learned, healthy and enthusiastic in spreading the socialist Revolution. Adherence to Marxism-Leninism, and individual behaviour consistent with that philosophy's prescriptions, were among the crucial traits expected of the New Soviet man.
Author and philosopher Bernard Byhovsky, Ph.D. writes: "The new man is endowed, first of all, with a new ethical outlook."
Among the major traits of a new Soviet man was selfless collectivism. This trait was glorified from the first Soviet days, as exemplified by lines from the poem Vladimir Ilyich Lenin by the Soviet poet Vladimir Mayakovsky:
Who needs a "1"? The voice of a "1"
is thinner than a squeak.
Who will hear it?
Only the wife...
A "1" is nonsense.
A "1" is zero.
Fictional characters and presentations of contemporary celebrities embodying this model were prominent features of Soviet cultural life, especially at times when fostering the concept of the New Soviet man was given special priority by the government.
Some critics of the Soviet Union argue that a new kind of person was indeed created by the Soviet system, but hold that this new man - which they call Homo Sovieticus - was in many ways the opposite of the ideal of the New Soviet man.
|
|
|
Post by pieter on Dec 13, 2009 13:55:20 GMT -7
Is there a ghost of fascist nationalism with neo-communist roots going through Central-, Eastern and South-eastern Europe. Does the Globalisation, economical crisis and ethnical tensions between natives and minorities add to this? And how about the Neo-fascist Russian and Italian governments with their National-Capitalist states, plutocrats olicharchs and elitist economies? Berlusconi and Putin are friends and have a Russian-Italian axis! www.derechos.org/nizkor/econ/rusita.htmlwww.globalpolitician.com/24577-italy-russia
|
|
|
Post by tuftabis on Dec 14, 2009 13:46:21 GMT -7
Tuftabis, Terrible guy this Neo-Stalinist and Milosevic supporter Alexander Zinovyev. Pieter, just to make sure - Zinovyev was the author of the idea (mockery which came out to be truth) of Homo sovieticus. This was kind of ant-utopia and making ironic fun of the serious idea of Soviet Man (Sovietskiy cheloviek), made up by communist doctrine-makers. Are you sure you see the difference?
|
|
|
Post by tuftabis on Dec 15, 2009 9:32:23 GMT -7
Berlusconi and Putin are friends and have a Russian-Italian axis! That's true, but the importance of that axis is as strong as te importance of Berlusconi in European Union. Much more dangerous was the Paris-Berlin-Moscow axis formed on anti-American ground during the times of Chirac and Schreoder, the two men who did the most for the disintegration of EU in EU's history ;D ;D
|
|
|
Post by tuftabis on Dec 15, 2009 9:40:41 GMT -7
Tuftabis, Yes, I see the difference now. I was ill last week until sunday, so staying alone at home with my laptop and the internet gave me a lot of time to spend on the Forum. Yes, I know - your wrote about that! I hope your health is getting better now. Btw. I think it is a good thing for the forum to write a lot, so no worries, everyone should be glad. And for you it is also better to investigate things and write about them, rather than watch tv and do nothing intellectually while sick. As to Zinovyev. He did perfectly demonstrate both the absurdity and utopia of communism and the pathetic face of 'real communism' after he run aways to the West. And, yes, he got disappointed with with the West, the democracy, as well, came back to Russia after the fall of Soviet Union and in a way 'praised' the old times of SU. But that does not make a stalinist out of him, in my opinion. Interseting though that also Solzhenitsyn in his older years made a similar 'turn around' and praised Putin as a democrat
|
|
|
Post by pieter on Dec 15, 2009 13:08:46 GMT -7
Berlusconi and Putin are friends and have a Russian-Italian axis! That's true, but the importance of that axis is as strong as te importance of Berlusconi in European Union. Much more dangerous was the Paris-Berlin-Moscow axis formed on anti-American ground during the times of Chirac and Schreoder, the two men who did the most for the disintegration of EU in EU's history ;D ;D Tuftabis, Ofcourse you are right that the anti-American axis Paris-Berlin-Moscow axis was dangerous, and even without Moscow I was worried about the Berlin-Paris axis, because that was not good for the Polish and Dutch interests in Europe. For me it felt like a Polish-sceptic or camouflaged Big " European" Brothers (continental) pact. I also did not liked it anti-British or anti-English mentality and the power of the Germans and French in Brussels and Stasbourg (the European institutions). For me Great-Britain (London) is a good counterballance for a to powerful Brussels and to much French and German influence. Europe is from the Poles, Dutch, Danes, Italians and Belgians too. I think I might be more Anglophile (London) oriented or directed in my favor than Brussels. Although I am not an Eurosceptic like the Polish member of the European Parliament Maciej Marian Giertych (1936), I think we should not be blindly Pro-EU and see the EU as the cure and solution of Europe. I believe in the European nation state and the souverenity of the European republics and kingdoms. Authonomy and the independance of states like Poland and the Netherlands are important to me! We form a federation like structure, but have our own traditions, customs, faiths, ethnic identities, languages, cultures, regional differances, political systems, and centuries old national histories. We Europeans are united in division, we like our own part of Europe we live in and respect other Europeans, but have to admid that they are often strangers, because we don't understand their language, customs, culture and identity. Europe never will be like the USA with it's unifying American-English culture, which is spoken in all 51 member states. Europe does not have the American centralist Federal culture which unites the Americans who all feel American. Europeans first feel (1) National: Polish, Dutch, German, French or Italian, secondly feel (2) Regional (Western-European, North-European or Central-European) and thirdly (3) European (the continental identity like " The American identity" ). For instance we, Tuftabis and Pieter communicate as Europeans, but are aware of our regional and national differances, because the Polish and Dutch identities are completely different, as different as for instance the difference between the Greek and Danish identities. For me that is also the beauty, cultural quality ( quintessense or Aether[(classical element], economical strength and power of Europe. Due to the large and accepted and tolerated differances we have a huge innermarket, due to the differant qualities and products the differant people, countries and regions create and produce. The cultural, economical and intellectual cross-pollination inside Europe between countries, cultures and markets create wealth, prosperity, more democracy (structures, European legislation, human rights demands, trade legislation) and freedom. Each European nation sees that it can benefit from being an active partner or participant in the European Union, the European innermarket, the further developping bording crossing infrastructure (highways, Rail transportation, the digital highway - glassfiber lines- and more and more wireless connections - see for instance the Baltic states who developped a sort of Internet democracies, waterways, airports and Trans European fly connections - it is easier to fly to Poland than in the past from Amsterdam, Belgium or Germany - just a few kilometers cross the border in the East of the Netherlands). The European structural funds are a great invention and developped the poorer areas. This political and economical solidarity in Europe (payed by the collective contribution of all memberstates) is very good, because the growing European market creates new companies, niches, jobs, modern pragmatic legislation (on the marco-economical field) and mutual understanding and connections between Europeans. See for instance the changing image of the Poles in Western-Europe. From negative thieves, anonimous " thughs" which people feared and loathed, to respected skilled foreign workers and entrepreneurs, colleages and employees of Dutch, Irish and French companies. They have become fellow Europeans with an accent instaid of strangers! The same thing with Dutch employees, entrepreneurs, farmers or workers in other countries. (for instance the Dutch farmers that made a restart in Poland, Ukraine and Norway, where they escaped the suffocating Dutch laws "against" agriculture. Yes, farmers are a dying breed in the Netherlands due to Dutch and European legislation; quota [production limitations], lower market prices for their products, and withdrawn European subsidies that were given in the past and recently the cowdisease, the Classical swine fever (Pig plague) and the mad-cow disease (Avian influenza and the Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE)) that destroyed a lot of Dutch agricultural enterprises (farmers). I like the fact that these Dutch farmers can go to Poland and start new farms there and in the same time can add something to Poland and learn something from the Polish agriculture (which has more natural products than the Dutch farmers with their Dutch industrial farming methods). Poland is interesting for the food industry and farmers too, because the country has a mechanical industry which produces farming machines, Tractor factories and a huge internal market with interested neighbours. Polish settlement in the Netherlands (also in Catholic regions where they feel at home and in some case use empty or little frequented Dutch Catholic churches, with Polish priests) and Dutch settlement in Poland is a normal phenomenon today and probably will increase in the near future. The same is the Polish march to the West, the Poles who like East-Germany, buy or rent houses there, settle there and work there. (East Germany is very empty or low populated, due to mass emigration of Eastern-Germany to West-Germany to find work and new lives). For Poles Eastern-Germany is attractive, because it is close to Poland and due to the Western-German investments modern, clean and beautiful (the East-German cities and towns are nice). I read that many Poles feel at home there (businessmen, middle class, construction workers and etc. Probably Poles will employ Poles there in the near future and German-Polish coexistance will increase. Pieter
|
|
|
Post by pieter on Dec 15, 2009 14:29:38 GMT -7
Tuftabis,
Now I want to add something to the many postings about the far right and it's leftist roots in Central- and Eastern European nations. My fear is an international of the far right which exist in the European parlaiment and outside the parlaimentarian democratic system.
The far right danger is present in Western-Europe too and has old roots too. In Western-Europe the new Rightwing and Leftwing populism, with rightwing nationalist and leftwing nationalist roots (often a merger of the two) is on the rise. A lot of the far right or Rightwing Populist parties and movements have the support of former "red" (as we call it) Social-democratic or socialist families and working class people. These people are dissapointed in the liberal progressive policies of the Social-democratic governments and oppositions. They dislike the multi-culturalism, anti-patriotism, political correctness, support of affirmative actions (benefitting migrant workers and middle class at the expense of the native [European] working class and middle class), the funding of migrant organisations, the dominant presence of the migrant communities in their neighbourhoods, schools, institutions and public transport. The natives lost territory in their environment. Tensions between groups started in the seventees, continued in the eightees and ninetees and reached an explosive level early 21th century with (race) riots in Great-Britain, France, Germany, Belgium and Denmark. Since the democratic political parties from centre-left and centre-right for a long time ignored the problems, because they also had a significant amount of migrant voters nothing changed or nothing was done about the problems that existed.
The danger of today is a radicalised native youth and workingclass and middle class of natives which are xenophobe, some of them racists (anti-immigrant), ethnic rooted (Europe for the Europeans, Holland for the Dutch, Full is Full!) and against anything which is not white, European, Christian, secular or atheist European. 9-11 and the murders of Populist guys like Pim Fortuyn and Theo van Gogh triggered that feeling and tension. This tension was built up in decades (from the early seventees -with the first anti-Turkish race riots in Rotterdam city until today with Geert Wilders Rightwing Populist - some say far right Party for Freedom, PVV). Today the centre-left and centre-right parties are less overly tolerant as they were. They addopted some of the ideas of Pim Fortuyn (who was by the way less extreme or radical than Mister Wilders).
The danger with the Rightwing Populist parties in Western-Europe, which most often have leaders with roots in Democratic parties or movements, is that these parties which are legitimate, chosen in parlaiment, sometimes even government parties, attract the real far right, neo-nazi scene, which could be a platform of radical rightwing development under a decent, resepectable umbrella of for instance Wilders PVV party, the Danish People's Party, The Swiss People's Party, the Belgian-Flemish Vlaams Belang (Dutch for "Flemish Interest"), the Austrian Freedom Party of Austria and the French Front National, Mouvement National Républicain and Mouvement pour la France and Berlusconi's People of Freedom party (which came afte the merger of Berlusconi's Forza Italia with Gianfranco Fini's National conservative National Alliance [Alleanza Nazionale] which is the successor of the Neo-fascist Italian Social Movement (MSI). The majority of the National Aliance members that became member of the new People of Freedom party have (neo-) fascist roots giving the Italian government party the first European government with classical fascist elements.
The cooperation of all the Rightwing Populist Parties in Europe (from Western-Europe to Central-Europe and Northern-Europe to Southern-Europe) worries me, because you can get a Pan-European Nationalist movement with fascist roots. The danger of this development is the merger of the former "red family" (social-democratic) masses the Rightwing-Populist core of today, with the classical national-conservative, reactionairy, xenophobe, peoples nationalist far right (who by the way was always marginal, both in Western-Europe and Central-Europe). This merger is the danger and the fact that the far right, with it's neo-fascist, neo-nazi and (racist) social-darwinist ideology, leaders and parties have become part of the political mainstream. And really dangerous would be if one of these camouflaged fascists would become a charismatic and respected leader in centre-right disguise (neat suit and haircut).
Fortunately the Slovakian and Rumanian nationalists on one side and the Hungarian nationalists on the other side hate or dislike eachother, just like the German and Polish far right can't get along. Fortunately also is the fact that the far right, extreme nationalists have very few followers in Poland. The far right parties are outside the Sejm, because they didn't get enough votes.
In that perspective the rightwing Social-conservatism (PiS) and centre-right rightwing liberal-conservatism (PO) of many Polish Catholic voters is a good counterballance for the old National-democracy, Reactionairy far right Polish ideologies and movements. The democratic Polish right and centre-right are to well developped to give the far right a chance. Far right extremism is also not such a positive option for Poles due to it's past with Nazi-Germany. Italy was a German ally, so Italian fascism will also be not that popular in Poland, and the few Neo-nazi Hooligans and Nazi-skins or Neo-nazi party activists are a lunatic fringe. Real Poles would be not that stupid to support people who advocate an ideology that tried to eliminate all Poles as an inferior race.
The Hungarian, Rumanian, Slovak, Czech, Croat and Russian forms of far right extremism will in the same perspective not be attractive to Poles, because these far right movements also have roots in Neo-Nazism and Fascism. That's the differance between Poland and those countries.
For the rest the only threat to Poland is Leftwing Populism of Leppers Samoobrona, the Rightwing Endecja populism of Liga Polskich Rodzin! But I don't know if these parties have even members in the Polish parlaiment today, what support they get in the rural area's, towns and cities in Poland. Luckily the far right in Europe is as devided as the far left always was too.
Pieter
|
|
|
Post by tuftabis on Dec 16, 2009 14:10:07 GMT -7
For the rest the only threat to Poland is Leftwing Populism of Leppers Samoobrona, the Rightwing Endecja populism of Liga Polskich Rodzin! But I don't know if these parties have even members in the Polish parlaiment today, what support they get in the rural area's, towns and cities in Poland. Luckily the far right in Europe is as devided as the far left always was too. Pieter It seems the busy Poles don't presently have time for extremism, neither left- nor righ-wing. LPR and Samoobrona are not in Sejm anymore. However it is worth noting the difference - Lepper's Samoobrona is leftewing populist but they mean nothing. LPR has a strong background of around 10 maybe 15 percent , which currently votes for PiS. They amay be called extemal while compared with current European mainstream, but speaking justly one must note they are not that far right.
|
|
|
Post by tuftabis on Dec 16, 2009 14:37:00 GMT -7
|
|
|
Post by pieter on Dec 16, 2009 16:27:34 GMT -7
For the rest the only threat to Poland is Leftwing Populism of Leppers Samoobrona, the Rightwing Endecja populism of Liga Polskich Rodzin! But I don't know if these parties have even members in the Polish parlaiment today, what support they get in the rural area's, towns and cities in Poland. Luckily the far right in Europe is as devided as the far left always was too. Pieter It seems the busy Poles don't presently have time for extremism, neither left- nor righ-wing. LPR and Samoobrona are not in Sejm anymore. However it is worth noting the difference - Lepper's Samoobrona is leftewing populist but they mean nothing. LPR has a strong background of around 10 maybe 15 percent , which currently votes for PiS. They may be called extreme compared with the current European mainstream, but speaking justly one must note they are not that far right. Tuftabis, In general Dutch people do not have time for extremism neither, because all over Europe people work hard and have to work hard to maintain a living and a good standard of life. But you have unfortunately a lof ot people who are unemployed due to the economical crisis, who are less wealthy then their neighbours and are envious, and people who just don't like minorities, people who are differant (Gays and Lesbians, anarchist bohemians, hippies, squaters, leftwing people or exentric people in general) and the situation they are in. They use a scapegoat. I don't know much about Lepper's Samoobrona and why they don't mean nothing (just an bunch of rioting radical farmers and youngsters with an old leader? Or something else why they don't get votes). And why is LPR so popular that it gains around 10 maybe 15 percent of the votes? And why does it's voters vote PiS instaid of LPR? What is the difference between LPR and PiS today when you compare it to the days they were in government together. Would a PO-PiS-LPR coalition government be possible. If the LPR is not far right where is the far right of Poland. In tiny far right extremist splinter groups! I just saw the image of striking workers of the Gdansk Shipyard in june 2009, members of the 2009 Solidarnosc. They are protesting against the present PO government (not against communists), and against the EU. " Under communism we didn't have socialism and now we do not have democracy" growls Brunon Baranowski in his office, from which he supervises the production of the casco of ships. He was 27 years old when he joined the strikers on augustust the14th 1980. „ It all started here and we pay the highest price for the changes.” He stands not alone in his retrospective view on the youngest Polish history. A large part of the Shipyard is sold to projectdeveloppers. The amount of workers is decimated. Most Shipyard workers feel abandoned in the new Poland. It is nota bene the EU, the engine behind the Polish succes, whcih forces the government in Warsaw to get tough on the Polish Shipyards. Closure of the Gdansk Shipyard is unavoidable, because eurocommissionairy Neelie Kroes came to the conclusion that it was unjust that the Gdanks Shipyard received state support. She is the commissionairy for competition. (In that sense she tries to avoid and work against monopoly of branches int he economy, state support that hinders free competition and etc. She became known for dealing with microsoft whom she sued for a monopoly position on the European market) Baranowski does not know exactly what to think about the European Union. The main culprit in his according to him the government of ' liberals' in Warsaw. „ They send the forgd documents to Brussels. In that papers stand that we received hundreds of millions of zloty's state support. That is not right at all” This is a translation form quotes from the Dutch Newspaper Trouw from June the 4th 2009. Pieter
|
|
|
Post by pieter on Dec 20, 2009 10:57:00 GMT -7
For the rest the only threat to Poland is Leftwing Populism of Leppers Samoobrona, the Rightwing Endecja populism of Liga Polskich Rodzin! But I don't know if these parties have even members in the Polish parlaiment today, what support they get in the rural area's, towns and cities in Poland. Luckily the far right in Europe is as devided as the far left always was too. Pieter It seems the busy Poles don't presently have time for extremism, neither left- nor righ-wing. LPR and Samoobrona are not in Sejm anymore. However it is worth noting the difference - Lepper's Samoobrona is leftewing populist but they mean nothing. LPR has a strong background of around 10 maybe 15 percent , which currently votes for PiS. They amay be called extemal while compared with current European mainstream, but speaking justly one must note they are not that far right. Tuftabis, This is a very good and positive thing about Poland, that Poles are pragmatic, realistic, hard working people who think about their economy and wellbeing of their compatriots. In the same time Poles care about their family, culture, Polish traditions and their Roman-Catholic faith and heritage. I have already said that I was very pleased to see the progression made in Krakow (2004) and Warsaw (2006), and the possitive news I gain from the Dutch, German and English language press and media. And you Polish Poles from Poland on this Forum who posted images on this website, and supplied us with fresh information about Poland. For instance the Topic: Polish Impressions in the TRAVEL & IMAGES section. But on the long term I am worried about Poland too. Poland is inbetween Germany and Russia, which both have sometimes questionable politics and far right political minorities that can grow easily when the economical situation deteriorates. The far right tendensies, Isolationalist Rightwing Populism in Europe is bad for Polish minorities in the Polish diaspora and Poland itself. I am very glad that in contrast with the surrounding countries the far right and far left are marginal or small in Poland, but Poland should monitor the Rightwing populism in other countries, which acts against Polish interests. I see the Polish diaspora as a positive Catholic element in secularising Western-European Catholicism. I see Poles as fellow Europeans who are emplyee's, workers, entrepreneurs and European civil servants in the Netherlands and Belgium nearby. That's the most important. More important than the exceptional amount of attention I gave the far right in this topic. I am not obsessed by the far right in Europe, the Islam in the Netherlands or the merger of leftist elements in the far right. I am concerned though about the state of the Netherlands, Poland and Europe, the country I live and work in, the country (Poland) of my ancesters and family of mine and Tuftabis, Zooba, Pawian, Adam, Bubjo and where Jaga came from and where her roots lie. I hope that the PO maintains it's centrists, moderate centre-right course and that there will be a fair opposition of the centre-left and the conservative right (PiS). Since PiS and PO are archrivals I don't think that will be the case. For Poland a continuation of this government would be the best. I hope that the government manages to press through the tax reforms and continues the economical reform which is necessary. (cutting back the state bureaucracy, firing some state clerks and bureaucrats) Implementing more Laisseze faire through privatizations, creating a smaller state, and ending the traditional etatist culture and dominance of the Polish state. That's probably the differance between PO and PiS. The differant views on the Polish economy by PiS and PO: Prawo i Sprawiedliwość (PiS) The party supports a state-guaranteed minimum social safety net and state intervention in the economy within market economy bounds. During the election campaign it proposed tax decrease to two personal tax rates (18% and 32%) and tax rebates related to the number of children in a family, as well as a reduction of the VAT rate (while keeping a variation between individual types of VAT rates). 18% and 32% tax rates were eventually implemented. Also: a continuation of privatisation with the exclusion of several dozen state companies deemed to be of strategic importance for the country. PiS opposes cutting social welfare spending, and also proposed the introduction of a system of state-guaranteed housing loans (also unimplemented). Platforma Obywatelska ( PO) Civic Platform is a Christian-democratic and liberal conservative party, combining liberal stances on the economy ( Laisseze faire oriented) with conservative stances on social and ethical issues, including opposition to abortion, same-sex marriage and civil unions, euthanasia, fetal stem cell research and partially to wide availability of in vitro fertilisation. Core proposals in the party program include: * privatization of the remaining public sectors of Polish economy; * direct elections of mayors and regional governors; * first-past-the-post electoral system instead of proportional representation; * labor law reform; * independence over monetary policy by the National Bank of Poland; * a 15% flat tax; * the decentralization of the state.
|
|