Poland in Axis - real alternative?

[szopen]

Domen121 -> ignoring your ironic "cotton words" Stalin was a better alternative? for who? for the working class and their soviet leaders?

edit 31-11-2008:
some explantion about Pilsudski for those who does not know Polish history very well -
Pilsudski used force to expand the eastern frontier of Poland, which resulted in the inclusion of several million Lithuanians,

SEVERAL MILLIONS? Ekhm. Please provide the sources.

For those who are not familiar with history, note that Pilsudski dreamt about federation of Ukraine, Lithuania, Poland (under leadership of Poland), and that Polish side in fact proposed federation to Lithuania (federation of Vilnius+Lithuania proper, confederated with Poland, refused by Lithuania). Wars were started by Reds, and in Vilnius area Lithuanians were something like 1% or less.

[haoz]

szopen ->

FACTS! read carefully: FACTS proove that Pilsudski was fascist according to the textbook definition. key posts in the Polish government was taken by members of his military organizations (ex-veterans from Polish Legions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish_Leg ... orld_War_I). leaders of democratic opposition was arrested or even killed. period of his fascist autocracy was called "Sanacja" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanacja and Parliament of 2nd. Polish Republic was ruled by one and only party Nonpartisan Bloc for Cooperation with the Government http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonpartisa ... Government (like NSDAP in III.Reich)

Do not use Stalin philosophy of "neighborhood countries liberation" with reference to the Vilnius annexation. FACTS! read carefully: FACTS mentioned in sources indicated in my previous posts http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish-Lit ... #Aftermath:
The Polish commander Józef Piłsudski ordered his subordinate, General Lucjan Żeligowski, to defect with his 1st Lithuanian-Belarusian Division and capture the city, without formal declaration of war on Lithuania. With Lithuanians unwilling to enter into a federation with Poland, and wishing to avoid a full-out conflict and international condemnation, Józef Piłsudski staged a fake rebellion by Polish army units (under command by gen. Lucjan Żeligowski) in the Vilnius area, which allowed the Polish army to take control of the city in October 9, 1920.

and please, szopen - do not manipulate incomplete quotations of interlocutors and do not make any personal invectives to any body... it will not make your arguments more reliable

[szopen]

and please, szopen - do not manipulate incomplete quotations of interlocutors and do not make any personal invectives to any body... it will not make your arguments more reliable

Uhmmm where I did personal invectives? After some thought I think you may refer to "you are ridiculous". Sorry for that. I meant that your logic was ridiculous. Pilsudski was fascist, because he was admired by fascist. Great. So Prussian king Frederic was fascist too. Hitler admired him too.

But I will repeat (give answers about rule of Pilsudski, not after his death):
1) where is the source for your "SEVERAL MILLIONS OF LITHUANIANS"
2) Did the other parties existed during sanacja, were there elections? What were the results for BBWR? Was opposition present in parliament?
3) What about opposition newspapers, did they exist?
4) Did Pilsudski promoted nationalism, or maybe he promoted cooperation between nations?
5) Was Pilsudski antisemite, racist, did he believed Poles are better nation than others?
6) What was position in government occupied by Pilsudski?
7) How many opponents were actually murdered? Tens, hundreds, thousands?
8) How many people died in Bereza Kartuska?
9) What Pilsudski thought about fascism? What he was planning in 1934?
10) What about Bertel, the first government of sanacja - how long did lt last, how did it fall?
11) When Moscicki issued a decree about censorship, why this decree was not introduced into the reality?
12) What about Czechowicz affair? Why he was putted under tribunal?
13) What happened 30 october 1929, when officers and military entered building of parliament?

[haoz]

Ad. 1. dear szopen, read carefully please, once again:
several million Lithuanians, White Russians and Ukrainians I have never used number "millions" regarding only to Lithuanians. you manipulate incomplete quotations

Answers on next questions are only description of democracy prosthesis in 2nd. Republic in Poland. what it means that Pilsudski has killed less opponents then Hitler or Mussolini? IMHO nothing. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bereza_Kartuska_prison

pay attention to the fact that he a insist on France to start pre-emptive war with Germany in 1933 - is it indication typical for peaceful democrat? no, force solutions are characteristic for fascist.

btw. cough and hem are necessary in your posts?

[Borys]

haoz - I'm reporting you to the mods for trolling and/or stupidity.
Borys

[szopen]

Ad. 1. dear szopen, read carefully please, once again:
several million Lithuanians, White Russians and Ukrainians I have never used number "millions" regarding only to Lithuanians. you manipulate incomplete quotations

Ah ok. I still think including Lithuanians into the equation is a bit... strange, since there were maybe tens of thousands of them in Poland, but I admit i was wrong on that.

Answers on next questions are only description of democracy prosthesis in 2nd. Republic in Poland. what it means that Pilsudski has killed less opponents then Hitler or Mussolini? IMHO nothing.

Not every dictator is fascist.

pay attention to the fact that he a insist on France to start pre-emptive war with Germany in 1933 - is it indication typical for peaceful democrat? no, force solutions are characteristic for fascist.

Is Bush fascist? And he has ideology similar to Hitler??

[haoz]

Bush is not good analogy for Pilsudski. Bush is not a self-nominated Chief of the State, which hold his post permanently for decades (till dead) and appears as the Leader of the Nation as he like, without any democratic cause. I think that Bush would never appear from time to time to stage a coup and eliminate his personal antagonists to strengthen his fellows from para-military organizations
most bright example of Pilsudski's contempt for democracy and the People: after "Miracle at the Vistula" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_at_the_Vistula he returned to Warsaw as a victorious Chief of the State, despite the fact that he gave in his resignation (*) to Prime Minister W. Witos hands in 12.08.1920r and retreat from Warsaw before the Red Army.
* the whole text of the Pilsudski's resignation you can find in magazine "Niepodległość" published in 1962 year in London, volume VII, and in published in 1991 year in Warsaw "Moje wspomnienia" of W. Witos, volume II in footnotes on pages 290-292. original text http://www.stanislawkalemba.pl/doc027.htm


but coming back to the point - Pisudski's myth is a good example that Poles could accept and unite under command such a ruthless dictator. it's very likely also that Pilsudski which have no scruples could be the strong link between Germany and Poland - hostile against each other from centuries. and that's why Hitler deeply regret Pilsudski's gone in 1935, one year after signing peace treaty http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German-Pol ... ssion_Pact. I think that in Hitler's opinion Pilsudski was the one and only Polish politician which could co-operate with him against Soviets. what I am trying to prove in this topic.

[wojtop79]

Hi haoz,

I think that in Hitler's opinion Pilsudski was the one and only Polish politician which could co-operate with him against Soviets. what I am trying to prove in this topic.

Interesting point, have you got any sources confirming this speculation?
I find it somewhat strange considering that Polish govt offered France to launch a preemptive strike against Germany when Pilsudski had a very strong position in Poland. Hitler had to know about it.

Regarding Pilsudski being a fascist according to the textbook definition - you should definitely check if your textbook is written by a competent author. Pilsudski and his followers broke democratic rules but.... Totalitarian rulers/govts, including fascists, try to capture total political power AND control all aspects of life of it's subjects they can (like work, religion, values, leisure etc). Check if Pilsudski tried to do it - i assure you that his ambitions were purely political and he wasn't much interested in manipulating the society. Sorry, but he can be merely called an authoritarian leader.

[szopen]

most bright example of Pilsudski's contempt for democracy and the People: after "Miracle at the Vistula" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miracle_at_the_Vistula he returned to Warsaw as a victorious Chief of the State, despite the fact that he gave in his resignation (*) to Prime Minister W. Witos hands in 12.08.1920r and retreat from Warsaw before the Red Army.

The resignation was NOT accepted.

but coming back to the point - Pisudski's myth is a good example that Poles could accept and unite under command such a ruthless dictator.

But he wasn't ruthless dictator, that's the point. Imagine ruthless dictator standing before marshall of the parliament, saying "start the session" and when marshall answers "under guns I won't" ruthless dictator just leaves? Do you think Hitler in this position would just leave?

I think that in Hitler's opinion Pilsudski was the one and only Polish politician which could co-operate with him against Soviets. what I am trying to prove in this topic.

In Hitler's opinion, maybe. In Pilsudski opinion, war with Germany was unavoidable, though he thought it will be in 1940.

[haoz]

wojtop79 -> please do not jump from one term to another. according to your thesis (especially incl "etc." even Franco and Mussolini were not fascist, as well. even, most demonic Hitler could hardly fit to frames determined by you. but, ok - tell me please why Ukrainians and Lithuanians claim that there were a fascist regime in 2nd. Republic of Poland. if you find any that could tell "Pilsudski was not fascist and my national minority was not discriminated against", than I can give up.
btw. undoubtedly Jozef Pilsudski did not care about religion. he changed his denomination, only for marrying his first wife ;P

szopen ->
it does not matter the resignation was accepted or not. the resignation was handed, and Witos together with Rozwadowski and Weygant won the battle only by themselves, despite the fact that Pilsudski took them almost half artillery on back area where Pisudski planned to negotiate capitulation.
your arguments are good for regime newspapers. you might as well inform everybody that: he just live concerned, he stroked a dog, he smiled to the child facts: in The May Coup d'État (1926) 215 soldiers and 164 civilians were killed, and some 900 people were wounded.

[szopen]

it does not matter the resignation was accepted or not. the resignation was handed, and Witos together with Rozwadowski and Weygant won the battle only by themselves, despite the fact that Pilsudski took them almost half artillery on back area where Pisudski planned to negotiate capitulation.

WHAT?
You are creating new history here. Pilsudski did handed resignation, but resignation was NOT ACCEPTED< so he continued to be chief general. Weygand was not involved at all - he was ignored by Polish staff, he in fact proposed static defense around Warsaw and was convinced Polish plan won't work, he did absolutely nothing. Rozwadowski worked together with Pilsudski and it was Pilsudski signature on the plan which counted - Pilsudski having several plans accepted one, took responsibility for that plan and therefore he wasalso author of the victory.

You accuse Pilsudski for fascism and you repeat propoganda prepared by ND (national democrats) which were far closer to fascism than Pilsudski.

your arguments are good for regime newspapers. you might as well inform everybody that: he just live concerned, he stroked a dog, he smiled to the child facts: in The May Coup d'État (1926) 215 soldiers and 164 civilians were killed, and some 900 people were wounded.

So what - are all dictators fascist? And second, what kind of dictature was that, if in first elections pro-government party has no majority in parliament, and in second elections it has not enough majority to change constitution?

[haoz]

the resignation was not accepted by Witos and that's why Pisludski is still Brave Leader of Polish Republic? despite he run away? I am afraid that history should be rewritten, indeed. I see clearly that propaganda of Junta called "Sanation" made history of the 2nd Republic of Poland too cloudy...

of course - I repeat true kept and spreaded by ND (national democrats). but were they far closer to fascism than Pilsudski? they did not kill and oppressed anyone in 2nd Republic of Poland. anybody has been arrested, banned or tormented in jails by ND.

and
please, pay attention that Witos and Rozwadowski soon became victims of oppression, because they hold in contempt for Pilsudski's hypocrisy and arrogance. they (and many others which remembered who really defended Warsaw against Soviets) had been arrested and convicted of a high treason. later Witos had been banned, Rozwadowski dead in jail. some others disappeared http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W%C5%82odz ... _(general)

so, who was closer to fascism than Pilsudski? imho only Hitler...

[wojtop79]

Hi Haoz,

There are many definitions of fascism. Some are so so unprecise that virtually all countries led single-handed by one man can be seen as fascist. More precise ones see fascism as a totalitarian style of govt focused on militarism, etatism, nationalism and populism and opposed to liberalism and communism.

I send you back to your textbook to check what's the difference between authoritarism and totalitarism. Hitler was doing a lot to control all aspects of life of people - Hitlerjugend and SA was one of means to do so as well as various secret services. Probably you are not aware of "Fuhrers" of particular quarters, villages, sometimes even houses in Nazi Germany whose responsibility was to monitor behaviour of people and report the ones whose lifestyle failed to conform to standards established by Nazi policy. Stalin and Mao worked in a similar way, Mussolini attempted it - "Tutto nello Stato, niente al di fuori dello Stato, nulla contro lo Stato". This is totalitarism.

You know that Pilsudski was very very far from this kind of stuff. This is one, the most important, diffecence between fascists and Poland 1926-1939. Not the only one, also Polish economy was liberal and nationalism, populism and militarism were very limited comparing to Italy or Germany.

Anyway, can you please provide some sources for your main thesis - that Hitler was eager to work with Pilsudski. It's quite interesting.

[Tim Smith]

Piludski (and most other Poles) spent 1919-1939 trying to turn Poland into a Great Power - attempting to fill the power vacuum left by the demise of the Austro-Hungarian Empire and the weakening of Germany under Versailles restrictions.

If the Poles made a treaty with Hitler, that would mean that they would have to accept that Poland was inferior (in economic and military power) to Germany. But the Poles had spent 15 years believing that Poland was Germany's equal, because of Germany's weakness under Weimar Republic gave Poland a false sense of her own relative power.

Hitler wanted an agreement with Poland similiar to the one made with Rumania later. That would mean that Poland would not be treated equal with Italy, let alone Germany, in the Axis alliance. Poland would be a MINOR Axis ally, expected to follow Germany's lead in all things, not an equal partner with Germany, Italy and Japan.

To Poles, that would be totally unacceptable, even if they had been pro-Axis by inclination (which they weren't).

Pride is a very important matter to Poles.

[haoz]

wojtop79 ->
quoting the Wikipedia: "What constitutes a definition of fascism and fascist governments is a highly disputed subject that has proved complicated and contentious. Historians, political scientists, and other scholars have engaged in long and furious debates concerning the exact nature of fascism and its core tenets." so we could argue, and argue
and further: "Most scholars agree that a "fascist regime" is foremost an authoritarian form of government, although not all authoritarian regimes are fascist. Authoritarianism is thus a defining characteristic, but most scholars will say that more distinguishing traits are needed to make an authoritarian regime fascist.
I, personally prefer definition in its primal form as the "Fasci di combattimento" i.e government posts and power in hands of fellows from the Army and no matter if they left or right, they preparing for wars and provoke it. pay attention that III.Reich economy was liberal as well - they did not involved more then 10% of industry for war production till Stalingrad defeat. everything based on tenders and government procurements.

totalitarianism (and its variations) overwhelming much larger focus of life aspects and should be defined separately without taking under consideration any fascism. so, do not change the subject of the discussion. the same regards your wrong conclusion that I am in possession of some reliable sources that prove Hitler was eager to work with Pilsudski. please, read carefully few first posts and find that this topic has been opened to find such a sources, and some members of this Forum had opportunity to present "the pros and cons". unfortunately, you are trying to to lead discussion astray raising irrelevant issues like differences between authoritarianism and totalitarianism. please find any Ukrainian or Lithuanian that could tell "Pilsudski was not fascist and my national minority was not discriminated against" ;P