Polish Terrorism in Upper Silesia 1920

[Molobo]

http://www.wilno.pl/naszczas/027/jedyna.html
Dr hab. Barbara Jedynak
Fryderyk II
"Polska - to kraj durniów z nazwiskami na -ski."

Friderick II
"Poland-its a land of idiots with names on -ski"

Wasn't Hitler an fan of Friderick II and admired his policies and thoughts ?

What we need is a non-chauvinist historiograohy, which no doubt would tell us that Kosciuszko's primary identity was not as a speaker of Polish or as a speaker of Belorussian, not as a Catholic or as an Orthodox, but as a member of the szlachta of the Rzeczpospolita

Tadeusz Kosciuszko March 24 1794 Cracow :
"For nobility alone I shall not fight, but for the whole nation"

He clearly speaks that he doesn't fight for noblilty alone.What's more to add ? You are expecting to confirm your beliefs at all costs, even when the historical facts and statement disproved what you were saying-that the conept of polish nation was born in 19century, while Kosciuszko spoke about nation of Poles regardless if they were peasants or nobility in 1794.

In Uniwersal Polaniecki he speaks that no matter if you are a peasant or a noble your duty is to fight for the common good of the Polish state/

[PAK]

Tadeusz Kosciuszko March 24 1794 Cracow :
"For nobility alone I shall not fight, but for the whole nation"

Excuse my intervention, but wasn't the meaning of "whole nation" michael mills base af argumentation? By posting this same quote again and again it adds nothing to the discussion, or am I wrong?

[Molobo]

No as the Mills said that nation meant nobility while Kosciuszko says he will not fight for the nobility but the whole nation, so he didn't considered the nobility to be the whole nation.

[HK]

True it is Frederick II ill-treated poles in many ways, but he was not nationalist in moderndays sense, actually he did not understand ethnicity and natiomnality in the way how we look at it. He treated ethnic germans who lived on lands what he got from Austria or from Saxony very much same way.
He thought about efficiency and organization of the state, so the germanisation was a practical tool for him, what matched the fact that prussian bureaucracy worked in german language. He himself despised so called german culture and german language. In fact he was fluent in French, but spoke german very poorly. Ehtnical background didnt matter for him, he just didnot understand what this meant.

[michael mills]

And it was IIRC also Frederick II who coined "Poland is a country of idiots with names ending with -ski"

In the 18th century, the only people in Poland who had names ending in "-ski" were members of the Szlachta.

I have no doubt that Frederick II regarded the Polish szlachta as lazy, anarchic idiots.

And he was right - they were. The szlachta had brought the Polish state to utter ruin through their selfishness and incompetence.

But it is a total distortion of history to regard Frederick II as a German nationalist whose aim was to promote the German people at the expense of the Polish.

He judged his subjects solely according to their economic value, not according to their ethnicity.

[Molobo]

I have no doubt that Frederick II regarded the Polish szlachta as lazy, anarchic idiots.

And he was right - they were

It's a xenophobic prejudice of Frederick, which you share, at the same time insulting many great names in Polish history.
The partition of Poland was also part of the aggresive polices of its neighbours ruled by absolut rulers, to which the democracy of Poland could not stand up.

In the 18th century, the only people in Poland who had names ending in "-ski" were members of the Szlachta.

Wrong :
http://www.naszekaszuby.pl/modules/arty ... ticleid=99

Zanik przydomków szlacheckich był efektem rozmaitych czynników zewnętrznych. Jednym z nich była szczególna popularność sufiksu – ski już w XVII w. W drugiej połowie tego wieku formant – ski tworzył wszelkie nazwiska niezależnie od tego, czy ich nosiciele należeli do szlachty, czy nie

"The disapearance of noble names was effect of many external factors.One of them was the extreme popularity of the -ski part of the name in the XVII century.In the second half of century the the -ski element of names was creating names no matter if the user was belonging to nobility or not."

He judged his subjects solely according to their economic value, not according to their ethnicity.

He held prejudices against his subjects based on their ethnic background, and was unable to judge them objective, a strong bias against Poles is needed to judge all them as idiots.Such expressions are sign of xenophobia and prejudice.

[szopen]

It should be remembered that by end of XVIII century idea of "Nation" as encompassing nobility, peasants and burghers was not foreign to Poles, even if not universally accepted. You should check names of people like Staszic or Konarski. In short, do not project Western conceptions into Central and Eastern Europe, because that will show only limited knowledge of the area.

As for Frederick. i am searching for Salmonowicz book about him. I have him in references from the books I promised to search, but I somehow feel that general remarks as "In la guerre confederes Frederick fully showed his obsessive hatred of evertyhing Polish" (quote from "Plish-German stereotypes'") wuold not convince anybody, so i want to get into the source.

And - pst! I bet Mr. David will soon move this topic somewhere else, but first of course he will give us chance to get back to the topic and present sources.

[boobazzz]

Well, well, well, what a nice example of the Australian ignorant version of history:

So men wearing strange-looking clothes and strange-looking hats and carrying scythes might well look like peasants to an outside observer, but nevertheless they were members of the szlachta, petty gentry.

Michael, these were not strange, but very common clothes, which were worn by - surprise! - the commons. Long straight coat and angled cap. Scythebearers battalions were fomred exclusively by peasants. And why they carried scythes? a common harvesting tool used by peasants? cause after rearrenging it vertically it was the only weapon they had. Contrary to the szlachta (or nobles, there is not much difference in english meaning), who ususally had a piece of weapon of honor, even members of petty gentry, as you caled it (I assume you're not familiar with "Pan Tadeusz" by famous Polish chauvinist A. Mickiewicz).

this is nice one too:

I have no doubt that Frederick II regarded the Polish szlachta as lazy, anarchic idiots.

And he was right - they were. The szlachta had brought the Polish state to utter ruin through their selfishness and incompetence.

could you be so kind to more precise on it? What "szlachat"? all of them? and when? in XVII century? the Act of Constitution of the 3rd May included?
because now you seem to be no more than stereotype spreader.
cheers
b.

[michael mills]

(I assume you're not familiar with "Pan Tadeusz" by famous Polish chauvinist A. Mickiewicz).

I saw a dramatised version of it on television.

It was just like a movie, except that the characters were speaking the lines of the poem.

I think the poem demonstrates the backwardness of the Polish szlachta at the time.

It was the early 19th century, during the napoleonic wars, and two szlachta families are going to war with each other over possession of a castle, as if they were still living in the middle ages.

The most ridiculous character was a macho guy in a long caftan who strode around making faces and acting like a maniac. He struck me as a typical szlachcic of the time.

That character was played by an actor called Kmicic (or perhaps that was the name of a character played by that actor - I cannot remember exactly). I had seen that actor in other films dating from the Communist period, in which he usually played some sort of nationalist hero. One of the films was about an invasion of Poland by Sweden in the 17th century (Ogniem i Mieczem?). Another was about capitalists in Lodz in the early 20th century.

[boobazzz]

(I assume you're not familiar with "Pan Tadeusz" by famous Polish chauvinist A. Mickiewicz).

I saw a dramatised version of it on television.

It was just like a movie, except that the characters were speaking the lines of the poem.

I think the poem demonstrates the backwardness of the Polish szlachta at the time.

It was the early 19th century, during the napoleonic wars, and two szlachta families are going to war with each other over possession of a castle, as if they were still living in the middle ages.

The most ridiculous character was a macho guy in a long caftan who strode around making faces and acting like a maniac. He struck me as a typical szlachcic of the time.

That character was played by an actor called Kmicic (or perhaps that was the name of a character played by that actor - I cannot remember exactly). I had seen that actor in other films dating from the Communist period, in which he usually played some sort of nationalist hero. One of the films was about an invasion of Poland by Sweden in the 17th century (Ogniem i Mieczem?). Another was about capitalists in Lodz in the early 20th century.

wow! I must say I am pretty impressed with your familiarity with Polish literature (although adopted to a movie)!. I must think of reconsideration the opinion on your ignorancy
The actor's name is Daniel Olchbryski. and yeah - He used to play Kmicic in adaptation ( by Hoffman) of the H Sienkiewicz's Trilogy. The movie on XvIIth wars was "Potop" (yes, a sort of sequel of the "ognie i mieczem" within the Trilogy) The movie on Lodz was "Ziemia Obiecana" (" A promised land") bu Andrzej Wajda. Very impresive movie - a masterpiece actually. In short - it is a story on a busibness undertaking conducted ba a Jew , German and Polish (played by Olchbryski) in XIX cetury Lodz.

Ok - back to Mickiewicz's poem. (a classic of Polish literature). In general it presents very complex study of the contemporary Polish nobles types. There are lazy dumbs (warcholy in Polish), true. especially amongst the povertised szlachta members. Nevertheless, there are other szlachta, who are of very patriotic and reasoanble attitude (and i was during the Napoleonic wars), with no glimpse of chauvinism. Mickiewicz knew what he was writing about as he was raised in one of those "zajazd" in Lithuania (Lithuania as land of th eRepublic to be precise). So in my opinion generalsing on nobles they were lazy and stupid as such is just an exaggeration - to put it gently.

Same applies to peasnats. In Polish history there were patriots like Wojciech Bartosz (vel. Glowacki) during the Kosciuszko insurection, but there also were bloody slaughters, like Szela uprising in the 1846 in hte Austrian partition.

cheers.
b.

[Musashi]

(I assume you're not familiar with "Pan Tadeusz" by famous Polish chauvinist A. Mickiewicz).

I saw a dramatised version of it on television.

It was just like a movie, except that the characters were speaking the lines of the poem.

I think the poem demonstrates the backwardness of the Polish szlachta at the time.

It was the early 19th century, during the napoleonic wars, and two szlachta families are going to war with each other over possession of a castle, as if they were still living in the middle ages.

The most ridiculous character was a macho guy in a long caftan who strode around making faces and acting like a maniac. He struck me as a typical szlachcic of the time.

That character was played by an actor called Kmicic (or perhaps that was the name of a character played by that actor - I cannot remember exactly). I had seen that actor in other films dating from the Communist period, in which he usually played some sort of nationalist hero. One of the films was about an invasion of Poland by Sweden in the 17th century (Ogniem i Mieczem?). Another was about capitalists in Lodz in the early 20th century.

wow! I must say I am pretty impressed with your familiarity with Polish literature (although adopted to a movie)!. I must think of reconsideration the opinion on your ignorancy
The actor's name is Daniel Olchbryski. and yeah .

Daniel Olbrychski. [Boobazzz, you could have typed more carefully, because nobody will find your phrase in Google]


Daniel Olbrychski as Gerwazy in Pan Tadeusz...


... and Potop.

[boobazzz]

sure thing, my mistake in spelling - sorry!

[szopen]

Konpczynski "Fryderyk Wielki a Polska" - that was that book, not Salmonowicz, that i read a long ago... hehe my memory seems to be less working with all those years

I tracked the book in www of one of the old bookstores, so be patient - if the www is actual, I will buy it very soon now and then comment of Frederick indifference on language used by his subjects.

[michael mills]

I remember the movie "Potop" now, which was screened here as "The Deluge".

Very exciting - I enjoyed it a lot.

But the story is an example of the point I was making about projecting 19th Century nationalism back into earlier periods.

The film presented an invasion of Poland by a Swedish army as a national conflict between Swedes and Poles, with the Swedes being a sort of Ersatz Germans.

In fact, the invasion was part of dynastic conflict within in the Swedish Vasa dynasty, to which the King of Poland belonged at that time. In essence, it was a family quarrel between the Catholic branch of the Vasas and the Lutheran branch; it was not a national conflict at all.

[Molobo]

But the story is an example of the point I was making about projecting 19th Century nationalism back into earlier periods.

Kosciuszko spoke about unified Polish nation in XVIII century.