"The president of Rafał Trzaskowski is the system's closure" warns right-wing politicians and publicists. This thesis sounds not only disturbing, but unfortunately besides credible. Only what does “close the system” truly mean? And why is that password resonating with specified force today?
Even a moderately conservative president may be the last barrier to legal changes aimed at the fundamental values of Christian civilization. It is adequate to callback the law on the alleged "talk of hatred" which, if not for its referral to the Constitutional Court by Andrzej Duda, could already apply today, penalising the expression of Catholic views in public space. Believers would be exposed to prosecutorial proceedings, the confiscation of electronic devices, as well as surveillance and search for links with alleged extremist groups.
Other projects of the moral revolution are expected, specified as legalization of homosexual marriages or killing children in the prenatal period of development. Blocking them by a moderately conservative number (e.g. the remnants of the Resisting Wing of the PSL) will yet be circumvented, and trying to keep the current composition of the Constitutional Court is besides a substance of time. In specified a situation, the only real barrier to the full implementation of this programme will be the signature – or its absence – of the president of the Republic of Poland.
However, the rate of the ‘close of the system’ is not limited to individual laws. It is about a comprehensive political-institutional change, after which the retreat will become virtually impossible – and for many decades.
Who's truly gonna decide?
The question is: who will make the most crucial political decisions in the close future? Contrary to appearances, it is not just the Sejm or the president – it is the real centres of power in Europe. Already today, many competences have been delegated to the institutions of the European Union, whose staff composition and the thought line are beyond our control. Poland, as a peripheral and little influential country, can increasingly only make decisions in Brussels, Berlin or Paris. Nevertheless, there is inactive a certain degree of self-reliance – especially in terms of culture, education or health. However, these remnants of sovereignty can be consumed by the EU over the next fewer years.
The plan for the next phase of the alleged "European integration" was presented on 22 November 2023 by the Committee on Constitutional Affairs of the European Parliament, which adopted a resolution on Treaty reforms. Among its main assumptions was the resignation of the rule of unanimity in the EU Council in 65 areas, including foreign, social, fiscal and environmental policies. It is besides envisaged to extend the scope of shared competences (i.e. those in which EU law prevails over national law) and to simplify the procedures for imposing sanctions for alleged infringements of the "lawfulness" (whose indebted ones, for what is "unlawful" is decided by the headquarters). If these changes are ratified – Poland will no longer have a real impact on key issues concerning its interior and abroad policy. It will lose the ability to aspire even to middleweight player status.
Proposals to extend the Union's competences in education and public wellness policies are peculiarly dangerous. This would mean organization rewriting the identity of future generations of Poles – not by national politicians, media or foundations, but through an educational strategy governed by the EU's ideological guidelines. The process, which has so far been extended for decades, has been carried out bottom-up and unevenly, now would be institutionalised and coordinated – from a transnational level. This would not only be symbolic, but a real end to the era of cultural sovereignty. The Polish cultural code – rooted in Christianity and national ethos – would first be relativized and then replaced by the ideology of progressive unification. All of this makes the concept of a "downstory of the system" not only an alarmist slogan, but a diagnosis of the situation in which Poland can find itself – if there are no fresh organization fuses.
In the case of Poland, ratification of treaty reforms depends, among another things, on the President's will. The head of state plays a key function in building a social consensus around specified fundamental changes. In an utmost situation, he can besides – like the modern Rejtan – refuse to sign documents, even at the price of triggering a serious constitutional crisis. But better specified a crisis than the peaceful and unreflective surrender of the remnants of Polish sovereignty into the hands of environments that want to impose on Poles abroad principles, values and lifestyles.
The triumph of Rafał Trzaskowski in the presidential election could importantly facilitate the adoption of a fresh version of the treaties, because, like Donald Tusk, he is an enthusiast of deeper integration and centralisation of the Union. In his case, there is besides a full array of kuglary pretexts by which he could convince an crucial part of society to support reforms. For example, it could call for faster decisions within the Union in defence matters in the context of the Russian threat – although the Treaty improvement concerns much broader and more controversial spheres than safety alone.
Such propaganda would easy be applied in the context of a possible referendum on this issue. Especially if the full state apparatus, public media and strong private media would operate in 1 choir, and the opposition had previously been pushed into the corner. A society without access to a fair debate could be effectively misled as to the actual nature of these changes.
An example? Unification of wellness policy in the EU does not seem to give emergence to emotion, but under this innocent name there could be practices specified as liberalisation of abortion law or regulations on alleged "sex correction" (i.e. mutilation) of minors, carried out without parental consent. This is not speculation: akin solutions have already been enforced in Western countries specified as Germany or Spain, as well as promoted by the European Commission in the alleged LGBT Equality strategy 2020-2025. A president from a conservative camp could effectively halt this process. And this is not just about temporarily blocking individual initiatives. At stake is the ability to defend the model of life we want to pass on to the next generation. In this sense, the election of the president comes not so much to the designation of the "guard of the chandelier" as a turning point: it determines whether Poland will have the strength to say "no".
Freedom Not for All
Our lives, however, are not decided solely by formal policy. Equally important, if not more important, is the social scenery and the hidden network of dependencies, interests and hierarchy. Liberal democracy – at least in its current form – is little and little like a strategy open to citizens and an increasingly institutionalised oligarchy. Under the guise of defending the "rights of minorities" and superficial inclusion, it promotes a model of a society in which real power is exercised by the wealthiest, most cross-linked and most influential. Behind the paravan of humanism, human rights and tolerance, soft, but effective social control is taking place, which increasingly passes into dense ideological pressure. This ideology – although dressed in a tongue of loud-sounding values – is frequently profoundly contradicted by human instincts, tradition, and common sense.
The problem is that the liberal strategy is in a state of exhaustion today: support for parties protesting its foundations is increasing, more and more people see its illusoryness, injustice and, above all, inefficiency. But that's what makes him dangerous. due to the fact that the more the ability to manage society softly decreases, the more eager it is to scope for strength solutions – legal, administrative, done by peculiar services. erstwhile the old ideology is not adequate to legitimize power, there comes a time for “crisis management” and manual control. This was the case with real socialism, and so it is increasingly common in the field of education, public wellness or identity policy. The largest beneficiaries of liberal order – large corporations, Eurocrats, financier, think-tanks, non-governmental organisations surviving from grants – do not want to lose control. That is why they are seeking to "open the system": to concrete it tightly adequate so that social discontent can no longer challenge its foundations.
The symptoms of the upcoming systemic changes have already been visible for respective years: creating liberal-left "sanitary cordons" around right-wing parties, blocking the candidacy of uncomfortable politicians (such as Marine Le Pen in France or Călin Georgescu in Romania), illegal actions aimed at opposition and favouring its media (AfD in Germany, PiS and Confederation in Poland), or politicising electoral commissions. All this can be considered any kind of test balloon. With the comparative passiveness of societies – dormant by effective propaganda – the liberal-left power goes on. The factions calling for the illegalisation of certain parties and independent media titles, supported by salon journalists and global digital corporations, are becoming increasingly stronger. In this way, we are moving towards a situation where universal elections will only become a façade ritual, without real meaning. In this context, the five-year presidency of Rafał Trzaskowski would supply an effective protective umbrella for further steps towards organization oligarchisation. As head of the armed forces, he could warrant the smooth course of these processes, safeguarding them from interference from a resisting society. The opponent of specified a transformation in the position of president – even if his influence was mainly formal – could be a real barrier and take the patronage over the expressions of social opposition.
Opposition pacification
As far-reaching actions aimed at opposition as those presently led by the Unienthusian liberal-left forces have no precedent in modern European history. They have achieved a mastery in giving common sense political forces the mouths of radicals and dangerous fanatics. At the same time, they can cheat unprivileged social strata, putting them into an elite that they are not – which results in voting against their own interests. However, in times of fast flow of information and ease of creating independent media, these "centres of illusion" are increasingly painfully confronted with reality, and the lie cannot last forever.
Moreover, liberal-left sanitary cordons are incapable to present a coherent, affirmative proposal for society, due to the fact that their interiors teardrop out the worldview differences. This forces their strategists to cover themselves with political games, in which another right-wing people are publically stigmatized and thrown to the impatience crowd. In specified a situation, the strategy must defend itself physically from anyone who notices and exposes its failure.
The president can counter this – not only as a guardian of the constitution or a superior of the armed forces, but besides as a individual with the right of grace and large social authority. Much depends on his personality and determination. Although president Andrzej Duda did not consider himself peculiarly decisive in this regard, his possible successor – more independent and assertive – is already a origin of concern in the salon environments of the elites, as evidenced by the media hysteria of November, directed, among others, by Antoni Dudek and leading "intellectualists" of the salon.
In summing up the facts cited: the election of Rafał Trzaskowski as president would indeed increase the chances of a “cloak of the system” no longer only in the impunity of the smiling coalition, which would hand over the remnant of power to the cosmopolitan progressives and revolutionaries. This would mean a permanent integration of Poland into an increasingly uniform EU-European landscape. This would lead to a further fast oligarchisation of the strategy in which the voice of citizens outside the urban economical and legal "elite" will be systematically marginalised, and any effort to make a public debate with a message unfavorable to the pro-European establishment – brutally pacified.
Louis Loop
