It can be understood that past is utilized by politicians for the purposes of current politics, but any limits of specified manipulation should nevertheless be. erstwhile I perceive to subsequent historical-political divisions of Mr. president Karol Nawrocki, I find that there are no specified boundaries.
During the 163rd anniversary of the January Uprising, attended by, among others, the president of Lithuania and the Ambassador of Ukraine, Karol Nawrocki said: “Besides Romuald Traugutt, priest Stanislaw Brzoski, our brothers Litwini and Rusini fought; and Żmudzi, and Vilnius. To this day, the symbols of these rallies and these fights remain, on the 1 hand, Sigismund Sierakowski, buried in Vilnius, and Wincenty Kalinowski, who awakened the Belarusian people until independence." And the second passage: “We are talking about history, we are talking about memory—but we are facing the times erstwhile the empire counterattacks. The Empire counterattacks and it is no longer Alexander I, nor Alexander II, nor Tsar Nicholas, it is no longer Joseph Stalin, but it is Vladimir Putin – a different Russia, but inactive in its mechanisms the same Russia".
Uh, in a fewer sentences, a fewer lies and half-truths. No Lithuanians, Belarusians, or Ukrainians fought on the side of the January Uprising. Just due to the fact that specified nations in today’s sense did not be then. "Lithuanians", yes, they did, but they were "Lithuanians" Poles, Catholic nobles, referring to the tradition of the First Republic. Not Lithuanians, represented by the current president of the Republic of Lithuania. The Lithuanian, Belarusian and Ukrainian national movement never referred to the tradition of the 1863 uprising, recognizing them as exclusively Polish, hostile to the emancipative aspirations of these fresh nations. The uprising in Russia was choked in a fewer days erstwhile the Ukrainian peasantry, supporting the Tsar, caught and murdered almost all insurgents. The passus of “Russian imperialism” and the mention of the Tsars Alexander I, Alexander II and Nicholas II are missed no less. The first one, the creator of the Polish Kingdom from 1815, was the most pro-Polish, Alexander II was not an anti-Polish imperialist – for the remainder of his life he could not forgive Poles that they destroyed his improvement program and alliance with France. Santa II must besides not be counted as sinister. If anything, Karol Nawrocki should name the German Catherine II or Nicholas I, but he chose – as the Russians say – "no price". Lansing an untrue legend of Kalinowski, Lithuanians or Belarusians fighting on the Polish side, he ‘forgets’ that the only real allies of this uprising were Russians – revolutionaries specified as Aleksander Hercen or Andrei Potiebnia, from whom the “Ukrainian” is now made, and who considered himself a Russian. A full of respective 100 Russian troops fought in insurgent troops. It is not by chance that during the period of the Polish People's Republic, the USSR ambassador laid wreaths at the failure Gate on each anniversary of the outbreak. But nowadays, I'm afraid to even think about it.
Jan Engelgard
Photo: KPRP profile on fb
The comment will besides appear in number 5-6 of Polish thought (1-8.02.2026)
