Talk:Self-Defense of the Republic of Poland
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Is the partys program nationalist, I've never hard them say about anything related to nationality?
- Their current program is not nationalist, it's similar to social democratic, but its intelectual quality is lower than poor, it's inconsistent and unrealistic. Samoobrona is just a bunch of populists who will tell each group of people what that group wants to hear, even if that leads to condradicting statements. E. g. when they're talking to better educated people in the cities, they portray themselves as tolerant, modern leftist party, but when they're talking to some uneducated people in the country, they sometimes use nationalistic and anti-semitic slogans. It only depends on the audience they're talking to at the moment. MarcoosPL 18:25, 3 October 2005 (UTC)
The party is left wing. I don't know why it was ommitted from the article. Is it becasue it allied itself with the twins?
[edit] Samoobrona - a "socialist" party?
I really fail to understand what is Samoobrona has populist pro-welfare state positions, but its background is in agrarian lobbyism, not socialism suppose to mean, the two aren't mutually exclusive in any way. Are you saying that only parties based on directly on the PZPR can be described that way.
I'm afraid You're either completley ignorant of political scene in Poland (in which case You really shouldn't be making edits here) or You're intentionally trolling (and unfortunately You're aggresive retheoric seems to confirm the later). --212.76.33.89 19:35, 14 December 2005 signature added, --Thorsten1 21:13, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
- First of all, welcome 212.76.33.89, and thank you for explaining your motivation for your edits. I had overlooked your post above, since it appeared at exactly the same minute as your edit of the article, and so it did not appear on my watchlist. For this, I apologize.
- Let me briefly explain why I disagree. It seems we are simply using different definitions of the term "socialist". You said that "socialism" and "populist pro-welfare state positions" (my words) are not "mutually exclusive in any way. They are certainly not, but neither are they mutually causative, as you seem to believe. I.e., the presence of the latter does not sufficiently justify categorising an organization as the former. Socialism is one of the three large political ideologies that emerged in Europe in the 19th century (the other two being liberalism and conservatism). There is also nationalism, which is rather a 20th century phenomenon, and the even more recent Green movement. These currents have their current presentation in the form of parties or similar political organizations in most, if not all European and many other countries worldwide, even if the strengths of the respective parties very much vary. Additionally, there are certain parties which cannot be unambigiously or at all attributed to any of these currents or ideologies, and are often specific to one or several countries. In Poland, the agrarian Polskie Stronnictwo Ludowe is such a case; Samoobrona is a similar case. Samoobrona undisputedly adopted certain characteristics (and individual members) of nominally socialist/social-democratic parties, but that does not mean that it became such a party itself. The party's defining element remains populist agrarian/lower class lobbyism without any coherent ideological foundation. After the 2005 election, which marginalised the traditional left, it is not at all impossible that Samoobrona will gradually take over its functional role, at least for a certain period. Whether a party that fills the vacuum left behind by the implosion of a socialist party can be called "socialist" on this grounds is open to debate; but it is much too early for this debate. At the moment, there is no real basis whatsoever for categorising Samoobrona as "socialist". Neither does the party have any historical background in, or any notable personal continuity with, the socialist movement, nor is it a member of the Socialist International or the Party of European Socialists.
- Certainly, if we stretch the definition far enough, one could also include Law and Justice or the League of Polish Families under the heading "socialism", due to their vague pro-welfare message and skepticism of the free market. Even the National Socialist German Workers Party could arguably be counted as "socialist", not only due to its the name, but due to its message - and it attracted significant portions of the electorate of the SPD and KPD, too. However, here on Wikipedia, we simply do not use such loose definitions or apply categories to things that cannot be backed up with previously existing and established research. There is a strict rule called "no original research", and using new or unconventional categories for things is original research. This is supposed to be an encyclopedia, and not a place for political essayism.
- Finally, a formal request: Please sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). This will automatically create a signature with your IP address and a time stamp, so we can trace who said what and when. I would also recommend you obtain a personal user name. This has several benefits, not only if you would like to contribute on a regular basis. We can also judge your expertise, and how legitimate your statements and accusations (such as "childish", "completley ignorant" or "intentionally trolling") are, in the light of what else you contribute. --Thorsten1 21:13, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
-
- To begin with there's really no reasonable doubt that that the NSDAP was a socialist party.
- Both PiS and (especially) LPR, have socialist elements in their programs. The diffrence between them and Samooborna however is that while the former don't openly admit it, instead describing themeselves as a social party or other such terms. Samoobrona on the other hand openly declares itself as socialists public saying things such as "we are the modern left", "we, socialists". In the presidential and parliamentry campaign this party has itself admited to being socialist so it strikes me as to try to deemphesize and downplay this fact, even though it's bluntly obvious from reading the program included in this article. None of this is my original research it has all been covered by mainstream Polish media such as TVN, Rzeczpospolita, OZON, Wprost and many, many others during the past few months.
- Finaly, the argument about historical continuity and historical background strikes me as particulary weak. They could just as well have arrived from Mars yesterday, that doesn't in any way prevent them from adhering to stupid ideologies. Nor does being a socialist require recognition from other socialists. if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck...
- 212.76.33.87 21:45, 14 December 2005 (UTC)
-
-
- ....but it doesn't mean it's a duck
- --84.26.109.69 13:59, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
-
Samoobrana/NSDAP is/was a PATROTIC PARTY,over all.Lepper/Hitler is/was a great leader and a working class heroDzoni 14:05, 14 April 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Regarding an Accusation
Accusing the League of Polish Families to be an extremist organization, the user:Piotrus, also known as the "Prokonsul," and having shown many times to be an expert on matters concerning Poland on English Wikipedia, states that Self-Defense of the Republic of Poland, is also an extremist organization. Is this a correct assessment? Dr. Dan 19:09, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- Please point out where I have made such accusation.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 17:46, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
-
- On November 8, 2005, you stated in the opening line of Żydokomuna, that this organization was not only extremist but anti-Semitic. You are also the author of this peculiar article. Dr. Dan 05:05, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
- See, Dr. Dan, I was just translating the Polish Wikipedia article, and as I had no sources to defend the translation, I had no problems with the term extremist being removed soon afterwards by another editor (this also thought me to be careful translating articles from Polish Wikipedia, which is habitually underreferenced). Thus please stop misinterpreating other's actions: I did not call those organizations extremist, I merely translated a source that said this. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 05:56, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
- On November 8, 2005, you stated in the opening line of Żydokomuna, that this organization was not only extremist but anti-Semitic. You are also the author of this peculiar article. Dr. Dan 05:05, 20 January 2007 (UTC)