Recent Posts

Most Used Categories

Category: Political

You are Here :
Christian Witness, Perspective, PNCC, Political, , ,

Remembering the working man and woman when you vote

From Interfaith Worker Justice: A Guide for Faith-Based Voters — Vote Your Values 2008

This guide is meant to highlight issues of major importance for working people in the U.S. during this election cycle.

The prophet Amos spoke God’s word thus: —Let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like a mighty stream— (Amos 5:24). The foundation story of the Jewish faith is God’s liberation of His people from slavery in the land of Egypt. Further, the Bible commands us not only to give to the poor, but to advocate on their behalf. —Speak up, judge righteously, champion the poor and the [needy] (Proverbs 31:9).—

At the core of Christian belief is the vision of God lifting up the poor, the destitute, the homeless and the reviled. The Apostle Paul wrote, —Our desire is not that others might be relieved while you are hard pressed, but that there might be equality….Your plenty will supply what they need, so that in turn their plenty will supply what you need. Then there will be equality, as it is written: ‘He who gathered much did not have too much, and he who gathered little did not have too little.’— (2 Corinthians 8:13-14).

In the 2006 elections, —values voters,— men and women whose political choices are influenced by deeply held religious and moral values, were crucial in the outcomes of six successful state referendums to raise the minimum wage. In 2008 we face an economy in freefall, millions of homeowners in danger of foreclosure, many millions more unable to obtain health insurance who face economic ruin if they or a loved one gets sick, workers who cannot take a paid sick day to care for themselves or a family member, workers who are robbed of their wages, and the worst income inequality since 1929.

This voter guide highlights several issues that are clearly critical to working families but that often receive scant attention by the media and by candidates for federal office. Interfaith Worker Justice urges people of faith, and indeed all citizens of conscience, to consider these issues when they cast their votes for president and congress in November 2008.

  • Support the Right of Workers to Organize a Union —“ Pass the Employee Free Choice Act
  • Health Care for All
  • Stop Wage Theft
  • A Job Should Get You Out of Poverty, Not Keep You In It
  • We Need Comprehensive Immigration Reform
  • All Workers Need Paid Sick Days —“ Support the Healthy Families Act

From personal experience I can tell you that these issues are real. Things like wage theft do occur – and much more frequently then you would suspect. The abuses people thought had long passed, the horror stories from the early 1900’s, are just as real today: child labor, forced labor, wages so inadequate that workers must sleep in unheated boxes at job sites, the same workers provided with just enough money to eat. They keep working because there is no means of escape, and in hope of getting paid eventually. I have heard of migrant construction workers who are transported, fed, and housed by companies. They work 12 hours a day, 7 days a week. If they complain they are left at the side of the road, hundreds of miles from home, with no means to get home.

You may think they are illegals – they get what they deserve… Certainly not the way Christians should treat their bothers and sisters. Every human being deserves justice and fair compensation for his work. Hiring an illegal is not the basis for treating that person as a slave, nor is it allowance for breaking even more laws.

Deuteronomy 24:14-15 states:

“You shall not oppress a hired servant who is poor and needy, whether he is one of your brethren or one of the sojourners who are in your land within your towns;
you shall give him his hire on the day he earns it, before the sun goes down (for he is poor, and sets his heart upon it); lest he cry against you to the LORD, and it be sin in you.”

I encourage you to read the materials IWJ presents and that you give them due consideration.

Christian Witness, Perspective, Political

Fr. Frank Pavone misses the point

Through Christian Newswire: Fr. Pavone: Pulpit Under God’s Authority, Not Government’s

Fr. Frank Pavone, National Director of Priests for Life, commented today on the “Pulpit Freedom Sunday” that a group of pastors observed this past weekend, in which they spoke about the moral qualifications of candidates for public office, with a freedom that they maintain the IRS is wrongly taking from pastors.

“This effort is not about bringing politics into the pulpit; it’s about getting government out of the pulpit,” Fr. Pavone explained. “It should be Church authority, not government authority that determines the criteria for how pastors should address politics.”

“When a preacher goes into a pulpit, he does so under the command and authority of God, to preach God’s word. Now God’s word cannot really be God’s if the government can limit or censor it. Moreover, if preachers didn’t historically have the freedom to challenge government authority, we would have neither Christianity nor the United States of America,” Fr. Pavone pointed out…

There was much hullabaloo a week or so ago over freedom in the pulpit. Pastors wanted the freedom to comment on politics, political parties, candidates, etc. (but not really – they really wanted to make endorsements).

For more on this see the NY Times: I’m Your Pastor, and I Approved This Ad and from the IHT: Protesting pastors back candidates from the pulpit.

Fr. Pavone and his cohort say it is about freedom.

Fr. Pavone and those like him are so embroiled in politics that they cannot see the forest for the trees. In their comprehension everything is about politics and using political means to achieve the ends they seek. I think Fr. Pavone and the other pastors who championed this cause have forgotten who and what they are. They are not a business nor a corporation. They are not politicians, nor are they dependent on the political establishment for anything. Further, you do not need the government’s permission to comment on or challenge governmental authority. We do it all the time when we comment on greed, unjust war, abortion, capital punishment, euthanasia, or pretty much any biblical principal that is at odds with the government’s direction.

Of course Fr. Pavone could care less about his right to speak freely on these principals. This fight has nothing to do with freedom to teach. He, and those like him, would much rather toss their biretta into the political morass, cleaving onto candidates with endorsements from the pulpit.

I can just see Jesus doing that – come unto Me all who hunger and thirst, and vote Pharisee – they believe in the resurrection!

I suggest that Fr. Pavone go on a long retreat, best in a far away country, and that he break his addiction to politics. When he comes back he should teach the truth without fear. He doesn’t need to approve of any candidate (and none are a basketful of Christian principals anyway), he just needs to trust. Do not fear the government when at the ambon or in the pulpit. Fear God who will judge if you do not put faith and trust in Him. With Him all things are possible.

Christian Witness, Perspective, Poland - Polish - Polonia, Political

An officer of the court?

George Weigel posits a question in a column from The Pilot: CAMPAIGN 2008: Marriage, civility, persecution

Will the Catholic Church have to get out of the civil marriage business (i.e., priests no longer serving as officers of the court for purposes of validating a marriage)? Will Catholic marriages in the United States eventually resemble marriages in, say, communist-era Poland: a sad joke of a civil ceremony, followed by the liturgical ceremony?

At least in Poland people were honest enough to stop at the civil step if that was all they wanted.

Frankly I hope that such a turn of events does occur. Clergy should not be “officers of the court” for any purpose. We do not represent earthly government, nor should we align ourselves, or encumber ourselves, with the requirements governments put upon us. We should use great care in not equating the sacrament of marriage with a legal contract between two people (which is all a civil marriage is)Should we require that every civil contract between Catholics be blessed in a church. Can you imagine the fees from the lawyers and consultants… They’d be lined up for miles..

Such a move, getting the government out of the Church’s sacrament and the Church out of the government’s business of contract oversight, would only serve to bring a greater level of honesty to the whole process. The Church and couples should be free from the hypocrisy of it all — freedom from the notion that the Church is only a way point for marriage, later for the baby naming ceremony, later for the funeral.

I have seen faith filled couples come to church because that’s where they want to be. I have also seen people go through the motions, lying to themselves and to the Church for months, just for the pretty ceremony — the one grandma wants. Tens of thousands of dollars for lies and shame. Money that could be saved if only they had stopped by the local court, put down $10, and signed a contract. That was all they really wanted. If the word ‘sacrament’ passed through their minds for more than a millisecond I’d be surprised.

Let’s not make churches “officers of the court” as part of an elaborate faí§ade – filled with pretense and business opportunities for wedding consultants. Let’s not make the Church a party to corruption. Let those who come to Church come freely. When they come they will find the doors open to them, doors that open to a lifetime of faith.

As an aside, no Mr. Weigel, you don’t need a government ‘ceremony.’ It can be as simple as putting pen to paper, signing off on a legal agreement as it were. Why play make believe?

Frankly I think Mr. Weigel is full of beans. He cannot see beyond John Paul/Poland shrine he has built to the stuff John Paul really believed in. God’s Kingdom and His Church are greater than human folly.

Christian Witness, Perspective, PNCC, Poland - Polish - Polonia, Political, ,

Homogeneity, neighborhoods, the good life…

I found an interesting article at The Catholic Thing: Neighborhoods Thrive Throughout America wherein the author states:

—It is easy to see in this mutuality of obligation,— writes sociologist Andrew Greeley, —a continuation in the urban environment of the old peasant loyalties of village and clan.—

The Catholic immigrant experience proved that homogenous neighborhoods can enhance American urban life —“ quite a contrast the 1960s big-government social engineers who, in the name of urban renewal, turned many of them into municipal deserts.

I refer to this as the good life because this environment, the associations created therein, and as the author states, this “mutuality,” is part and parcel of God’s design for mankind. We are designed to grow in our understanding of our obligations toward each other. We are meant to act within a supportive and connected community, valuing our family and our neighbor (Luke 10:29). The good life is found in communities that build up and support the right aspirations of their members — aspirations founded in the Gospel and the teachings of the Church. The confluence of right teaching and communal membership forms a microcosm for teaching and passing on an understanding of our moral, social, and religious obligations.

From experience we know that such communities were not without their sins and shortcomings. That is where we all fall short. That said, we must not negate the greater value provided by those communities all-the-while rushing headlong into forced unanimity. As we have ventured into new, unexplored, individualistic territories, under the mask of unanimity, we have seen the fabric of society torn in numerous ways. As recent events tell we have all played the role of robber-baron in an attempt to claw to the top, enriching ourselves at the cost of family, community, and our nation’s treasure.

As our PNCC experienceThe author notes the growth of ethnic rather than territorial parishes in urban centers. The National Church movement was a key motivator in this arena. R.C. bishops were focused on homogenization, but homogenization into the culture, language, and traditions they personally espoused at the expense of people’s natural connections. demonstrates, the joining together of the component parts of the universal Church is not a denial of the Church’s universality, but rather a strengthening of its component parts – each offering its skills, talents, and abilities to the enrichment of the wider community.

Christian Witness, Perspective, Poland - Polish - Polonia, Political,

You can enjoy Poland, but…

An very nice article from a R.C. Seminarian who spent some time in Poland this past summer. Check out Summer Part I: Tertio Millenio Seminar in Krakow in Poland from his blog, The Law of the Gift.

An amazing history:

Poland certainly has an amazing history. It has played a great role on the world’s stage, a role that goes beyond the two or three sentences commonly taught in U. S. schools. It is unfortunate that students in the U.S. are so unfamiliar with Poland’s history, and that they have a rather narrow understanding of European history. Europe doesn’t stop at the norder of England, France, and Spain. That said, in reading the seminarian’s post I recalled something Dr. Ryszard Sokołowski told me before my first trip to Poland in 1991, “Do not overly romanticize Poland.”

Getting to the truth:

It is a half funny, half true statement. Can you imagine your typical American tourist going to Poland, expecting to be greeted by girls in Cracovian costumes, dancing the Polka, and feasting on pierogi every night; gallant men riding into battle every day with sabers at their sides…

Of course the seminarian is both an idealist and a questioner of the future. It is the advantage and disadvantage of youth. He sees churches filled, he sees a history of faith, he sees the great martyr nation, w jedności siła, and a hero in John Paul II. He also sees uncertainty ahead. I offer him the same caution Dr. Sokołowski gave me. Don’t over idealize it.

Polish history is filled with sins equal to the heroism, fragmentation equal to strength in unity, abandonment of religion equal to conversion. As a member of the clergy you have to look to and understand the culture — long term, but only as the backdrop for the struggles people face every day.

Seeing the Sheep:

Individual struggles have not changed very much. The opportunities for sin may be a bit different today, but at the core it is the same temptation. If we spend too much time looking at the big picture, the movements on the world stage, we miss the souls we are supposed to care for. How can we help people see the way today? Pointing to history is part of the equation, but the greater measure is found in pointing to the future, to our hope in Jesus Christ.

Applying the Gospel:

I appreciate the fact that he states:

[Krakow] provides an interesting context to study the social doctrine of the Church

This is true because the city offers a micro level lesson in the application of the Church’s teachings. We can learn from the witness of people who have lived through the application of the Church’s teaching, both in their heroism and their sin. We can learn from culture because God endows each nation with unique gifts and skills that benefit man’s journey back to Him. At the same time we must avoid the trap of assuming that Church teaching, including social teaching, is solely based on the experiences of a people. Rather, the Church’s teachings are a unified whole formed from the Gospel. The Gospel message applies universally; past, present and future, in Poland, this nation, and in every nation. Bishop Hodur understood that. The Church is here to lift men up to their true potential: intellectually, morally, and spiritually. The Church is key to the fulfillment of God’s plan for mankind. So we have to continually ask: Lord help me to lift your people up to You. Help me to see their gifts and their challenges.

Christian Witness, Perspective, Political

This, that, or the other thing (on political religion)

An interesting post from Catholic Eye: Becoming A Catholic Nation.

The problem with the argument is that it involves a sine qua non that places religion as key to governing.

The author cites a First Things article on the decline of ProtestantismAn interesting enumeration of the foundational elements in the American experience is found in Eric Kaufmann’s American Exceptionalism Reconsidered: Anglo-Saxon Ethnogenesis in the ‘Universal’ Nation, 1776-1850, European Institute, The London School of Economics and Political Science in which he concludes:

This paper has tried to illustrate that the United States was not an exception to the rule that nations are formed by core ethnic groups which later attempt to shape the nation in their own image. The American case betrays many of the same features that characterize other ethnic groups. These include: a sense of election (Puritan), a myth of exclusive genealogical descent (Anglo-Saxon), a set of cultural boundary markers (‘WASP’), a process of dominant-conformity (anglo-conformity), an association with a specific territory (United States/Frontier), a lifestyle representation (Yeoman) and a communal Golden Age (Jefferson’s Republic) to which the group seeks to return. Together, these elements formed the myth-symbol complex of the “American” ethnie. This ethnic structure, once crystallized, decisively shaped the reactions of the American nation for a over a century.

. He posits that Catholicism has assumed (is assuming) the role Protestantism once played in setting the moral tone and focus for the nation. He also cites Michael Gerson’s book Heroic Conservatism: Why Republicans Need to Embrace America’s Ideals (And Why They Deserve to Fail If They Don’t), connecting Catholicism’s emergence to its relationship with the Republican party.

If the sine qua non between religion and politics is true, then religion, faith, is little more than a subjective part of the human experience. The type of religion required for a nation’s existence is really irrelevant – as long as you have one. While classicists point to the role of religion as foundational to civilization I do not think you can carry that argument to the extent some believers do, equating religion as central to sustaining a nation’s political reality. We do not have the right to co-opt faith in that way. Government and the political order is a self-serving and self-preserving endeavor. It will use whatever tools are available, from religion to the military in order to maintain itself. While government can promote and restrict through its beneficence, that power does not equate with truth. While you may get “faith based” programs if religion serves those in power, you can just as easily get concentration camps if religion opposes the will of the political class.

Our Lord and Savior told us that we cannot serve two masters (Luke 16:13). Religion, tied to government, looses its center, its mission, and the truth found in its voice. The Bishop of Rome’s talk on the role of religion in the social order makes sense only when seen in light of faith speaking the Gospel regardless of political circumstance. In a society that is truly free religion should have equal footing with all voices; the protection of just laws. That said, we know that in times of injustice and persecution the Gospel cannot be silenced, but rather produces martyrs and confessors.

[French President Nicolas] Sarkozy openly argued that while secularism is important, it should not be a hostile force that forbids all talk of God, faith, and transcendence. Sarkozy called for a —positive laïcit闝 that allows religion to help forge an ethical society.’

It is —legitimate for democracy and respectful of secularism to have a dialogue with religions,— Sarkozy said at the palace with the pope. —That is why I have called for a positive secularism,— adding that —It would be madness to ignore [religion.]—

Pope Benedict reinforced Sarkozy’s words, and rephrased them rather more bluntly: —it is fundamental to become more aware of the irreplaceable role of religion for the formation of consciences and the contribution which it can bring,— the pope said.From Sarkozy, Pope Challenge French Secularism at PoliGazette

The voice of faith is beyond government, the political order, and the nation. Its life is apart from the world, in it, not of it (John 17:14-18), speaking and gathering according to its witness.

This nation, any nation, cannot have this religion, that religion, or the other religion. It cannot change affiliation and philosophical perspective like people change underwear, suiting the political winds of the times, and still expect to be thought of as proclaiming truth. The fact that exercises in doing so occur proves that government treats religion like a subjective good. If we are an objective good, the true sine qua non in the lives of men, then we must be outside and unaffiliated. speaking the Gospel in good times and bad, in freedom and persecution, under the Republic or the tyrant.

To the author’s argument, this country is neither Protestant or Catholic. Our Republic is simply a political reality. Our job is to speak the truth. Our task is to form our citizens in faith, to enlighten their intellect by His word and His way. God’s gift is that intellect, the intellect enlightened by truth, that sees beyond the lies and hypocrisy of the world. Unless we transform the lives of men we fall short of building the true Kingdom on a hill. That kingdom is not a nation of geography, political parties, and men, but is the Kingdom of God.

Perspective, Political, ,

EU Politics in religious terms

I found the following story from the Economist to be interesting: The heretical Czechs. The pragmatic skeptics who will have the next European-Union presidency.

On a 2007 visit to talk over EU affairs, the German chancellor, Angela Merkel, said the Czechs reminded her of modern-day Hussites—”followers of Jan Hus, who was burnt at the stake in 1415 for challenging the Roman Catholic Church. This was a shrewd observation, says Alexandr Vondra, a deputy prime minister. The Hussite movement was crushed amid bitter in-fighting, and the Czechs remained Catholic. But Hus remains a national hero, and his legacy helps to explain why Czech views of the EU differ from those of such neighbours as Germany or Slovakia. Mr Vondra suggests that Czechs think like —classic reformation countries—, such as the Netherlands or Sweden.

I actually enjoyed the way the author used religious imagery throughout this report on the E.U..

Perspective, Poland - Polish - Polonia, Political, ,

Poland and the Ukraine – Ethnic Animosity in the U.S.?

mobtown mafioso posted an interesting commentary on an ethnic festival recently held in Baltimore. See: Baltimore Ethnic Festivals- Bringing Genocidal Enemies Together

Yesterday, I went to Baltimore’s Ukrainian Festival. For you who do not know, it is the weekend every year where Baltimore’s Ukrainian population gathers together and celebrates the good parts of their heritage like quality beers, potato pancakes, and meat filled dumplings, but otherwise demonstrating a studied ignorance of the relevant parts.

What was particularly ironic was the decision to hold the Ukrainian festival in front of the Count Pulaski statue. What made this ironic was the large-scale massacre of Poles by Ukrainians during WWII…

Yet, despite this history, the Ukrainian festival featured Polish sausages and a booth for the Polish National Catholic Church. Like I said, Baltimore Ethnic Festivals bring genocidal foes together.

What I wonder is whether the author: Was making an observation as to the ironies of history; Believes that people are just ignorant of past wrongs and now, so informed, should regurgitate these wrongs so to bring about a state of frenzied dislike within the remainder of old ethnic communities; or Thinks that every ethnic festival should include a display covering the darkest chapters of that group’s history.

Certainly Poles and Ukrainians have had a long history, living side-by-side and together throughout history. There are things that unite and some things that divide, but on the whole the relationship with the westward facing portion of the Ukraine has been generally positive. The eastern Ukraine is another story, but that is because the east faces east – toward Russia. For more on this see this RFE/RL article: Analysis: Ukraine, Poland Seek Reconciliation Over Grisly History.

A relatively unknown fact was that there was a civil war in Poland following World War 2. The remnants of the Armia Krajowa (AK – Poland’s underground army in World War 2) fought against the communist takeover of Poland. Some of these battles were along the Polish-Ukrainian border with the remnants of Bandera’s Ukrainian Insurgent Army. Much of what the author writes about reflects the World War 2 and the post World War civil war period.

Going back to things that unite and divide, the author might wish to study the history of ethic communities in his city and in the United States. He might find that some animosities from the old county come into play among more recent immigrants, but even there it’s less likely nowadays. Most modern Poles don’t carry around these types of grudges because they see their reflection in the eyes of the Ukrainians, slightly east, slightly poorer. As some have told me, ‘What America was to us, is what we are to the East.’ On the other hand Polish-Americans and Ukrainian-Americans who are heirs of the older generations (the pre-World War 2 immigration) have shared a common struggle here in the United States, attempting to maintaining ethnic identity, cultural and religious ties, and joining a common fight against natavist racial stereotypes.

I say great for Baltimore and the Ukrainian festival with Polish flavor. What we share is more than what divides – including kiełbasa or ковбаса. Irony only exists if yesterdays battles retain their relevancy. I would prefer to enjoy my вареники and the highlights of Ukrainian culture without a serving of ethnic remorse.

Perspective, Poland - Polish - Polonia, Political

When you just don’t have the time

I read with interest an article at LRC by Peter S. Rieth entitled Oh, Me! Me! Shoot Me! A Summary of Contemporary Polish Foreign Policy

I agree with Mr. Rieth’s key point, but wholeheartedly disagree with the method he uses to get there.

In the article he states:

Of course, when speaking of something as abstract as “national psychology” or “the character of a nation,” it must be remembered that we are speaking in generalities verging on stereotypes; that there is no such thing in fact as a “national psychology,” because a “nation” is a mere historical construct; like “ethnicity” itself. Nevertheless, it is often useful to engage the archetype of a “national psychology” to explain certain tendencies in popular thought and action; that is to say —“ in politics. What, then, is it, about Polish national psychology…

Politics is all about painting your enemy, whether a person or philosophy, in the worst possible light. This article simply bathes in the top propagandist models aimed at supporting Mr. Rieth’s arguments. After exposing a great basis for his argument Mr. Rieth seems to loose focus and makes a broad appeal to the Natavist leftovers still so much a part of the American culture. It is the appeal to the “all Poles, dumb Pollacks, they got it with their mother’s milk” way of thinking. The article paints Poles as a corporate unity – all thinking, acting, and believing in the same way. Of course that argument appeals to his target audience especially when it is couched in Mr. Rieth’s brief allusion to ‘well I don’t mean everybody’ and ‘hey I’m a Pole too so I know what I’m talking about.’

His disavowal of stereotyping in the excerpt above doesn’t cut it. Mr. Rieth relies far too heavily on the idea of national consciousness, nationalism, national mythology, with a quick cross-reference to National Socialism throughout his article. He lost his way in writing this article when he failed to grasp the key point he made in saying: “…there is no such thing as a homogeneous understanding of human history.”

I have experienced the broad spectrum of Poland. It is old and new Polonia, it is cities and villages, conservative, moderate, and liberal. It is far from singular in its aspirations and thoughts. Its people are diverse and represent the best and worst in humanity, and everything in-between. Even for all its touted Roman Catholic conservatism its pew dwellers perceive even those matters differently.

What we can understand, and what would have made a better argument, is that governments make good and bad choices and that there are wise and poor leaders. We see flag waving, baby kissing leaders who fail to set a vision for the future as well as those with their sights on the future (take a listen to Lech Wałęsa when he speaks on the interconnectedness of societies, or Jerzy Surdykowski when he speaks on European history – the long view). We see leaders who sell the well being of their country on the cheap as well as those that stand on core principals. We see leaders who take the lessons of history into account in building policy and those whose history is nothing more than chauvinistic fantasy. Each country has its own mixture of these and heaven knows the U.S. has been plagued of late.

Mr. Rieth may want to attempt this exercise and develop an article on the national consciousness of the United States. What leads us to making such bad choices in leaders? Are we an amalgam of “keeping up with the Jones'” and to heck with everything important? It cannot be done, or at least not without too broad of a brush stroke. Those too broad brush strokes destroy the soundness of many an argument.

For my part I would encourage Mr. Rieth to rely on patience in building out his articles. He should avoid painting peoples in such a homogeneous fashion. In taking that route he is not serving intellectual curiosity, good journalism, or a sound call to change. He is just hurting his point: Poland sells itself on the cheap to the United States for the air of safety, one which doesn’t exist (see the Young Fogey’s citation of this article) and in doing so lessens its soundness and security.

The street, and the people of Poland get it, or at least a percentage of the population does. The same street moved away from the destructive tendencies of the Kaczynski twins. You cannot fool the population, in Poland, the U.S., or elsewhere forever, because enough of them see through the disguise. Sound arguments help in achieving better ends, in achieving political change. Please reconstruct your argument.

Media, Perspective, Poland - Polish - Polonia, Political

On Poland’s missle defense agreement

You can read lots of stories on this. The Weekly Standard has a good analysis (ok – basically neo-cons, but even neo-cons can make sense from time-to-time) in Poland’s New Missile Defense.

The first few articles I read yesterday, primarily from the Press in the United States, were so horrible, both historically and factually, that I wanted to correct a few of the inaccuracies and further extend and clarify their statements.

  • Poland will be a nuclear target (because of this new system). Sorry scary Russian General but that is just a fact and has been a fact for 50 plus years. Poland’s geographic position between the ill-named Warsaw Pact and NATO just made this so. Russia and the United States would have cleared Poland off the map in any conflict – and would do so today. Likely that Poland’s Warsaw Pact allies would have been the first to nuke it.
  • Poland is a Eastern European Country. It depends upon who you quote. The CIA Factbook puts Poland in Central Europe. The UN notes Poland as being in East Central Europe. Religiously Poland is Western European. Central European is a better term.
  • Poland has “traditionally [been] under Russian influence.” Only if your historical perspective is 200 years plus or minus, you believe that invasion is a welcome event, or you follow a Pan-Slavic philosophy. Poland fell under Russian “influence” several times, in the partitions of the late 18th century until World War I, during World War II when Russia and Nazi Germany cooperated in the invasion of Poland, and following World War II when Poland was involuntarily thrown under Russian control by its Allies (England and the United States). Influence is also a poor choice of words. Better to say control. Those Russian ‘influences’ were not welcome.
  • Poland was communist. Technically and historically correct but misleading. It’s like a reporter stopping at saying that the United States was an English Colony. Poland was more than that and wasn’t a communist country by its own choice. The statement is not reflective of what Poland was and is in a larger context.

Of course no Press outlet will take notice of my corrections and clarifications, but there you are.

All Right Reserved © 2005 - 2023