for fb:
Marcin Dybowski ·
Watch
January 22 at 22:23 ·
The following I directed to JKM, for he again showed his inaccuracy about the January Uprising. Quoting JKM: "The anniversary of the outbreak of the most moronic 'national' uprising - in protest against the threat of the demolition of the serfdom (in Russia already abolished). The peasants didn't fall for it and the captured insurgents seemed to the Russians. Even the Pope condemned this moronism harshly. A II and III of the Polish Republic praise"
My answer:
Are you an idiot???
1. It was not adequate that it did not give ownership to the individual peasant – due to the fact that "propriety" was obtained only by agrarian commune, not by a peculiar individual (i.e. a peasant who moved or disappeared another work outside this village lost ALL) that tsaric, Russian (and so better than Polish for the Lord) property active paying the Tsar's instalments of "purchase" until the 1920s, and in any provinces even in the 1930s!
2. Thus made/ botched Russian "propriety" for agrarian communes, without giving ownership in Russia to peasants, in no way generated in this layer behaviour and anti-revolutional, pro-capitalistic or freedomal tendencies. With this, Lenin's slogan “earth and peace” could later hit specified susceptible ground. It was on the basis of the enslaved, crazed agrarian component (because the working layer was besides modest to win the “proletariat”) that the successful Lenin Revolution took place.
It was our 19th-century thatchism over a 100 years before Thatcher freed the British from socialist myths precisely by applying the same mechanics – the dissemination of property. The difference was that she didn't do it until the end of the 20th century, and with the apparatus of a state that the British didn't lose to strangers.
The Lord of this "obviously" in his ignorance and inconceivably does NOT see – how dare I direct it to the Lord, it is (hatefully and unreasonably despised by the Lord) Polish achievement, and it is not Russian, which the Lord would have loved just due to the fact that it would have been czarski or even Russian even if it were, as it is, contrary to apparent facts.
The greatness of this ugly Lord, the Polish uprising, is not about countless fightings, battles, struggles, but about what these struggles were done – it was about the fact that with the expropriation decree of the Provisional National Government to drag in bleeding, even crawling with the last breath in the chest, to another pleban and from another Polish pulpit, the Polish voice to shout out that the erstwhile lease of land ends, and its tenants become owners and that they will owe it to POLSCE and POLAKOM, their brothers, alternatively than RUSJI or RUSY CAR!!!
And the Lord, in his complete ignorance of this substance and in his foolish philocaric, anti-Polish, a historical blindness spits on the large Polish owners, who, thanks to this act of giving up their property to others, make them darkened with a stupid uprising and how complete the IDIOTA you make them State Defenders???????????? Here you must usage the word you are happy to usage towards others, Mr IDIOTA!!!
The nonsense which you compose about the January Uprising, the misunderstanding of the fundamental meaning of the REPEATING OF PROPERTY, the maintenance of all, this tiny and large property in the Polish hands, makes a mark of the question about which schools you attended, what cognition you received and Why do you share specified knowledge, which would not be ashamed of Adam Michnik's mommy, writing in her communist textbooks for Poles akin kompała!!!
I have a trace of hope, but I hope that erstwhile you look at the issue of the spread of ownership and implantation of this property of Poles in the second half of the 19th century, it will let you in a different position to look at our resilience against what happened in the future in Russia in 1917, where this chance to spread ownership, in the crucial for the success of the peasant revolution, was wasted by the Tsar and Russia, and later you will realize the dependence of Poland's triumph in 1920 on what for all right-wing man is holiness – property that was in those hands and not another hands!
Encyclopedya Staropolska
January 22 at 10:37 ·
On the subject of the erstwhile XVI-XVIII-century nobility there are many stupid myths. Most of them are the aftermath of the Marxist slur in Polish history, which was large before planet War II, after which it became almost a religion for many years, and in the III Rzeczpospolita small was done with it, especially in the context of school education.
One of the top follies to be introduced into the human minds of the people's labor-smarts is the simplified perception of the property position of the erstwhile nobility.
And so: until today, in the common image of all noble (or at least most) was a rich man sleeping on gold, having at his disposal dozens of peasant-slaves carrying out the stupidest even orders. specified a script (like a fairy tale about a bad wolf or legend about Robin Hood) appeals to imagination, so it carries and anchors easily.
How was it in reality?
In fact, in the Republic of Both Nations It was dominated by tiny nobles, a homestead, without own kmiecies, working alone and utilizing mercenaries.
A nobleman who physically lives on a farm all day, surviving in a modest cottage on an increase called a manor house, and who does not, in principle, have any higher care institution to which he could appeal in case of problems - this is simply a real image of the Polish nobleman of the 16th-Xth century.
For me, the old nobles have always associated with modern tiny entrepreneurs - sleazy, forced to carry out increasingly fresh duties towards the state, trying to someway keep their business in order to feed themselves and their employees.
Meanwhile, the image of a magnate - specified in the erstwhile Republic of Poland - was applied to the image of an average coat of arms. They reached a peculiar position in the 18th century. Disgusting oligarchs wielding vast areas of earth, affecting national politics, having private armies.
Within the state, possibly a fewer percent.
It's like looking at the mediate class present (whatever that means) through the prism of people specified as Kulczyk, Solorz or Przyszka. How much does that make sense? I'll leave that to you.
***
Encyclopedia Staropolska is simply a task that integrates lovers of the Republic of Poland Both Nations.
If you value my work, you can financially support me in 3 ways:
Through the Patronite portal:
With the "Channel Support" option on YouTube
By voluntary payment to the account with the "gift" note (please contact us by email to darek@encyclopedya.pl)
Look at my YouTube channel, too. Hello!
Marcin Dybowski ·
Watch
January 22 at 22:23 ·
The following I directed to JKM, for he again showed his inaccuracy about the January Uprising. Quoting JKM: "The anniversary of the outbreak of the most moronic 'national' uprising - in protest against the threat of the demolition of the serfdom (in Russia already abolished). The peasants didn't fall for it and the captured insurgents seemed to the Russians. Even the Pope condemned this moronism harshly. A II and III of the Polish Republic praise"
My answer:
Are you an idiot???
1. It was not adequate that it did not give ownership to the individual peasant – due to the fact that "propriety" was obtained only by agrarian commune, not by a peculiar individual (i.e. a peasant who moved or disappeared another work outside this village lost ALL) that tsaric, Russian (and so better than Polish for the Lord) property active paying the Tsar's instalments of "purchase" until the 1920s, and in any provinces even in the 1930s!
In a long time I have not read the stupider and so lying, and the opinions expressed in respective sentences about the January uprising. erstwhile again, you have shown complete inaccuracy in historical matters. This is all the more sad due to the fact that it deals with property issues, and thus fundamental to the right-winger you think you are.
1. It was not adequate that it did not give ownership to the individual peasant – due to the fact that “ownership” was obtained only by agrarian communes, alternatively than individual persons (i.e. peasants carrying out or another work outside this village lost ALL) – this tsaric, Russian (and so better than Polish for the Lord) property active paying the Tsar the instalments of “purchase” until the 1920s, and in any provinces even in the 1930s!2. In this way the Russian "propriety" for agrarian communes, not giving ownership to the boys in Russia, did not in any way produce in this layer the anti-revolutionary preserves and clones, pro-capitalist, free and password Lenin's "earth and peace" could later hit susceptible ground and just on the basis of the enslaved, crazy agrarian life (because the working layer was besides modest to win the "proletariat") came to a successful Lenin Revolution.
Fix only the diacritic characters do not change anything else in this text:
3. That's the difference.
This caused that the Polish peasant, becoming an individual owner, was on his own and what was his Bronil, changed his attitude towards all left-wing ideas about "common ownership", "revolution", etc., etc.
It was our 19th-century thatchism on above A 100 years before Thatcher freed the British from socialist myths precisely by applying the same mechanics – the spread of ownership. The difference was that she didn't do it until the end of the 20th century, and with the apparatus of a state that the British didn't lose to strangers.
Our Polish, Lithuanian, Russian nobility in the erstwhile Polish lands (and so on) owners whose alleged Lord should defend and their prominent function in civilization, said the Lord should emphasize) did not only over a 100 years before, but did NOT HAVE its own statehood and in general the apparatus of the state on its side, paying for it not only the failure of part of its property to the benefit of My neighbor, but paying for it with your own blood!!!
The Lord of this "obviously" in his ignorance and indiscretion does NOT see—how dare I expound it straight to the Lord, that is (hatefully and unreasonably despised by the Lord) the achievement Polish, a It's not Russian that you would just love Because It would be czarski or even Russian even if it were, as it is, contrary to apparent facts.
The size of this hideous Lord, the Polish uprising, is not about countless fightings, battles, struggles, but about what these struggles were done – the aim was to drag the Provisional National Government with a decree of embezzlement, even crawling with the last breath in its chest, to another pleban and to shout out from another Polish pulpit, the Polish voice that the erstwhile lease of land ends a its tenants become owners and that they will owe it to Poland and POLAKOM, their to brothers, and NOT RUSI OR RUSIAN CAR!!!
And you, in your complete ignorance about this subject and in your stupid philocaric, anti-Polish, ahistorical blindness, spits on the large Polish Owners, who, thanks to this act of surrendering their property to others, make them darkened with a stupid uprising, and how complete IDIOTA do you make them Protectors of the State?????????????????? It is here that you must usage the word that you willingly usage towards others, you are an idiot!!!
5. To this day in Latin America, large landowners, despite having their own state, are incapable to share this property with the poor, even though they are Christians, even though they are not threatened by any blood flow, are NOT able to share their property with the owners, the poor, who - on ours and those owners of misfortune - feeds revolutionary facilities of various Bolshevik formations and communist liberation theology. And it would suffice if they did not gotta make an uprising simply to divide their property and to give these scars even to the tiny part of what they have, by saving their countries from the left-wing plague OF DISCOVERED WLASTICS into the likeness of the Poles of the 19th century, like Thatecher, would seem to even like the postulates raised in a magazine "Highest Time", which you should most likely know, unless you feed readers erstwhile a cutting from 1 trough (a private property) and erstwhile poisons a seed from another anti-Polish trough (Poles as owners are morons and request to be ashamed of the Polish achievements and history).
7. You pretend, Does he not truly realize that the boy of the Polish boy who went to the mill was already in the first generation, after the uprising you spit on, little susceptible to left-wing slogans due to the fact that his father was already owner of a part of land and he was already the boy of the owner???? And even the fresh leftist political parties, which were created on the lands of the Kingdom of Poland, even though they were left-wing, were due to the fruit of the January Uprising, which was the ENCOURAGEMENT of Wlasności, were not so revolutionary and so crazy Bolshevik. Therefore, KPP or Roza Luxemburg did not enjoy any interest and was considered an agent, not a Polish person.
I have a trace. hope, but However, I have that erstwhile you look at the issue of popularization of property and instillation of this property of Poles in the second half of the 19th age, To you in a different perspective, look at our resilience against what happened in the future in 1917 in Russia, where this chance to spread ownership, in the key to the success of the peasant revolution, was wasted by the Tsar and Russia, and later you will realize the dependence of Poland's triumph in 1920 on what for all right-winger is holiness – property that was in time in These, not these. another hands!
