The aim of the article is to trace and compare the views of Roman Dmowski and Jan Stachniuk on the problem of the defects of the Polish nation – which they think are causing alternatively than civilization – and to show these views in the light of the spiritual attitudes of both thinkers.
The main issue here is not so much about the nature of national attributes - whose catalogue in both cases is very akin - as their origin and social scope. In short, Dmowski considered them to be the flower of the nobles (caused by the serfdom system) who, due to the political dominance of this state, became the participation of another layers. Stachniuk, on the another hand, considered the same disadvantages to be national and their sources to be seen in the “Polish ideology of the group”.
Paradoxically, Dmowski's views on this substance become most readable after learning about Stachniuk's works. The problem is, that the creator of the intention with the issue of national disadvantages more widely and straight addressed almost exclusively in his early works, with The thoughts of a modern Pole at the head of the case, elsewhere, treating it randomly, marginally or even by default. In contrast, Jan Stachniuk made it the basis of his thought, and devoted almost all of his writing work to this matter, and in uncovering out the reasons for this, he created an first historiosophy. So, what Stachniuk does occupy full volumes and is excavated in a systemic way, in Dmowski it is only background, and it is frequently essential to extract his opinions on this subject from the arguments concerning seemingly another matters. At the same time, it is absolutely clear that it was the views and writings of Dmowski that stimulated the reasoning and writing of the younger man by 41 years of Stachniuk, who repeatedly recalled the erstwhile in his texts. It should be argued, therefore, that the thought of the creator of the Second in relation to Dmowski's thought was developed according to the rule of induction, due to the fact that what the creator of the Endection mentioned in item – the second developed into a general system. Taking into account Stachniuk's own work, it should be said that they were based on the same principle, due to the fact that early works were based on detailed observations and observations to later become lectures of general theories, according to the key "from economics to historiosophy and philosophy". So in The Heroic Community of the Nation describes the current state of Polish civilization in terms of economy and economy, in No History the reason for Slavic myth indicate postulated economical and systemic exit methods. We in Stachniuk will be especially curious in the work phase The past of non-life and Christianity and humanity, and the earlier edition of “Zapuga”.
Jan Stachniuk devoted peculiarly much space to Christianity and its function in shaping the national character of Poles, which became its hallmark, so a comprehensive presentation of his view on this substance requires a separate message covering besides the fields of philosophy, social psychology, economics, political science, past of Poland and the world, as well as the past of religion.
So it will only take us here to relate national traits to a spiritual factor, mainly Catholicism.
Roman Dmowski, on the another hand, made only comments about religion and Catholicism in any places, clearly not wanting to talk openly. An exception is the brochure Church, nation and state, which in itself is rather ambiguous and around which many myths and misinterpretations have arisen. So Dmowski noticed and wondered about the collapse of civilization of Poland and was bound by express verbis with intellectual attitudes of Poles, calculating moralism, aestheticism, false humanitarianism, suffering. On the another hand, he saw the alleged "Christian values", but he did not decision to combine both syntaxes, and on this basis Jan Stachniuk did – which in itself is besides the support of the above-mentioned thesis about the inductivity of his works towards Dmowski's works.
One of the reasons for the differences between the 2 thinkers is their different generational experiences, due to the fact that the ideologist of the ideals created at a time erstwhile the function which nationalists would like to delegate to the Church has not yet decided. While remaining in part religiously indifferent, they created concepts of dual ethics, i.e. national ethics and Christian ethics about separated fields
applications (1). It was only in time that nationalistic ideas were gradually adapted to the requirements of the Christian worldview to accomplish synthesis in the form of "national-Catholic" thoughts. Stachniuk, on the another hand, acted at a time which fell after the publication of the brochure Church... erstwhile the "Christian nationalism" was mentioned and ideas of the "new medieval" were created. These were reflected, for example, in the concepts of Adam Doboszyński, rejecting industrial progress, for which the Christian thought was the starting point (2). In specified a climate, Stachniuk, who placed a large emphasis on the improvement of the civilization of Poland, who considered the nation to be absolute, recognized the emanations of the national movement as an agent of the “Vatican international”. The very designation of the nation as an object, object and absolute intent was recognized by the Christian thought as pagan (3).
Another origin of different accents is the different nature of the activity.
The sharper face of Stachniuk's criticism stems from the fact that this, unlike Dmowski, was not an active politician. Dmowski, on the another hand, had to deal with the current situation and possibly to speech his own statements, avoiding final conclusions. Stachniuk was fundamentally an ideology and a theoretician, and his works in his series form a intellectual strategy aimed not so much to correct, as to completely rebuild social attitudes, and thus to completely rebuild the Polish state. It cannot be amazing that the criticism of the conditions taken by Stachniuk turned against Christianity in a way far more clear than the conjecture of the reader any remarks made by Dmowski, since, as Jan Skokyński pointed out, Christianity was previously criticized by poets, philosophers, writers, and economical activists, nobody in front of Stoogniew (4) undertook specified strong and frontal criticism (5).
Nationalists of the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries and the Church
In order to realize the views of Dmowski and Stachniuk on the issue of national disadvantages, their origins, scope and effects, it should be considered that the first problem here will be to establish the beliefs of both authors concerning the relation between religion and the nation and the character of the individual.
So we said that it was the generational experience that shaped Roman Dmowski's views, and it was at a time erstwhile the national movement had not yet developed a uniform policy towards the Church and Catholicism itself. This is confirmed by the publications of the camp, which described itself as “democratic-national”, which raised difficulties. in determining the appropriate position inreligious and ecclesiastical matters, more so that in today's situation our partyship, aiming to include its full national interests, must, on the 1 hand, search to defend the so powerful basis of socio-national existence, namely religion and the national Church, while on the another hand, to guarantee that the designation of religion and its protection do not change into spiritual slavery,
the intellectual advancement of society. In designation of this difficulty, our direction has so far deliberately avoided defining his position in spiritual and ecclesiastical matters, limited only to making it clear that he stands on the ground of defending the interests of the Catholic Church in Poland against attacks by abroad governments(6).
This text dates back to 1903, and earlier nationalists have repeatedly spoken on this issue. This was besides done by Jan Ludwik Popławski, whom Dmowski considered to be the first of the “creators of the fresh national movement”(7).This pioneer treated Catholicism in purely obtuse terms, not to say: instrumentally, erstwhile he wrote that Rome was a higher institution for Poles, independent of the possessive rule, thanks to which the Polish case maintains an global character and so “our Poles with Catholicism, and necessarily with Roman Catholicism, connects not only spiritual interest with papal Rome, but above all political interest”(8). If this is insufficient to convince us of the character of Popławski's policy towards the Church, let us follow this author:
We may and may have good reasons to be dissatisfied with his politics, we should boldly and firmly counteract it if it harms our national interests, if it sacrifices it for the interests of Catholicism, wrongly or even rightly understood. But breaking up with Catholicism, breaking up with Rome would be equal to today's national suicide.(9).
Even this last sentence, despite the seemingly expressed loyalty to the Church, is in fact simply a confirmation of the hierarchy of the author's value of these words, in which the national policy is at the summit, and it is in concrete conditions which serves with Catholicism. Moreover, specified declarations, aimed at linking Polish national interests to the politics of the Church, issue
the consequence of a somewhat earlier reflection and the opinions and concerns about the future direction of this policy. He wrote Popławski that the politics of the Catholic clergy towards Polish national aspirations, conducted in practically all occupations, took an undesirable shape. The origin of this is to lead by a higher hierarchy "an own, independent policy, which we call clerical, Catholic, ultraviolet, ecclesiastical diversity, but which is in fact the same in all countries..."(10). This policy, on the another hand, was then intended to full subordinate all political interests – and in all countries – to the interests of the Church. In fact, in Popławski's view, it was to lead the Church to take the helm of politics in each country "and to adapt inherently contradictory and divergent national and social aspirations for its exclusive purposes" (11). Thus, the creator of Polish nationalism predicted that "this must necessarily origin clashes and protests and lead to the fight against the Church no longer governments, but nations or separate social groups"(12). Reserving that, in Polish conditions, especially in Russian and Prussian partitions, specified a fight would be dangerous, he urges that "all efforts must be made to prevent it, the relation between the clergy and the people must be assessed calmly and impartially, and the likely consequences for the parties of both the breach of the existing communication"(13). A small further to devoid of all illusions, he explains on what grounds this communication flourished:
The position of highly influential in our society gained the church with the inflexibility of principles and conduct, its categorical "non possumus". In fact, it is rather common to think that they owe to the piety of the general public. As a consequence of the properties of the Polish national temperament, piety cannot be very ardent and profound, and the raising of the temper of Catholic zeal is mostly attributable to political influences, namely the function of the church andclergy in the national conflict with possessive governments(14).
Sometimes, however, opposition to church policy was expressed very strongly:
Today, however, erstwhile Kurya's politics became more diplomatic and reconciled, erstwhile in the Prussian election we already see the disastrous effects on our nationalities, the naive belief that Rome will never and nothing neglect our expectations and hope—would be a sin towards the nation(15) [or even as he called out]Popławski:] we are fed up with this hypocrisy of the wicked, these Roman scurvy and the Jesuit scurvy, this diplomat, pact in matters of religion and conscience, this clerical cosmopolitanism(16).
However, the speech was mild and nationalists developed a policy towards the Church, so that in 1903 – the same way we started the article – to announce in the political programme that:
(b) establish the rule of public control over the politics of church authorities and the conduct of civilian clergy, which must be governed by all national institutions;
act by making our national affairs dependent on the views of church politics, which union(d) establish the clergy for the widest possible national work in civilian ranks together with another members of society, leaving the Church a separate political origin only in spiritual and ecclesiastical matters(17).
The views of Roman Dmowski and Jan Stachniuk on the function of Catholicism in the nation, past and its influence on the individual
The above words clearly show how the nationalists of the early 20th century saw the Polish people's connection to the Church and Catholic religion. Roman Dmowski besides at that time regarded “Christianism” as a religion of individuals and humanity understood as a collection of individuals. It evolved in an environment that was not a nation, at the time erstwhile the institution of the state collapsed, and with it civic virtues and the concept of Homeland. The unit then operating, after breaking all social threads, was "a lonely, erroneous, devoid of all control in life." Christianity then shaped individual morality – individual in relation to God, neighbor, self(18). At the same time, Dmowski acknowledges that ethics, called “the ethics of neighbor's love”, “the ethics of altruism” and moral principles developed by it are incompatible with the nature of man, with the self-preservation instinct of the individual. Moreover, how desirable a moral canon cannot foretell all possible relationships between people and ethical issues created by them. The algorithm of conduct can be drawn from it, but only between individuals. The attitude of individual to nation and nation to nation lies in fact outside the sphere of Christian ethics"(19). So, like older nationalists, he demarcated the fields of Catholicism and national issues, especially erstwhile he criticised “Catholic legitimacy” many years later, which understood the work to conduct policies in accordance with Vatican guidelines(20). This detailed example he dressed in general rule that distinguishes the Church from the politics of the Holy See, for
The Church for Catholics is simply a power which in the things of religion is bound by ruthless obedience. Vatican policy is simply a human thing, like all human thing, not error-free [...]. The most Catholic state has a work only to connect with it, unless it is contrary to the welfare of the state and nation(21).
He so believes that higher aspirations require real action, here and now, in place of – as he writes with irony – "pray to past and future Poland in chapels" (22). In spite of that, he besides throws that alongside antacidism, the danger to national politics may be drowning in religion and philosophy, as thoughts separated from life (23).
It was only in the “Church, nation, state” that Dmowski expanded the function of Catholicism in national life, so that not only the current policy and diplomacy was measured by the attitude of nationalists to Catholicism. For he besides admitted to him, and possibly above all an crucial function in shaping the desired types of character of individuals forming a nation. He states that, according to Jesus' teaching, "it does not appear ... that the Church should stand outside worldly affairs, confined only to the truths of faith" (24). He besides described the deepening of spiritual indifference among all social strata in all the countries of Latin civilization, the retreat from Christianity of the older generation while at the same time turning to the “religion of freedom” and occultism on the 1 hand, and the always clearer return of the young generation to religion on the other. “All these facts,” he writes, are of paramount importance to the nearer and further future of nations” (25). The function of the Church was to be highlighted in the beginning of the historical past of Poland, erstwhile it was in cooperation with or against a young hub country.
He worked for the soul of the individual, brought her closer to maturity, educated her conscience, destroyed the original, obstructing social instincts, repaired customs [...] formed a strong family(26). [To this day, the conduct] of the average man depends on the upbringing of history, for generations, in the customs and institutions in which these generations lived, under which their social instincts were created, and on his individual upbringing in the household and in school. From the position of the Church, therefore, the primary is what the customs of society are, what state institutions and others, what their moral impact on the population, what is at last the upbringing in the household and what in school(27).
But can we truly conclude from the statements contained there that their author’s clear spiritual attitude is true? It seems that not, but the mythological transition of Dmowski from indifferentism to religious-Christian positions can be considered as a consequence of the explanation made by the alleged "young" in the national mainstream. Dmowski was alternatively a kid of the nationalist thought of the end of the 19th century and remained so even in the second half of the 1920s. In this work he writes that the most hard time for the function of the Church in the life of the nations was the 18th century, which set the individual and her happiness as a goal of all treatments, providing her with the widest scope of rights, and the narrowest duties. As a result, things condemned by the author, specified as liberation from all interdependencies and social ties, even in the field of spreading views "without respect to their intellectual and moral value"(28). In light of careful reading of the lines of the Church... it is clear that the author inactive considered the good of the national community as fundamental. For he writes:
We have frequently heard [...] that man, especially on a certain level of intelligence, does not request religion to be moral. This was even confirmed by uncontested facts. These facts have frequently put into problem the advocates of religion as the foundation of morality. They have besides made concessions, agreeing that without religion a man can be very intelligent, but that he is vitally needed by the masses(29).
In the further part of the argument, however, it adds that, yes, the advanced moral level is represented by many apostasies, as the “atheus” express themselves, who frequently even fight against religion, but it must be remembered that they were raised by Catholic or Protestant families and institutions. Only the second generation, already raised in the spirit of atheism, is simply a formation that “cuts off from the remainder of society”(3). However, attention should be paid to what is meant here by the word morality, as Dmowski evaluates the attitude of the pupils of atheism. For he writes that apart from uncommon examples of conversion
more frequently we see complete cynicism, devoid of all morality, striking especially among the sons of prominent people, who, being indifferent religiously or even enemies of religion, lived honestly and worked with large enthusiasm and dedication to their ideas; [...] in general, they are more or little correct materialists who enter through life without a clear purpose, without a guiding star. All are marked by outstanding moral handicaps, consisting in the deficiency of all enthusiasm. I.D.G.] the ability to have strong religion in anything, to sacrifice anything of his selfishness, yet the inability to worship, which 1 wise author called the ultimate ability of man. They're dead bodies on the ground.(31).
He described the Catholic Church as an obstacle to currents aimed at depriving an individual of work for matters beyond its indirect scope of interests. However, there is no concern about the failure of Christian values as such, and even more so, the deviations from the truths of faith. The author's concern concerns clearly the characteristics of an individual stripped of his ability to dedicate himself to higher ideals, to Community ideals, to believe in anything [sic!]. So the quality of character is the most crucial here, not universal values, but statements specified as "moral illiteracy, consisting of the deficiency of all enthusiasm" or a passage about "the ability of worship" as specified shows clearly what qualities are here. Especially erstwhile his earlier statements are recalled: frequently greater without comparison his moral strength had an influence on the destiny of the nation. It is crucial to remember that the moral strength of the nation is not its defencelessness, its innocence, as we frequently hear today, but the desire for a broad life, the desire to multiply national achievements and influence, and the willingness to sacrifice for the accomplishment of national goals(32), which, despite the passage of 25 years after the release, "Thoughts...’ echoes in ‘Church...“ Moreover, it recalls as a vividly later concept of “creational will” created by Stachniuk and the demands of “joyable submission”, “the acquisition of full creative momentum”, the transformation of millions into “historical people” to be the essence of the strategy of the second, designed in Slavic myth(33).
Dmowski so treated the Church and Christianity itself as an instrument allowing to form the character of individuals in a manner desirable for the improvement of national forces. 1 might even ask whether in the brochure judged as a program for the Catholic-National Current, its author did not go – even in a guess or even in a subconscious way – to absoluteization of the nation itself and the act. specified an attitude would be clearly described as pagan. Thus, in the light of all these statements, it is unusual to say at the end of this brochure: “The politics of the Catholic people must be sincere Catholic, that is, that religion, its improvement and strength must be regarded as an nonsubjective that it cannot be utilized as a means for another purposes, having nothing to do with it”(34). Especially erstwhile recalling erstwhile thoughts that a strong national policy should be pursued in order to make a national ethics that would combat the desire to regulate national affairs exclusively from the position of individualistic ethics(35). Could it be pure cyclicalism – how different are the opinions issued in 1927 from views expressed only 2-3 years earlier in “Polish Policy” – or it may simply be recalled here that Dmowski was primarily a politician, acting under certain conditions. Bogumił Grott pointed out that the content of the Church. ..is subordinated to the intention to show the Catholic Church's links with nationalism. Therefore, he included in it statements about the Catholic origin of nationalism, while wanting to make the impression that certain elements of nationalistic thought criticized by the Church are not an immanent part of it, but were a consequence of applicable request under certain conditions(36).
At the same time, it must be remembered that apart from the origin of political tactics, Dmowski remained in his consciousness under the influence of what Stachniuk referred to as “a Catholic ideology”. After all, he casts statements about the "rest of society" (most of them) as Catholic and remains under the overwhelming habit of speaking about morality even erstwhile he applies values to this concept not necessarily due to its conventional understanding. It is not surprising, therefore, in the light of both facts, that "a nation frankly, indeed Catholic must guarantee that the laws and state facilities in which it lives are consistent with Catholic principles and that young generations are brought up in Catholic spirit" (37). The most celebrated of the “Church...” is the statement: “Catholicism is not an addition to Polishness, a coloring of it in a certain way, but it is in its essence, to a large degree its essence. The effort to separate Catholicism from Poland, to separate the nation from religion and from the Church, is to destruct the very essence of the nation" (38). However, it is uncommon to draw attention to the context of this sentence, which is straight preceded by the remark that the search for the sources of the qualities of our collective soul, which "make us people as we are, and a modern European nation" must lead to a consensus that "they are stuck in both our ancient cultural background and in the existence of the Polish state for centuries, as in our 10 centuries lasting Catholicism" (39).
Stachniuk would have said yes to that point of view, but he would have done so with a completely different emotional quality. He felt that from the mediate of the 16th century it was Catholicism that full shaped the national character of Poles. At the time, a cultural coup was carried out.
the penetration of Catholicism into the deepest nerve centers of the nation's substances [...] that all self-consciousness from the core of the national substance blooming, was mercilessly destroyed. At the deserted cemetery of the first-born, native Polishness the Catholic spiritual planet was at home. A fresh cultural category, implanted on a surviving Pole, began transforming its foundation into its ideals(40).
What is more, he believes that in Poland there is an effort to reverse the concepts, “and we mostly hear that it was not the Church who shaped our history, but that the Polish nation modeled Catholicism into its fashion!”(41). While the “spiritual planet of Poles” is shaped by the Catholic – identified with Polish – ideology of the group so that “from the earliest childhood the head of all Pole is modeled according to the strategy of values given by the ideology of the group”(42). The scope of this educational strategy is full and defined here as the "absolute consciousness". For all the elements of spirituality, the criteria of good and evil, the strategy of values, are implemented in a way that makes an individual view them as “absolute and own” and “the planet of his “self” ... as simply worthy of reverence and love ... the only right”(43). Thanks to this, the Catholic Church managed to "transform what we call Poland, into a colony of Catholics speaking Polish" (44).
The influence of Max Weber and the findings of his sociology of religion clearly indicating the influence of religious, ethical origin on the economical improvement of nations(45). In addition, Stachniuk knew Ernest Barker’s work, in which the English student wrote: “While the relation between religion and race is unclear, the relation between religion and national life is, of course, very close. In any cases we can even claim that religion is nationality, that the nation is given what it is, through religion"(46).
These views were besides the consequence of Stachniuk's strictly deterministic convictions that ,it is unthinkable to have any isolated individual"(47), in another words: he pursues, thoughts, and operates the individual, but its pursuits, thoughts, actions, stem from the propensities of the life group. The unit is so the consequence of an arrangement of forces aiming to discharge in civilizational works. It is simply a biological product of a number of its ancestors. Parents and first parents are perpetrators [...] that I follow these or another ideals, that is besides the indivisible property of the social group(48). So the individual is always the product of the group's ideology. This creates a ‘average social type’ by means of a mechanics consisting of: religion, educational strategy and its ideals, general ideas, content of the group's awareness of its essence, language, philosophy, art, science, state facilities, economical system49. A fewer years later, mentioning moral norms, spiritual orders, worldview concepts, social ethics, law, ideals of life and farm style, he called these factors "emotional energy bonds", which are tasked with "organising the intellectual planet of man and creating paths for his civilizational work"(50).
Catholic personalism, which, through the action of the “Polish ideology of the group” is “the core of the psyche” – the average, social one, imposes standards of behaviour and behaviour in everyday life and in all situation. These in turn designate an individual, millions of Poles, kind of activity, and from it emerged a "style of politics and farms"(51). Thus, "what happens in Poland in the field of farm, politics, culture is simply a simple consequence of the influence of the organized national soul, or Polish ideology of the group on its external environment"(52).
We established above that Dmowski, as Stachniuk understood that the unit was shaped by Community factors, both of which were considered to be the main creator of the contemporary kind of intellectual Poles. However, there is another question here: what is the ideology of the group, and in fact how is it shaped? Stachniuk knew that “the physical group itself is simply a product of historical improvement and, in addition, geophysical and geopolitical conditions, which reflect their stigma on the strategy of the state of ow and economy”(53).
Catholicism, which is the core of the Polish ideology of the group, by working out spiritual generations, has led to the creation of “permanent features of the “national” character, the main rule of which is Catholic personalism. However, these features are to be completely inadequate to the nature of Poles, so instilling them in a young generation involves mutilation of his soul, resulting in "congenital secondary qualities of the Polish character" (54).
If we apply this supposedly natural, biological nature of Poles to the "imported" Catholic worldview, then even though for respective 100 years they be in the strictest relationship, it turns out that they are completely opposite. Thus, imposing a directional, completely contrary to the direction in which by its nature the Polish nation should have developed, causing “the faltering of natural aspirations, vitality” calls Stachniuk “the first antinomial of Polish history”(55). So it is not an ideology factor, unchanged and permanently connected with a given nation, and the “babit” is to talk about the “Polish race” distinct from the Slavic background. The proof of this is that the majority of Prusai people who "created large Germany" is of Slavic origin and is not biologically different from Poles (56). This is where Stachniuk quotes Dmowski:
Let us not forget that the Prussian society, which is specified a polar other of our noble type, has mostly grown from the same racial material as ours, that today's, [...] Prussians are descendants of our common ancestors or close relatives [...]. The same material, mostly only raised in another state school, gave specified a strong, vital, so politically active nation. (57)
Indeed, in this regard, Stachniuk was a direct follow-up to Dmowski, who inactive wrote in the mid-1920s that for Europe the main threat was not the fact of the unification of Germany, but the fact that they made this Prussia, whose society was "sticked from Germanized Slavic strains". The strains which the author considered in addition to being the most primitive among Slavs and which alternatively late and superficially adopted German culture, especially its discipline, and morally remained harsh. And it was this discipline, combined with severity, that would give the “nation of feldfebls”, which “had to wreak Germany”(58). He besides felt that at the beginning of the statehood, the ancestors of Poles did not represent the passive kind as they frequently did. So this kind was active adequate to organize a state that, in addition, for a long time attacked its neighbours more frequently than it was assaulted(59).
Thus, while we have long been very weak, the “embryos of large strength” in us to extract them cannot fall into the misconception of their superiority over others (60).
Although “pronounced in past as 1 of the first peoples of Europe”, “our nation has rapidly removed to the rear of civilization” and today's national morality, as a barren sentimental one, does not know the active love of our homeland and causes the failure of self-preservation instinct(61). The Polish nation has overestimated that infirmity called nobility, and cowardice with prudence, and began to live in a planet of moral delusions. In order to adapt to specified a existence, it dulls in itself all instinct of healthy instincts (62).
At the same time, the difference between ideologies is clearly visible here, as long as they pointed to the same desirable and negative qualities, they looked elsewhere at the causes of their disappearance in the first case and the creations in the second. This difference does not exclude statements about the continuation, as this – let us remind – consisted in Stachniuk's disposing of many limitations which were the share of Dmowski and the combination of elements proposed by this.
When and how did the transformation take place? As to the way and sources, the opinions are different, but in relation to the minute of its occurrence – rather convergent. In 1937 Stachniuk had not yet known the "political methods utilized by Catholicism, which led to the complete soul of the peoples inhabiting the river Vistula and Odra"(63). This struck Poland out of the orbits of historical development, making its inhabitants a historical “social group, as if torn from a past that does not apply the requirements of place and time”. The long-prepared proceeding of “The Acts of No History” which was published in 1939 already gives a description in the position of historical mechanisms – political and social – of the link between Polish and Catholic ideology.
So the breakthrough was half of the 16th century, erstwhile for systemic reasons the Church sanctioned the aspirations of the nobility, while the Jesuit order completely mastered the education system, forming literature, history, art, law and customs according to its principles. The consequence was that from the first Polishness only external attributes remained, i.e. "taches, carabs". Poland has turned into a “colony of Catholics of Lechite origin” (64), and “the last 3 over a century of our past can be brought to past by the demolition of the substance of the nation and, above all, its biological mass through the cultural strategy of Catholicism” (65). The time position is striking here, as Dmowski mentions his camp's policy to regain independence, he writes that the Polish nation in erstwhile generations has not developed any directions of action, that "for 3 centuries it did not have what could be called a state and national policy" (66)
Footnotes:
(1) See: B. Grott, Zygmunt Balicki – ideologist of National Democracy, Kraków 1995. This is the selection of Balicki's writings.
- A. Doboszyński, National Economy, Warsaw 1934. About the economical concepts of the camp at the ancestral camp in the 1930s Cf. B. G ro tt, Catholicism in doctrines of national-radical groups until 1939, Kraków 1987, pp. 81-96
- Concerning the relation of secular power and law with the spiritual strategy in pre-Christian societies, including K. Modzelewska and, Barbarian Europe, Warsaw 2004;P. Urbanczyk, Authority and Politics in the Early mediate Ages, Wrocław 2000;M. Finley, Politics in the Ancient World, the crowd. Kozińska , Kraków 2000; M. Eliade, Sacrum and profanum, Warsaw 1999.
(4) Main alias of Jan Stachniuk.
- J. Skoszyński, Neognozapolska, Kraków 2004, p. 163.
(6) National Policy in relation to religion and the Church, “Review of All Poland” 1903, p. 322.
(7) R. Dmowsk i, Church, Nation and State, Wrocław 2000, p. 20.
(8) J. L. Popławski, From all over Poland, “Overview of All Poland” 1897, p. 7.
(9) Ibid.
(10) Idem , From all over Poland, “The Review of All Poland” 1896, p. 176.
(11)Ibid.
(12) Ibid.
(13) Ibid.
(14) Ibid., pp. 177-178.
(15) Vatican and Rosya, "Review of All Poland" 1896, p. 385.
(16) J. L. Popławski, From all over Poland, “Review of All Poland” 1898, pp. 380-381
(17) Democratic-National organization Programme in the Russian partition, Kraków 1903, pp. 17-(18), [in:] B. Grott, Religion, Church, Ethics in the Ideas and Concepts of the Polish Right, Kraków 1993, p. 57.
(18) R. Dmowski, The Basics of Polish Politics, [in:] idem , Thoughts of Modern Pole, Wrocław 1996, p. 99.
(19) Ibid. p. 99.
(20) Idem , Polish Politics and the Restoration of the State, Warsaw 1988, Vol. 1, p. 242.
- Ibid. p. 248.
- Idem , Postwar planet and Poland, Wrocław 1999, p. 82
(23) Ibid. p. 115. Although these comments concern Russia. At another times he writes about the Tsar Nicholas II as the misfortune of Russia, for example, due to the fact that he was a mystic, powerfully spiritual and sought support outside the visible world. Idem, Politics..., p. 1, p. 84.
(24) Idem , Church... p. 24.
(25) Ibid. p. 14.
(26) Ibid. p. 17.
(27) Ibid. p. 24.
- Ibid. p. 11
(29) Ibid. p. 14.
(30) Ibid. p. 15.
(31) Ibid
(32) Idem , Mzyli... p. 22.
(33) J. Stachń k , Myt Słowiański, Warsaw 1941, computer printout, du. Toporał, p. 11,42.
(34) R. Dmowski, Church... p. 30.
- Idem, Basics... p. 114.
- B. Grott, National Camp and Catholicism, “Culture and Society” 1979, No. 3, p. 193.
(37) R. Dmowski, Church... p. 24.
(38) Ibid. p. 18.
(39) Ibid.
(40) J. Stachniuk , Rhythm of the Rebellion of Generations, “ZaDruga” 1937, No. 2, p. 1.
(41) R. Krzytewicz [J. Stachnik ], Fictions of Mistakes and Errors, “Zapruga” 1937, No. 2, p. 10.
(42) Ibid. p. 11.
(43) Ibid.
(44) Z. Banasiak [J. Stachniuk ], Constellation of the existing conditions, ‘Zadruga’ 1938, No. 1, p. 11.
- See B. Grott, Religion, Civilization, Development. Around the thought of Jan Stachniuk, Kraków 2003, especially pp. 73-92.
(46) E. Barker, National Character and Factors that form It, Warsaw 1933, p. 300.
(47) R. Żęciwic of [J. Stachniuk ], Starting point, “Zadruga” 1938, No. 10, p. 5.
(48) J. Stachniuk , The Issue of totalizm, Wrocław 1990, pp. 18-19.
(49) R. heartwic of [J. Stachniuk], Point..., p. 5.
(50) Idem, Issue... p. 13.
(51) Idem , past of No History, Wrocław 1990, p. 115.
(52) Zadruga , About the request for theories of the interior improvement of Poland, “Zapuga” 1937, No. 1, p. 3.
- R. Heartwic of [J. Stachniuk], Point... p. 5
(54) J. Stachniuk , Acts... p. 115.
(55) Ibid., pp. 172-173.
(56) Ibid. p. 41.
(57) R. Dmowski, Thoughts of a Modern Pole, [in:] J. S tachniuk , Acts... p. 41.
(58) Idem , Politics..., t. 1, pp. 299-300.
(59) Idem , Thoughts... p. 39.
(60) Ibid. p. 22.
(61) Ibid. p. 23.
(62) Ibid. p. 24.
(63) F. Kowalski [J. Stachniuk ], The Basics of Polish Economics, “Zapruga” 1937, nr 1, p. 17.
(64) J. Stachniuk , Acts... pp. 46-47.
(65) Idem, Rhythm of Rebellion... p. 1.
(66) R. Dmowski, Politics...t. 2, p. 191.
