The Doubtful Logic of Sławomir Mentzen

Despite crucial differences of view, especially in economical matters, I have so far considered Sławomir Mentzen to be a policy in a rational and sober way assessing reality. This assessment was conditioned not so much by peculiar values, or Mentzen himself, but by the weakness of our political class, against which the leader of the Confederacy could be treated as little evil. The fact is that Mentzen was able to talk reasonably on many issues, including matters concerning Polish-Ukrainian relations. Therefore, with large surprise and distaste, I accepted Sławomir Mentzen's position on banning the promotion of flagism ideology. This issue arose during the examination of the draft law on the verification of benefits to the household of foreigners and assistance to citizens of Ukraine, erstwhile PiS MPs tabled an amendment concerning, inter alia, the prohibition of promoting flagism and aligning it with ideologies considered totalitarian. This amendment was rejected – against 146 Members of the KO, 29 Members of Poland 2050, 27 Members of the PSL, 19 Members of the Left, 3 non-attached Members and the only 1 from the Confederation of Sławomir Mentzen.

Sławomir Mentzen tried to justify his position with alleged concern for freedom of speech. He said: “I want everyone could preach the most absurd opinions I would never agree with. I would be a hypocrite if I voted against my views and statements‘ [1]. By the way, there were PiS MPs whom Mentzen called fools and accused them that they had previously tolerated Bandera worship in Ukraine. He said: “You didn't pay them any attention. You called Bandera worshipers your friends. You did nothing to force Ukraine to change its course. You wanted Ukraine to join the EU and NATO together with Bandera‘ [2]. In the full dispute – the palace worth Pac and the palace of Pac. True, Mentzen is right that the politicians of Law and Justice had not previously prevented the cult of Stepan Bandera, as well as the establishment by any Ukrainian organizations and military formations to symbolize Nazism. However, does this justify Mentzen’s conduct, which de facto sanctioned the promotion of flagism? Secondly, should the praise of criminal ideology, or criminal political practice, be covered by freedom of speech? Rafał Ziemkiewicz referred to this issue, which for many reasons I do not have peculiar sympathy and estim. In this case, however, Ziemkiewicz rightly commented on Mentzen's behaviour: "That's stupid, due to the fact that flagism was an highly criminal ideology, and your recourse to orthodoxly free arguments means that you are consistently in favour of the freedom to preach the praise of gas chambers, gulags, red brigades or political murders, specified as the fresh crime of antify on Charlie Kirk‘ [3].

So if Sławomir Mentzen wants to be consistent, he should besides request freedom of speech for Nazism supporters and another criminal ideologies. Why, then, does Mentzen not search to depenalize the act referred to in Article 256 of the Criminal Code, which provides for imprisonment of up to 3 years for promoting the Nazi, Communist, fascist or another totalitarian state strategy and these ideologies? Or should Mentzen besides take care of the amendment of the Constitution of the Republic of Poland, which in Article 13 prohibits the existence of political parties and another organizations referring in their programs to totalitarian methods and practices of acting Nazism, fascism and communism? Isn't that a clear regulation of freedom? Finally, the question should be asked – why did the “freedom” Mentzen condemn Grzegorz Braun for his message about gas chambers? Let us callback his comment on the above: “It is perfectly clear that I condemn Braun for his last interview. I believe that specified statements harm Poland and give fuel to our enemies‘. In this case, should Gregory Braun not enjoy the freedom of speech that Sławomir Mentzen is seeking? Is negating historical facts worse than condoning apparent crimes? Where is the logic and consistency here?

Michał Radzikowski

[1] Controversy around Mentzen's vote. "Pisan impudence amazed me again" — basins.pl/opinie, 13.09.2025,
[2] Ibid.,
[3] "This would be the biggest crime." Ziemkiewicz corresponds to Mentzen" – basins.pl/opinie, 14.09.2025,
[4] "Sławomir Mentzen: I condemn Grzegorz Braun for last interview" – Polish Press Agency – news.onet.pl, 13.07.2025.