- May 5, 2007
It really is. The problem is that:robw963 said:You're quite right. I appreciate your knowledge about this stuff...I'll admit it becomes confusing for me.
- during the PRL the Second Republic was smeared to unbelievable levels so works from that time are very biased,
- in the Third Republic (now) sometimes it was/is the opposite,
- political rivalry continued in the exile as well,
- the ruling elites were as usual blamed for everything in the usual Polono-centrist fashion or were cleared of all charges - little between both stances,
- foreign observers, writers, historians were thrown into all this or simply ignored everything and wrote their own stories (sometimes really horrid works not worth the paper they were printed on),
- the reality of those times was incredibly complicated,
- we are still receiving more sources, data, documents adding more to the puzzle as if it was not difficult enough already...
- everything written abroad is usually delayed by circa one decade - except in Russian Federation where it is delayed by 30-40 years,
In other words - welcome to the reality of the Second Republic - now you really are screwed...
For now the best English language work I can actually propose is 'the Heart of Europe' by Norman Davies which offers some incredibly useful insight - I have read pretty many works in English so I can recommend that with a degree of certainty it is worth the effort.
Propaganda is exactly what it is - propaganda. Statism, national pride etc it pretty much understandable if you are literally bringing back country from ashes. Certainly the general mood, the general situation of the interbellum highlighted some specific trends present everywhere.Naturally my timeline is a fantasy. Piłsudski IRL died in 1935, so his presence in the game at all is a giant stretch.
My theory behind my drive toward right-wing extermism is a projection of the direction that pre-war Poland seemed to be heading.
Yet it is not the same even if similarly looking.
The problems with Czechoslovakia are a bit... more complicated. It was a hostile country, a local rival and much material for a conflict existed in the relation with it. The fact that it was Czechoslovakia which was targeted first and the fact that noone had any real interest in dealing with two sides of the conflict (50 years of silence or worse can be a problem if you are trying to work out who was right and why noone probably was)., foreign policy, the nasty business with Czechoslovakia,
I have explained why there was hardly any other choice to achieve anything - especially taking the knowledge of those people into the consideration.the bravado against Hitler,
At least there was no 'Warszawa' SS Panzer Division - they wouldn't be shooting at birds for sure...
Sometimes bravado is the only right stance you can take.
Actually Rydz was a really bad choice for such a leader figure - shy and modest person without much charisma - which was another nail to the failure of the OZON, but the problem was someone had to replace Piłsudski - that was the logic of the pilsudskite movement based on popular support to 'the Old Man' himself.the power trip ego of Smigly-Rydz (verging on cult of personality),
If not him it would be someone else, it was supposed to be Walery Slawek , but was pretty much pushed to the margin (a terrible loss in my opinion - the man was almost a crystal clean).
Rydz was nominated the GISZ because he had no political ambitions - funny how things can change.
Apparently from the trimvirate of Mościcki - Beck and Śmigły only he was seen as a possible 'substitute' for Piłsudski.
The difference was that propaganda became more noisy after 1935 and that Piłsudski would kill with his stare (or some extremely vulgar, soldier's insult) anyone even trying to propose to make him some sort of a guru (he never abandoned this certain anti-establishment attitude he developed for his entire life).
Perhaps that was because Rydz wasn't popular when he took his share of power and had to be for the colonel government's political system to work - so the propaganda machine had to do what is could.
However it is a mistake to think it was just the usual quest for power and political rivalry.
Those people simply belived the times are hard and only them can guide Poland through the storm - that is because they were resistence leaders, former fighters so people who believed in a swift action and taking hard choices noone else could take while they saw political debate as relatively fruitless.
So the form might be similar in some forms, but it was closer to the New deal style propaganda than to 'Ein Volk, ein reich, ein fuhrer' stuff.
The respect the military traditionally had/has in Poland also played its part, so did the cult of heroism which produced the generation which later survived some most incredible hardship.
It is arguable if it was necessary, but perhaps there was no other choice - III Republic-style constitution provided much instability especially if mixed with political partizanship (which was the case) - some people really felt that Poland cannot afford risking it with barely a year of relative peace so they moved in...
Kemalism overall can be considered the most similar example.
And where those were not present ? The situation was indeed tense, but like on a frying pan everything was accelerated political, social, ethnical conflicts - the bottom line is the state acted to strike at extremism and that the only disloyal ethnical group were Germans (majority did, exceptions didn't - like admiral Unrug for example).presence of nationalist organizations, etc.
Again for the purpose of this AAR it is your choice alone - except that the 'bolshevik' and "German agent' Piłsudski would be laughing at anyone calling him right-wing.Had Germany not defeated Poland so early in the war, I suspect Poland would have become more and more right wing...at least that's the basis of this AAR.
Actually I personally consider him along with Jan Zamoyski and possibly Adam Czartoryski one of most impressive political minds in Polish history.