According to Professor Marek Jan Chodakiewicz, Per Anders Rudling’s The Rise and Fall of Belarusian Nationalism, 1906-1931 (Pittsburgh, PA: University of Pittsburgh Press, 2015) is seriously flawed both as far as its intellectual framework and understanding of subtle nature of the identity of the people inhabiting Belorussian lands. More in-depth research and less analytical bias stripped of leftist ideological prejudice should fix the problem. A version of the review was published as “Scholarship of Imagination,” East/West: Journal of Ukrainian Studies, vol. 2, no. 3 (2015), posted at http://www.ewjus.com/
On Saturday, November 14th, The Eight Annual Kosciuszko Chair Conference took place. Topics discussed a number of questions related to the past and the contemporary reality of the Intermarium as well as its closer and more distant neighbors.
Topics and speakers included:
“Poland for the Poles!” Recent Research on Christian Nationalism
Marek Jan Chodakiewicz
Kosciuszko Chair of Polish Studies, IWP
China in the Intermarium: The Ukraine and Belarus Connections
Dr. Paul Coyer
IWP Research Professor, Contributor to Forbes
Jews and the Polish Underground: A Book to End History?
Active Measures and the Smolensk Investigation
Dr. Chris J. Cieszewski
Professor, University of Georgia
Free Expression in Contemporary Poland
Deputy Director, American Transparency
Grupa Azoty and the Information War
On Thursday, October 8, Dr. Marek Chodakiewicz – the current holder of the Kościuszko Chair of Polish Studies – delivered a lecture entitled “Property Restitution: The Case of Poland After the Nazis and Communists.”
During his talk, Dr. Chodakiewicz dispelled many misconceptions about the restitution of property – Jewish property in particular – in Poland and explained the key role of the two totalitarian invaders that destroyed Poland during the Second World War and confiscated both Jewish and Christian property.
During this year’s annual Gen. Walter Jajko Kosciuszko Chair Military Lecture, Dr. Marek Chodakiewicz discussed the various ways in which the underground anti-communist insurgency in Poland fought against Communist forces in the wake of the Second World War, and in later years against the Nazi Germans and Soviet Communists.
Dr. Chodakiewicz highlighted the response strategy used by the Communist Party, most notably the anti-insurgent communist deception and propaganda, an example of which was Andrzej Wajda’s anti-Home-Army film calledAshes and Diamonds (1958). The film was screened after the professor’s talk.
To give historical context to the movie and reveal the true intentions behind the production of the film, which was commissioned by the Communist Party as a propaganda tool, Dr. Chodakiewicz discussed several means of propaganda used by the party. Using the words of Joseph Stalin, “The writer is the engineer of the human soul,” Dr. Chodakiewicz revealed the power of art and film and its ability to manipulate the human soul and mind when used accordingly.
This event was sponsored by the Kosciuszko Chair of Polish Studies, and took place on September 25, 2015.
by Marek Chodakiewicz
from the website of the Selous Foundation for Public Policy Research
The Hungarians and others argue that for economic and cultural reasons they simply cannot accommodate the new comers. The Magyars refuse to succumb to the social engineering schemes of Brussels and prefer their country just the way it is. We should watch the European debate very carefully because it also concerns our own problems on America’s southern border. It is not Nazism to wish to protect the nation’s frontier and to uphold its cultural essence. Patriots defend their countries from all enemies: foreign and domestic.
Hungary and most other Balkan countries are both NATO and EU members. An unprecedented influx of refugees from the Middle East and Africa has put a serious strain on the relationship between the military alliance and the political union. On the one hand, defense considerations necessitate internal and external stability among NATO’s participants. On the other hand, political realities require following the EU’s ideological diktat by the member states. This puts the alliance on a serious collision course with the union.
Brussels’ standing political policy is de facto open borders reflecting Europe’s dominant liberal ideology: multiculturalism. During the summer of 2015 multiculturalism encouraged a wave of migrants from the south. Desperate refugees search for a better life. Their home countries are usually dysfunctional and, at worst, like Syria, torn asunder by war. Until recently, the bulk of them came in a trickle and then spurts via Spain and Italy. The Spaniards and Italians felt overwhelmed by thousands and then tens on thousands. Now, hundreds of thousands are pouring into Europe.
Almost all refuse to stay in the south of the EU. They push north. A general impression is that these refugees have been welfare shopping. A few weeks ago a contingent of them refused to disembark from a ferry in Denmark, which has slashed its welcome benefits by half. When compelled to leave the vessel, they proceeded by foot, bicycle, train, and taxi to Sweden, which has maintained its generous subsidies. For similar reasons, they tend to spurn France in favor of England. London is viewed as more bountiful than Paris. Some travelers are detained by the authorities, including in the infamous “Jungle” camp of Calais. The situation is so dire that the bureaucrats even consider establishing filtration, or intermediate camps for prospective migrants in Niger. That may perhaps attract some sub-Saharan African asylum seekers but others are not fooled. They want their feet planted firmly on EU territory.
At the end of August, Dr. Marek Jan Chodakiewicz returned from a lecture circuit in Europe, which has become an annual Kościuszko Chair of Polish Studies tradition. The lecture series was dubbed “The Thoughts of a Free Pole” to emphasize the importance of liberty – i.e. active initiative vs. slavish passivity – in the struggle to overcome communist and post-communist pathologies.
During his three-week tour, Dr. Chodakiewicz spoke in many cities in Poland, including: Warsaw, Łódź (where he discussed post-communist “transformation”), Wrocław, Bełchatów, and Łomża. The holder of the Kościuszko Chair also delivered lectures in London (UK) and Dublin (Ireland), where he discussed the history of Polish-Jewish relations in Poland in 1918 – 1955.
For an additional video of Dr. Chodakiewicz’s lecture in Warsaw, please click here.
To watch an interview with Dr. Chodakiewicz about nuclear weapons and the Intermarium, please click here.
In his “Eastern Europe’s Crisis of Shame” (September 13, https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/eastern-europe-refugee-crisis-xenophobia-by-jan-gross-2015-09#exDBTojqcQWlmRlB.99) Princeton’s sociologist Jan Tomasz Gross chastised Eastern European nations, Poland in particular, for failing to address the current Middle Eastern refugee crisis properly. According to him, Poland has rejected the migrants. To provide a moral dimension and a historical context to contemporary developments, Gross opined that “the Poles… actually killed more Jews than Germans during the war.” Neither his historical musings nor his understanding of the current crisis square with the facts.
A New York newspaper has asked Dr. Marek Jan Chodakiewicz to comment:
Jan Tomasz Gross writes nonsense. However, he does regurgitate a thesis that has enjoyed a long currency among a few Jewish ethnonationalist historians. For example, Reuben Ainsztein stated some years ago that “during the [Warsaw 1944] uprising Polish fascists killed most likely more Jews than Germans.” (See his Jewish Resistance in Nazi-occupied Eastern Europe, London 1974).
Let’s see. During the Warsaw Rising the Germans and their allies lost about 10,000 casualties. Thus, according to Ainsztein, the Polish Home Army (AK) must have killed over 10,000 Jews. Gross’s methodology is similarly unsound as it is based upon a spurious estimate that the Polish peasants killed allegedly 200,000 Jews during the war.
Further, such shoddy “scholarship” co-exists hand in glove with poor command of current affairs in Europe. Gross claims that Poland and other Eastern and Central European countries have refused to take refugees and, thus, “have revealed themselves to be intolerant, illiberal, xenophobic, and incapable of remembering the spirit of solidarity that carried them to freedom a quarter-century ago.” This is untrue. The Poles have welcomed refugees. According to the New York Times (30 May 2015), there are at least 400,000 Ukrainian war fugitives in Poland. Additional hundreds of thousands of migrants rotate through Poland for seasonal work to return home afterwards. What does the rest of Europe do for them?
As far as the Middle Eastern and African refugees are concerned,
- According to the Dublin Regulation (no. 604/2013), the first EU country to accept a migrant is responsible for his processing, maintenance, and settlement. Since most of them cross into Greece, Athens should take care of them.
- It is true that other nations should accept the refugees, in particular wealthy Arab states, including Saudi Arabia. They can afford it, and they should help their co-religionists in the first place.
- One could also suggest that Israel take them for humanitarian and logistical reasons. The Jewish state abuts Syria and has a long history of aid to foreign people in times of crisis (e.g., in Haiti). Perhaps a moral argument can be made that history dictates that Israel should render assistance to those in need since the Jewish people often had to count on others for help.
Moral blackmail with alleged Polish mass murders on the Jewish people is as morally flawed as endeavors to force Israel to settle Syrian refugees with a vicious propaganda campaign comparing Israeli policy toward the Palestinians to the Nazi measures against the Jews.
The case of J.T. Gross shows the frightful collapse of scholarly standards in the humanities and social sciences at a formerly prime institution of learning. Shame on Princeton.
Marek Jan Chodakiewicz