The last year in Sweden (2016) has been marked by news of problems within the Green party and also scandals connected with abuse of power, “favor’s” to and from ministers of the Swedish parliament from both large trade organizations and private persons and last but not least a large scandal in connection with Swedbank.
In other words: nothing new under the sun.
Being just a small part of this society and a normal insignificant worker there is not much one can do about such things except: changing the trade union because of their involvement of scandals and therefore not giving indirect support to that sort of behavior by a monthly paycheck, not voting for certain political parties and changing bank. As for the rest business goes on as usual.
Pope Francis was in Lund and Malmö last year the 31 of october util the 1 of november. The joint Lutheran-Catholic commemoration marked the 500th anniversary of the Reformation and featured a liturgy in Lund cathedral, followed by a catholic mass at an arena in the nearby city of Malmö.
All this said and done – we look forward to the coming year and hope for the best and that God may bless this country and its inhabitants.
The Polish opposition – an attempt to destabilize the state
The strategy of the “total opposition” is “streets and abroad” – as stated by the leader of Civic Platform (PO), Grzegorz Schetyna, after the lost elections in 2015. News on the demonstrations were disseminated by the domestic and foreign media, but – similarly like in case of the previous street protests of the opposition – both reasons and the scale of those demonstrations were presented in a way suggesting that something worrying and undemocratic had been happening in Poland. However, the reality looks quite different. Spontaneous protests or planned provocation? Some domestic and foreign media presented the recent protests as spontaneous, notably those on last Friday and Saturday (16 and 17 December). However, the Saturday demonstration was registered already a few days before. Also, the statement of Eugeniusz Kłopotek – a politician of the opposition PSL party – calls into question their spontaneity.
On Friday morning, in the public television’s program “Guest of the morning”, he said: “Today, you will see what happens. (…) Again, there will be huge insolence, fight, booing, shouting and offending each other. (…) I am afraid that it may end in fisticuffs in the current term of the Parliament.” On Friday evening, his predictions materialized. It may also be surprising that the opposition protest to defend free media did not start on 14 December, i.e. when the Chancellery of the Sejm proposed the new rules on the media in the Parliament, but only on 16 December – moreover, at the plenary sitting unrelated to the media, i.e. during the budgetary debate. The dates of the recent opposition protests do not seem coincidental since 13, 16 and 17 December are the anniversaries of very important and tragic events in Polish history – the introduction of martial law and the massacres of miners and workers in Silesia and Pomerania in 1970 and 1981. In this way, the opposition tries to compare the current situation in Poland to the communist era, although it is clear – also for the opposition – that they have nothing to do with each other. Organizing protest on those days confirms that they are planned rather than spontaneous. In fact, the Sunday demonstration of government supporters looked more spontaneous – unplanned and organized in response to the opposition demonstrations. Official reason: “free media” On 14 December, the Chancellery of the Sejm presented a proposal to change the organization of work of the media in the Parliament, e.g. creating a modern Media Center, a TV studio in the Sejm (the lower house of the Polish Parliament), the accreditation of Permanent Correspondents Parliamentary, etc. It was announced that journalists would have unlimited access to the Media Center, which would be the key place for cooperation of the media and politicians, and in which the latest technology would be applied.
The changes were considered necessary since the current activities of the media in the Polish Parliament are not governed by clear and precise rules, and communication between the media and Members of Parliament (MPs) is often chaotic and random. The proposed changes were intended at allowing journalists and MPs to carry out their professional duties in a more professional and comfortable way than today. Moreover, the new rules would provide greater pluralism and equal access to the politicians by the media, keeping in mind that the current situation is discriminatory for many editors, notably the smaller ones who are unable to compete with big media corporations. The proposed amendments were also aimed at making the working conditions of Polish journalists similar to those prevailing in other European parliaments, where the work of the media is carried out according to 2 Preparation and development: Polish League Against Defamation strict rules and principles. Changes in organizing the work of journalists were inspired by practices functioning in the EU, e.g. in the European Parliament in Brussels or in the Parliaments of France, Italy, the Czech Republic, or Hungary.
It was noted that the proposals on the work of the media in the Polish Parliament are much less restrictive than in other EU countries and in the European Parliament. However, those proposals were considered by the opposition as an attempt to restrict freedom of the media in the Polish Parliament, or even an “attack on free media”, and obviously the ruling party (Law and Justice, or PiS) was accused of it. Therefore, the opposition decided to defend the allegedly threatened media and organized a demonstration using the slogan “Free media in the Parliament”. However, one could have serious doubts whether the real purpose of the opposition demonstration was “defending the media”, as evidenced by the fact that some participants of the demonstration, who protested on Friday in front of the Sejm, tried in various (often aggressive) ways to prevent a reporter of the public television – regarded by them as the “government television” – from reporting live the ongoing demonstration. It should be noted who attended the demonstration “in defense of free media” on Saturday – inter alia, politicians of the former ruling coalition (PO and PSL) as well as post-communist SLD.
Those political parties virtually monopolized the media market in Poland during the past years (when the PO-PSL coalition ruled the country) and were able to influence both the public television and the largest private television stations. It resulted in the lack of media pluralism and very one-sided information addressed to the public, i.e. almost uncritical support for the then ruling coalition (PO-PSL) and aggressive fighting against the then opposition (PiS). Several independent journalists were fired, and many of them were under surveillance. It is worth mentioning that no EU institution regarded that situation as a threat to Polish democracy. Generally, protests organized by the opposition to defend free media – in the situation where media pluralism is currently considerably greater than during the time of the PO-PSL coalition – are rather unconvincing.
Similarly, demonstrations of the Committee for the Defence of Democracy (KOD) are not credible since they want to defend allegedly threatened democracy in Poland, while Polish citizens – including the opposition – enjoy all democratic rights and freedoms (free elections, freedom of speech, freedom of assembly, etc). A kind of hypocrisy of the opposition was also uncritical defending Andrzej Rzepliński, who for the past year – as the Chairman of the Constitutional Tribunal – often breached the law and the Constitution, but he was presented by the opposition media as a defender of the constitutional order in Poland (his term of office expired on 19 December, and on 21 December, Julia Przyłębska was appointed as a new Chairman, which is a hope to put an end to the constitutional crisis and bring the situation back to normal). Actual reason: defending privileges If the defense of democratic values (e.g. free media) is not the real reason for organizing anti-government demonstrations by the opposition, the question arises: what is it in fact? Considering who inspires those demonstrations (beneficiaries of the political transformation in Poland and the system established after 1989, including people of the former communist regime), it seems clear that it is about maintaining the status quo, i.e. numerous privileges and benefits for a small group of the society. Such an oligarchic system combining politics, business and media functioned for 8 years under the PO-PSL coalition, but last year, it was removed from power (and privileges) in democratic elections.
Therefore, the beneficiaries of that situation – who still have difficulty with accepting the election results – seek to overthrow the Law and Justice government that wants to limit or eliminate those privileges. In this context, it should be noted that the Parliament (Sejm) planned to adopt on 16 December the Act aimed at cutting pensions of officers serving in the communist Security Service in the period 1944-1990. The purpose of the Act is not to punish former communist security officers, but depriving them of unfair privileges, i.e. high pension benefits. 3 Preparation and development: Polish League Against Defamation The first attempt to reduce pensions of former communist security officers was undertaken in 2009, but it was not effective enough. As a result, they continued to receive very high pensions (often more than PLN 10,000), substantially higher than the average pension (currently, about PLN 2,000), which was perceived by a majority of the Polish society as a blatant injustice. It was particularly shocking that former communist security officers received much higher pensions than former activists of the anti-communist opposition.
Thus, the real reason fueling the opposition activities last weekend seems to be the following: a desire to prevent the Sejm from adopting the Act cutting cash benefits paid by the state to a privileged social group. To this end, the opposition parties (mainly PO and Modern) decided to occupy the plenary hall podium and the Sejm Speaker’s chair. An excuse for this unparliamentary behaviour was the decision of the Sejm Speaker to exclude one of the MPs (PO) from the budgetary debate for his disruptive behaviour. By the way, in the previous term of the Polish Parliament, the Sejm Speaker (from PO) also excluded some opposition MPs from debates, but it never resulted in as hysterical reactions as currently (the opposition MPs, who had been occupying the plenary hall since 16 December, announced that the occupation would be continued until the next plenary sitting of the Sejm starting on 11 January).
The Act was, however, adopted by the Sejm as planned, i.e. on 16 December – in another parliamentary hall (the Column Hall), following the decision of the Sejm Speaker. Then, on 20 December, it was also adopted by the Senate. According to the Act, reduced pension benefits will not exceed the average pension paid by the Social Insurance Institution – ZUS (as of June 2016, the average pension amounted to PLN 2,053, pension for incapacity for work – PLN 1,543, and family pension – PLN 1,725). Reduced benefits will be paid from 1 October 2017 onwards. The above cut of pensions, which affects about 32,000 people, is expected to bring annually over PLN 500 million of savings in the state budget. Of course, attempts to block Parliament’s works could not be openly conducted as aimed at defending pension privileges for a small group of disgraced people. Therefore, the opposition used the convenient and catchy slogan of “defending free media”.
A similar mechanism of reversed meaning is being applied on the KOD demonstrations, which take place under the slogan of “defending democracy”, but in fact they are an expression of enormous frustration of privileged social groups that have lost various benefits as a result of democratic elections (e.g. well-paid positions in state-owned companies, state agencies and institutions, grants from the state budget, public procurements, high pensions, as well as the authorities’ tolerance for conducting fraudulent business, tax evasion, etc). On behalf of the society or in own interest? A regards the scale of the demonstrations last weekend, some Polish and foreign media spoke of “thousands of people” protesting in many Polish cities, which was to suggest a massive public support for the activities of the opposition.
According to the authorities of Warsaw, about 2,000 people gathered before the Parliament. However, according to other sources, several hundred people protested in Warsaw. In a few other Polish cities, there were usually less than 100 protesting people in each. Therefore, it is hard to recognize those demonstrations as widespread and representing a large part of the Polish society. Moreover, the credibility of the authorities of Warsaw in estimating the number of participants of street demonstrations was seriously challenged in May 2016, when they estimated that the opposition demonstration gathered 240,000, although almost all other sources (pro-government and opposition) estimated that about 50,000 people took part in it (it was the largest and the only opposition demonstration of such a scale).
Those inflated estimates should not be surprising, keeping in mind that the current parliamentary opposition holds the power in Warsaw (Hanna Gronkiewicz-Waltz, PO Vice-Chair, is the President of Warsaw). A declining number of people participating in the opposition demonstrations may suggest that the Polish society is more and more tired of a destructive and quarrelsome style of the opposition, notably that they 4 Preparation and development: Polish League Against Defamation have nothing constructive to offer – only hysteria and further demonstrations. Also, it seems that the Poles begin to realize manipulations of opposition leaders who pretend to be martyrs fighting for social interests, but in fact they treat the society instrumentally, and cynically use it to fight for their own interests. Destabilizing Poland means destabilizing the EU As mentioned, the opposition seeks to overthrow the democratically elected government, seize power and restore – favourable for themselves, but not necessarily for the society – the oligarchic system existing in the period 2007-2015. The opposition wants to achieve it at all costs, regardless of the interests of Poland and the Polish society, or Poland’s image abroad.
The events of 16 and 17 December 2016, as well as recent days and weeks, have shown that the “total opposition” begins to move towards increasingly dangerous and irresponsible actions aimed at anarchy and destabilizing the state. This includes, for example, paralyzing the Parliament by occupying the podium or the entire plenary hall, which could make the Sejm unable to adopt the Budget Act for 2017 (and this, in turn, could lead to early parliamentary elections). Equally dangerous are the recent calls of opposition leaders to “withdraw from obedience to authorities” and even to use force against the government, as openly suggested by former presidents – Lech Wałęsa and Bronisław Komorowski. In recent days, some physical assaults on Law and Justice’s ministers and MPs took place. It is evident that the opposition demonstrations are becoming more and more aggressive and focused on the confrontation, including the acts of violence. It seems that opposition activists, who on 13 December took part in the anti-government demonstration under the slogan “Stop the devastation of Poland”, should consider it the context of their own activities. Anti-government actions are being undertaken by the opposition also because they are encouraged by the European institutions (European Commission, European Parliament, the Venice Commission), which tolerate such activities. In addition, those institutions conduct their own actions against the Polish government. It seems that the role of the EU institutions should be acting as an impartial arbiter seeking de-escalation of conflicts in Member States. However, as regards Poland, the EU institutions might be regarded as a party of the conflict, clearly supporting only one side of the political dispute (the opposition).
This clearly leads to the escalation of the conflict, which begins to take dangerous forms. It is understandable that the left-liberal EU elite does not like a conservative government in one or another Member State. Nevertheless, one could expect that the EU elite would act responsibly and in the interest of the entire EU. In this context, it should be kept in mind that Poland is the sixth largest country in the EU and a potential destabilization of the situation in Poland will certainly have an impact on the situation in the EU as a whole. And, as it is known, the situation in the EU has already been seriously destabilized by the migrant crisis, terrorist attacks, the constantly extended state of emergency in France, etc. Thus, creating an artificial problem in Poland is not needed, keeping in mind that the EU faces currently a number of real problems (migrant crisis, Brexit and other disintegration trends, geopolitical situation, etc). Last but not least, a hypothetical but very important question. If subsequent, increasingly aggressive and confrontational actions of the Polish opposition – still tolerated or tacitly supported by the EU institutions – result in bloodshed, will the opposition and the EU elite take responsibility for this? Warsaw, 22 December 2016
Europe has once again been touched by tragedy. The Berlin attack, a copycat of the one from Nice, has demonstrated the threats modern democracies are facing. In the name of a bloody war against the West, terrorists have been killing innocent people for years. The recent attack left a Polish citizen and several Germans brutally murdered. The lorry driver from Poland became the first victim of the terrorist attack in the German capital.
This tragic event requires that we look again at challenges democratic states of Europe are faced with. The war on terrorism, the uncontrolled wave of migration, the threat posed by the East, Russia’s aggressive policy in many places across the world, geopolitical challenges – today the states must tackle global challenges of the modern world. The Polish authorities identify threats and try to neutralize them in their country. Poland’s foreign policy with this respect is based on a thorough assessment of hard facts gathered around the world. On top of that, Poland is sharing its knowledge of the threats with its partners. Unfortunately, sometimes it turns out that Poland was right, but its warnings were not heard at a proper time. Given the above, what the opposition is currently doing and how international media outlets are depicting my country seems even more outrageous.
Polish government has been under a brutal political attack. A well-organized obstruction campaign led by the opposition is not met with a broad support from the society, yet it resounds with power due to the opposition leaders’ links. The media repeat mindlessly every nonsense about the alleged threat to democracy in Poland, an oppressive rule of the current government and its will to incite domestic upheaval. But this picture is fake – the truth is that Poland has become an arena of a battle between the old political establishment that lost power after years of governing and a new political environment that introduces changes upon a mandate it was granted through a democratic political process. And it does so not by taking the citizens by surprise, but by fulfilling bit by bit the word given during the electoral campaign, which eventually brought it to power.
Unfortunately, only few realize what really is happening in my country. Political elites that have been dominating for decades have eventually lost social support; during the last election their defeat was so decisive that the plan of reforms envisaged by the now-ruling Law and Justice party gained huge public confidence. For the first time in the history of the Third Polish Republic one political party holds a unilateral mandate to govern. Moreover, it is keeping its promises from the campaign – to reform. This makes the ousted politicians furious, because the new power has redirected the flow of public funds into areas neglected before. Poland has introduced an effective pro-family policy, it has declared a real war on corruption, it has started closing tax loopholes, reducing the drainage of the Polish economy by foreign capital, making social opportunities equal to everybody through an unprecedented social policy. Moreover, the state has launched a new history policy based, among others, on the abrogation of privileges enjoyed by the officers of the totalitarian and communist regime of the Polish People’s Republic.
All this stands on the way of interests of those who have so far taken governing Poland for granted. Economic figures, a deep social stratification reflected dramatically by the rate of poverty and hunger among children, the scale of exploitation of the Polish economy, demographic problems have unveiled how inefficient or even harmful the development policy pursued by former governments was. Changes that are being implemented aim at establishing distribution channels for public funds anew. These changes mean loses and will bring loses to political groups who have so far dominated in Poland. The more ordinary Polish citizens gain, the more those who once governed lose.
They make a lot of noise which is a sum of their well-established capabilities, extensive foreign contacts, applause from foreign political parties, politicians and the media. However, I am absolutely convinced that they are far from being right. The Poles are those who directly benefit from the governance by Law and Justice. Those now in power have done much more for their nation in the last year than the former coalition government tried to do for two consecutive terms of office.
Poland IS NOT torn apart by conflict between a totalitarian government and defenders of democracy. Poland IS a witness of a brutal assault of the ruling party’s opponents on the government who wants to reshape the country’s social, political and economic life. It holds a social and legal mandate to proceed. Although those who oppose the government become more and more ruthless, try to disrupt the country’s life, yell louder and louder, bring Poland into disrepute – Law and Justice has not lost public confidence. Depicting Poland as a non-democracy is completely unfounded and erroneous. The current government enjoys a safe majority in the Parliament and therefore is empowered to govern. Never has it lost the mandate granted by voters, even for a moment. Society decided not to grant the mandate to former governing coalition again. They cannot come to terms with being voted out of power.
While the world is fighting terrorism, when Europe is picking up the pieces after yet another tragedy, when everybody’s eyes are on Aleppo, when NATO is looking suspiciously at the threat posed by Russia, here in Poland politicians voted out of office are continuing their childish dance in hope of getting the power back. To achieve their goal they resort to brutal and non-democratic means. Unfortunately, their actions get the world’s attention although they do not deserve it.
In the wake of the Berlin tragedy, it must be stressed that destabilizing a democratic state in very dangerous times for Europe and for the world may have dramatic consequences for us all.
No matter what the opposition is saying or doing, Poland remains a solid ally and partner of the West, it is fighting terrorism, cooperating with other countries within NATO as well as meetings regarding the war on terror. Poland never evades the obligation to help its allies. Poland has always carried out a responsible policy, with safety of both its citizens and Europe at the forefront. It is not the ruling party who is undermining the stability of my country, but politicians of the opposition who are unable to respect the democratic choice made by the Poles.
Tomek A. Klichowski
|Georgian currency Lari (GEL) is going to die
Business VS politics or bussines by politics
Every sphere cross each other in Georgia, especially after parliamentary election in 2012. (October). Government had changed by election and new party “GEORGIAN DREAM “ (Qartuli otszneba – We call members of party – “DREAMERS” ) became the winner.
At the beginning, head of that new group was Georgian billionaire Mr. Bidzina Ivanishvili. Now president is Giorgi Margvelashvili but for Georgians it’s really easy to see how Bidzina is manipulating with politicians and leads the group from back stage.
After election, in parliament we’ve got majority of “Georgian Dream” and minority oposite side of “National party” (-Party which was leaded by Mikheil Saakashvili ). New government had started “fighting” with previous one. On the main positions in Georgia, all ministers became “Dreamers.” Only one chair _ role of director of National Bank was free and achivable for candidate from National Party.
We have to notice that Mr Bidzina Ivanishvili follows to Pro- Russian ideology and Mr Mikheil Saakashvili Followed to Pro – American ideology.
Billioner Bidzina ivanishvili knows how to play with currency and make money from it.
So, director of National Bank was from National Party and if something went wrong everybody could think that it was fault of National party and their wrong politic. For “Dreamers” that was really good step to hide some dirty goals.
Since October 2012 we have huge differences.
If on 2012 : 1 USD =1.6633 GEL
Now on 2016 we have : 1 USD = 2.6154 GEL
Crisis of Georgian lari is really serious current problem for Georgians,
Result of wrong Georgian Dreamers’ economic politics and of the crisis:
- Increasing of costs
- Irrelevantly low salaries
- Dissatisfied investors, population
- Closed businesses
It’s so much led by the politics. The weak politics is the reason of our disaster. Step by step business vs politics or bussines by politics make us poor.
Georgian currency lost its power and result is more dangerous for Georgians than thick politicians can think about. Hopefully waiting for changings.
On Friday, 16th of December, in the Polish Parliament Budgetary Act for the 2017 as well as the Act that reduces the retirement pension of former, communistic secret service officers had to be voted. But, after the Speaker of Parliament didn’t allow opposition deputy to speak, the opposition party, PO, blocked the parliamentary platform for many hours.
The coalition moved to another room and voted the Acts. |The opposition doesn’t agree with those votes.
There were demonstrations both of the opponents and the supporters of the government.
In this video we can see a young man demostrating against the government. He lies on the street to simulate that he has been beaten by the police. But the police forces remain peaceful.
Another amazing fact: Polish public tv suddenly also have been blocked and there were problems with watching it.
Krótki samouczek jak się robi "ofiarę policyjnej brutalności" pisowskiego reżimu. To tylko jeden z dowódów na to, że mamy do czynienia z cynicznymi prowokatorami a nie z "zatroskanymi obywatelami walczącymi o demokrację". Zwracam też uwagę na petardy lecącę w stronę policjantów.
Opslået af Leszek Dobrzyński på 17. december 2016
14th of December there was a debate in European Parliament about Poland. The main issue was the Constitutional Tribunal in Poland, that, according to the Parliament, works without democratic procedures. Polish government is accused of it. Ryszard Legutko, deputy from PiS, the conservative party that governs Poland currently, explains, why there is no need to talk about Polish issues in the European Parliament nor there is a worry that the democracy in Poland is in trouble. But, as he observes, while the rules of democracy where broken by the previous government, UE did nothing.
Prof. Ryszard Legutko
MEP from Poland, Law and Justice (Pol. Prawo i Sprawiedliwość)
European Conservatives and Reformers
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Yet again, you are presenting another Orwellian spectacle; I hope the last one. However, knowing the House, it is not certain. As previously, this decision is nonsensical, unfair, extremely partial and unjustified.
There is no problem with the Freedom of Assembly Bill. There are no restrictions for anyone’s right to demonstrate in Poland. Am I clear? There are none. So, why are you bothering people? How is it possible to fly in the face of facts so radically?
Let us look at the Istanbul Convention. The Polish government’s position is clear. We are against the accession of the Union to the convention because it is in conflict with the Treaties. In any case, it is not the Polish government alone who is against. And please do not lecture us on the issue of violence against women. With regard to the occurrence of violence against women, Poland is the last in Europe. Yes, the last, the least violence. The country of President Timmermans, The Netherlands, and of President Verhofstadt is high in the disgraceful ranking: the violence many times greater than in Poland.
You have drowned out in political correctness everything likely at all to be drowned out; you are destroying culture and language with it, drowning education in it and replacing it with indoctrination. And what? And nothing. How about coming to us, to Poland, to learn the know-how so that women are not harmed? Reportedly, it is never too late to learn, unless we exclude the EU political elite from the tenet.
You Sir, President Timmermans, have been dragging stubbornly the case of the Constitutional Tribunal demanding its domination by the nominees of one side of the political dispute in Poland. I kind of manage to understand it. You have become accustomed that in the Union, since time immemorial, one coalition has been in power and the fact that in some country there may be a diversity of disputing parties, that a constitutional tribunal argues you consider an anomaly. A similar policy is carried out by the Venice Commission who in February this year, in Poland, did not grace the Tribunal judges of different opinion with their presence and threw their opinion to thrash. And how to respect the opinion of the Venice Commission?
So, do not say that you mean freedom because it is the least of your concern. You mean to preserve the monopoly of one side: yours. No matter how long you would speak about the European values, you have with them less and less in common. You do not observe the Treaties, you do not respect the subsidiary principle, you do not respect the rules of a rational discourse. You do not recognize the Latin principle that the other party should be heard; you do not respect another Latin principle that no-one should be heard; you do not respect another Latin principle that no-one should be a judge in his own cause. Such an alienation from the European culture by the elites of the Union we observe for some time is a saddening fact and it bodes ill.
Recently, together with my colleague Tomasz Poręba, I have written an extensive letter to you to point out the gross errors. I repeat: gross errors in your and the European Commission’s opinion. It does not concern an interpretation; it is about serious factual errors relating to the Polish Constitution and Polish law. In line with your habit, you have ignored all the remarks or have not understood them. It is an old method. To pretend that something does not exist. Ignorance or mimicking ignorance provides this pleasant sense of comfort. How does all of it look simple if one does not need to answer to arguments and it suffices to sing the same opera with the clapping audience, does it not? 
Unfortunately, all of it is a piece of a larger whole. Instead of stabilizing itself, the Union has been shaken and you are responsible for it, not inconsiderably. You antagonize communities; you deepen divisions-not only in Poland. Look how it is boiling up in most of the European countries. Instead of winning yourselves allies, you are creating new enemies in a rapid pace: not reformers such as I and my group but enemies. Yet, it cannot continue forever. I dedicate a sentence from the Old Testament, from the Book of Proverbs, to you:
Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall.
 Please compare also a very detailed and informative opinion of 15 experts: http://www.sejm.gov.pl/media8.nsf/files/ASEA-ADRKBW/$File/Raport%20Zespo%C5%82u%20Ekspert%C3%B3w%20do%20spraw%20Problematyki%20Trybuna%C5%82u%20Konstytucyjnego.pdf
 Lat. Audiatur et altera pars.
 Lat. Nemo iudex in causa sua.
 Lat. Audiatur et altera pars.
 Information in footnotes added by Voice Free Europe; the Polish original based on the speaker’s script, the authorized English translation by Lidia Sokołowska-Cybart.
There is an account on Twitter: Georgia Rises. This is the promotional account about Georgia’s achievements in politics, economy, culture, business, sport and other spheres of life. I like this account, because there is visible Georgia’s successful development, including in the economy. Yes, Georgia has good indicators in the economy, mostly in the macro economy. Unfortunately, poverty is the main problem of Georgian society. Success in the macro economy still doesn’t improve condition of life of the majority of Georgians. Unemployment or jobs with low salary are reasons of massive poverty. Voice Free Europe is an international network and many of its members are from the rich, developed Western countries. Georgia needs humanitarian aid. The VFE isn’t financial fund, but we can create fund of economical support for Georgia. I know western friends and partners of Georgia are ready to help poor families of Georgians. I’m sure its temporary problem and in future prosperous Georgia will be able to help other developing countries.
Georgia has pro Western political orientation. Main goals of my Homeland are integration in NATO and EU. Russia, our neighbor, considers post soviet republics, now independent countries, as territory of its influence, including Georgia. Russia’s refusal becomes as breaking factor of our transatlantic and euro integration, because western countries try to avoid conflict with the aggressive Russia. The VFE as international network can play role of political lobby of Georgia in the western political institutions.
As the head-office of the VFE in Poland, we can also choose as priority developing the bilateral relations between Poland and Georgia in various spheres of life. In Georgia are living many Poles. Friendship and solidarity between our nations have long history. We must strengthen ties between our nations and countries, all the more so, because officially Georgia and Poland are strategic partners. I’m sure, the VFE will play positive role to improve situation in Georgia!
Last week Polish foundation “Life and Family” have been given a fine for picketing against abortion. All of the participants and even passers -by got the fines of more than a hundred Euros. But they refused to take it.
In France, there were two cases recently that outraged public opinion: the ban of advertisement showing children with Down Sindrome and the project of government against the pro-life websites.
The advertisement might be confusing the mothers pregnant with such babies and influence their decision to abort them. When I enter the website of one of the biggest organisations encouraging women to have an abortion – American Planned Parenthood, there is no problem with sentences “Abortion is a safe and legal way to end the pregnancy”. “Abortions are very common. In fact, 3 out of 10 women in the U.S. have an abortion by the time they are 45 years old”. Aren’t such sentences encouraging women to have abortion or “end the pregnancy”? There is no information about killing babies in your own womb.
French goverment (as well as American one) sees no danger is encouraging women to have abortion, but the opposite action should be prohibited? It is the same situation with the police officers in Poland. Who let them give the fine for picketing?
How can we tell the truth about abortion and end with the hypocrisy of abortion business?
Is this the end of the Sweden’s history?
Lars Bern criticizes the political aristocracy who acts for interests utterly different from those of the Swedish nation.
I repeat what I wrote earlier on how the political parties in Sweden have transformed gradually from social movements into select trade unions of political class of sort of professionals. The class consists of social climbers to a large extend lacking professional experience and meaningful education.
Journalist Anders Isacsson once called them quite shrewdly political aristocracy who as the old aristocracy had achieved leading positions in society with no other qualifications except for the class affiliation.
Earlier, the obligations of a state were managed by qualified, educated and well-paid civil servants who worked under the pain of civil liability. The aristocracy viewed those well-paid positions as an opportunity to raise their earnings, so removed the civil liability and took over themselves those well-paid positions. Here we have one of the explanations for the deteriorating performance of the state in the contemporary society.
The political aristocracy now has joint interests to protect across political lines which are stronger than interests of the commonage. In those circles, it is important to minimize the risk which would appear if the common folks were allowed to influence politics.
The debate among parties involves no more the ideas of how to form the society in the best way. It reduces itself, step by step, to the ever thinner facade where roughly one per cent is offered up or down to create an impression of diverse submissions. In some areas, even this is not the case; instead, all politically incorrect opinions are silenced. Politics today is just a populist waving of posters without any connection to reality.
One of the means of minimization of the political risk by aristocracy was subjecting the state to the whole array of supranational organizations such as UN and EU-joining the state in the globalism controlled by oligarchs.
National self-determination has been given up through introduction of multiplicity of international agreements, for example in trade or climate requirements. More and more foreign leaders take important decisions. If afterwards there is a widespread popular discontent, the aristocracy washes their hands and skillfully seeks excuses for themselves. In exchange for giving up important elements of our state’s self-determination, it is invited to participate in the current court receptions at the imperial Brussels in the similar style as the old aristocracy used to fete themselves on the royal courts. The Brussels’ court ensures indecently high-paid positions without real authority.
Our top aristocrat Löfven was able to recognize how completely deprived of any content this court was and how everyone turned his back on him when he needed help in solving a domestic problem he could not handle himself.
The latest discovery of the political aristocracy after all those years when the national defense has been managed badly is that now we must break with our over-centennial, effective strategy of the Swedish neutrality. By subjecting our defense policy to the American military/industrial NATO shield, it is expected to avoid taking responsibility for the defense policy.
The majority of all wars started in the post-WWII era stemmed from the NATO circle and the greatest threat to the world peace today is a NATO state, Turkey. Therefore, it is difficult to understand how we are to achieve a peaceful development with NATO. It is a problem as well that Sweden must double its expenses on defense in order to be accepted by NATO.
The requirement is set in the amount of 40 bn Kronas from the taxpayers without the existence of a real danger; yet, we are forced to submit to the demands of the globalists despite the fact that Russia reduces its defense budget by 30%. Where 40 bn is to come from now that the migration policy of Reinfeldta and Löfvena devours all our reserves and much more than that? The political aristocracy does not live in a real world already.
Regarding health and medical care, that aristocracy, without opposition, has allowed the international pharmacological corporations to seize the control over education and research whereas the multinational giants control the food production and more and more of what we eat while the worst pandemic in the world history is raging because of the politics. Politically directed authorities who ought to protect the public interest become every day more dependent on the global firms.
The leaders of the political aristocracy allow to be invited to the closed associations of the ruling Anglo-American oligarchy where they sell out the national interest for the spot in the Sun among the wealthiest of the wealthy. Defense Minister Hultqvist runs as a child around the house blinded by the glow of brass of all sorts in Pentagon. Fredrik Reinfeldt has come home and sneered at the values and traditions of Sweden. He was persuading the Swedish nation to open their hearts to denationalization of the state in accordance with the New World Order plan which the oligarchs designed for him.
The creation of one common political doctrine of the aristocracy without personal liability has seized completely the dictat over political life. The common folk’s ability of influencing politics has vanished completely and democracy is dying.
This unfortunate trend is a result of a political strategy carefully selected by the aristocracy. If we, the citizens, do not manage to hold the line on their irresponsibility towards our society we will lose our freedom; the state is threaten with a decay characteristic for the countries where oligarchs imposed the New World Order.
Many count on the Sweden Democrats party, Sverigedemokraterna, but it is an illusory hope. Its leaders will not dare and do not want to take decisive steps out of fear of losing their fat perks. What the state needs more than anything else is the trustworthy alternative for the political Coalition of Dying (a Swedish quibble inspired by the name of the coalition of two traditional political rivals: DÖ-koalitionen) and the undemocratic globalism threatening with the end of the passage called Sweden in history.
Based on the Lars Bern’s Blog
Translated into Polish by Adam Wesołowski
Translated from Polish into English by Lidia Sokołowska-Cybart