Polonophobic Memes Virulent AntiCatholicism Porter Szucs

Faith and Fatherland, by Brian Porter-Szucs. 2011

Cultural Marxism: One Long, Rather Scurrilous, Hatchet Job On Polish Roman Catholicism

The author consistently oversimplifies the views with whom he disagrees, and fails to provide the reader with the kind of in-depth analysis needed to understand properly the topic.

BLAMING THE VICTIM

The author criticizes the “church militant” mindset. (p. 252). One would never know it by reading this book, but the informed reader knows that Communism was then relatively new, and that one of its undisguised goals was the destruction and abolition of religion. Why, then, is the “church militant” mindset either surprising or necessarily objectionable? Along a similar vein, instead of just mentioning the hostility of the Catholic Church to Freemasonry, why does Porter-Szucs not educate the reader about the very real enmity of at least part of classical Freemasonry towards Christianity–an enmity that goes at least as far back as the French Revolution?

As might be expected from a leftist, Porter-Szucs engages in name-calling instead of substantive analysis. Rather than analyzing the ultra-individualist flaws of western democracy that were brought up, he uses the epithet “extremist” (a standard left-wing buzzword) towards RADIO MARYJA. (p. 201). He also accuses RADIO MARYJA of “vitriol” when defending itself (p. 270), while virtually ignoring the stated left-wing attacks on the Church–the very one that show vitriol (if not scurrility) par excellence.

Not surprisingly, Porter-Szucs freely throws around accusations of (what else?) anti-Semitism, especially in conjunction with historian Jerzy Robert Nowak, Fr. Rydzyk, and RADIO MARYJA. He never defines this elastic term. [Readers familiar with Nowak know that he never lumps all Jews together. He individualizes Jewish behaviors.] Is the author one of those who tacitly supposes that Jews are beyond criticism–all the while that many of them so freely attack Poles?

The author tries to ridicule threats to Poland as conspiracy theories and bogeymen, notably in conjunction with the pronouncements of Fr. Rydzyk and RADIO MARYJA (e. g, pp. 268-269). Porter-Szucs should instead be candid about movements such as cultural Marxism, one of whose stated goals is the elimination of religion, notably in Poland. There are also not a few Polish liberals who, while perhaps not going as far, would like for Poles to marginalize Catholicism according to the liberals’ whimsical definition of “progress”, if only to win the admiration of the western-European ultra-secular states.

Instead of bashing RADIO MARYJA for characterizing the European Union as “godless” (p. 325), why does Porter-Szucs not, at minimum, mention the extreme secularism of this union (including lack of even nominal mention of God in its Constitution). This secularism sometimes goes as far as the elevation of professed personal offense, at the mere sight of a Cross, to a potential human right.

Now consider Jews. Porter-Szucs focuses on the pre-WWII Church portraying Jews as thinking themselves above goys, and of having active enmity against Christianity. He fails to inform the reader that such tendencies definitely existed among Jews. [Read the free online book, TRADITIONAL JEWISH ATTITUDES TOWARDS POLES, by Mark Paul.]

CONSTANTLY-REPEATED CANNED ACCUSATIONS AGAINST POLISH CARDINAL AUGUST HLOND

The author superficially dismisses teachings of some members of the Church, notably Cardinal August Hlond in 1936, about “Jews as freethinkers” and a threat to morals. He should inform the reader that Jewish authors themselves have written about the rampant secularization, and even loosening of morals, among Poland’s Jews. [See the Peczkis Amazon Wish List: JEWISH FREETHOUGHT IN PRE-WWII POLAND–BASED ON JEWISH SOURCES].

HOLOCAUSTIANITY AS A CLUB WIELDED AGAINST POLAND–YET AGAIN

Porter-Szucs’ Judeocentric bias is especially prominent when it comes to discussing the Holocaust. He takes the following customary slap at Christianity, “Catholic anti-Semitism would not have taken the shape it did had racialist ideas not been such a key component of European culture at the time, and secular anti-Semitism could not have gained so much support had it not shared a lot of common ground with Christianity.” (p. 272). This is a non sequitur. There is no evidence, certainly none presented by the author, that Nazi attitudes and actions relied in any way on past Christian teachings about Jews. Frankly, the author’s accusations against the Church come across as a cheap shot against Christianity.

Continuing the display of his obvious tendentiousness, Porter-Szucs then moves the target of his attacks to the Polish Underground NSZ (N.S.Z.). He quotes Jan T. Gross on Jedwabne as gospel truth. (pp. 322-324). He berates Poles who do not toe the standard Judeocentric line about the “Shoah as a distinct phenomenon.” (p. 316). Holocaust supremacism is alive and well.

DENYING JEWISH CRIMES

Predictably, Porter-Szucs tries to belittle the Zydokomuna (Bolshevized Judaism) through such artifacts as the naïve limitation of this tendency to Communist-Party affiliation, and through well-worn illogical arguments, such as the one about Jews and urbanization, and the one about Stalin being the one who chose Jews for U. B. (Bezpieka) leadership positions. (p. 298). The Jews were urbanized exculpation can be turned around. Urban dwellers, owing to their usual education and their usual higher standard of living, should be more skeptical of the revolutionary slogans and utopian promises of Communism than the presumably-simple country folk. So the urbanization of Jews is less, not more, an excuse for supporting Communism. As for Stalin, he chose Jews precisely because he knew them for what they were–unswervingly loyal and ardent Communists, devoid of any attachment to the nations in which they lived. Finally, Jewish over-involvement in Communism was always much broader than CP membership. It long preceded Stalin and persisted long after his death (in fact, in modified form, to this day, in the form of neo-Marxism).

STICKING UP FOR THE HOLOCAUST INDUSTRY

Porter-Szucs attacks historian Jerzy Robert Nowak for entertaining the notion of Judeopolonia (p. 325; see also p. 296), for speaking about extortion attempts against Poland by certain Jews, and for suggesting that some Jews want Poland blamed for the Holocaust.

Judging by the volume and venom of many Jewish writings about Poland, the casual reader could reasonably conclude that it was the Poles, and not the Germans, who had murdered the 6 million Jews. Finally, surveys show that a significant percentage of Israeli youth actually believe that Poles are co-responsible with the Germans for the Holocaust. Clearly, historian Jerzy Robert Nowak is on to something.

THE AUTHOR’S RATHER PRIMAL PREJUDICES AGAINST CATHOLICISM ITSELF

At times, Porter-Szucs goes beyond analyzing (or mis-analyzing) Polish Catholicism, and directly attacks Christian beliefs. For instance, he calls the doctrine of hell “an embarrassment”. (p. 79). [To whom?]. He does not realize that a person in a state of mortal sin CAN receive absolution. (p. 11). He mischaracterizes RADIO MARYJA by quoting those who say that it teaches praying to Mary over praying to Jesus Christ. (p. 392). As anyone with even a cursory familiarity with RADIO MARYJA programs knows, this is ridiculous.

THOSE BIG, BAD ANTI-IMMIGRANTS YET AGAIN

As a parting shot, Porter-Szucs hurls yet another standard left-wing buzzword at RADIO MARYJA–that of xenophobia. (p. 396). Everyone who disagrees with unrestricted immigration is a xenophobe. It is a fitting ending to the superficial and biased nature of his analysis of Polish Catholicism.