Undemonizing Polish Nationalism Rose

Polish Memoirs, by William John Rose, Daniel Stone (Editor). 1976

Polish Nationalism Undemonized and Clarified. The Jewish Share of Blame. Teschen 1938 Justified. Age-Old German Polonophobia

William John Rose was a Canadian from Winnipeg who visited Poland around the time just before WWI. He learned much about Poland. Soon thereafter, he was thrust into a position of diplomacy caused by the breakup of the Austro-Hungarian Empire. From then on, he became an authority on Poland, and eventually taught at several western universities.

DO NOT MIX ALL FORMS OF NATIONALISM IN THE SAME SMELLY BAG

Nowadays, nationalism, in academia, is a dirty word, and it is a standard pejorative LEWAK buzzword. This, for one thing, confuses emancipatory nationalism with imperialistic nationalism. In addition, Stone comments, “Poland, in contrast, made a deep impression on Rose, as he found in the nationalist movement moral values corresponding to his earlier training…Polish nationalism appeared to Rose to stress moral regeneration and the rejection of materialism.” (pp. xv-xvi). Rose thought highly of Pilsudski.

JEWS MUST ACCEPT THEIR SHARE OF BLAME FOR THE NEGATIVE ASPECTS OF POLISH-JEWISH RELATIONS

Having a firsthand knowledge of Poles and Jews, Rose, in contradistinction to most modern thinking, found Jews the ones primarily responsible for the negative aspects of Polish-Jewish relations. Citing several sources published by Rose, Editor Stone comments, (quote) He (Rose) recognized that Jews were subject to discrimination but considered actual anti-Semitism uncommon and of recent date, deriving from economic competition. The real problem was not Polish attitudes but the refusal of Jews to assimilate. He strenuously opposed Zionism insofar as it led to a resurgence of Jewish nationalism in Eastern Europe. The best solution needs to be emigration, preferably to established countries where Jews would not be too `arrogant’ to assimilate. Rose applauded those Jews who considered themselves Polish nationals… [such as] historian Szymon Aszkenazy, a practicing Jew…Nonetheless, assimilation could not offer a solution to the mass of Jews.” (p. xxiii).

Rose touches on his many encounters with thinking people of various sorts. While meeting with intellectuals and thinkers, Rose, already before WWI, had come across numerous atheistic Jews. (pp. 14-15). [This confirms Polish Cardinal August Hlond, and his much-condemned 1936 statement on Jews as freethinkers.]

Although they were living, of all places, in Poland, many Jews were hostile to even learning Polish–even after the resurrection of the Polish state itself! Rose describes his experiences with a Polish Jew who experienced enmity from fellow Jews for not sharing their veiled (and politicized) anti-Polish and anti-goy sentiments: (quote) Then my guide took me to see what everyone regarded as a model piece of work for abandoned children, the Jewish orphanage on Leszno Street [in Warsaw], managed by a Mr. Hosenpud. This remarkable man had been a teacher for years, and was president of the Jewish Teacher’s Association. A believer, he took the view that Jewry is a religion and not a nation, and had many enemies among his own people, who were opposed to having orphan lads taught Polish, or brought up to play games, or introduced to the school curriculum that is regarded the world over as the road to intelligent citizenship. (unquote)(p. 100).

POLES WERE LONG DISENFRANCHIZED ON THEIR OWN LANDS

In Lodz, the “Polish Manchester”, Rose found a city lacking even sewers and a central water supply. He adds, “The controls were really in Russian hands; the owners and managers of the cotton mills were mostly of German or Jewish blood, while the workers were chiefly Poles from the surrounding rural area, or again the poorest and most ignorant type of Jew.” (p. 175).

EVEN IF IT WAS ARGUABLY NOT A GOOD PUBLIC RELATIONS MOVE, POLAND WAS FULLY JUSTIFIED IN TAKING BACK CIESZYN IN 1938

For a time, Rose had lived in Teschen (Cieszyn). He was there when the Austro-Hungarian Empire broke up. As for the later events of 1938, Rose continued to maintain his lifelong belief that Poland had full rights to Cieszyn, but, recounting still later events (WWII), now questioned the political wisdom of Poland’s 1938 acquisition of Teschen. (p. 106). [Of course, Polonophobes will always find something to blame on Poland. If Teschen 1938 never happened, it would be something else.]

AGE-OLD GERMAN POLONOPHOBIA

According to Rose, as of at least just before WWI, “only a few” German thinkers regarded the thinking and writing of Slavs of having anything of value. (p. 14). Although Germans were later to reckon the territory of the Polish Corridor as “eternally German”, Rose cited the Germans’ own Spett map of 1912. It showed that the eventual Polish Corridor had a Polish-speaking majority long before 1918. (p. 82).

Rose frowned upon plebiscites as a method for deciding the German-Polish frontier around 1918-1920. The Germans, just defeated in their imperialistic war, were now about to be rewarded for German majorities caused by the earlier massive and barbarous German colonization and denationalization of conquered Polish lands. (p. 80). Well said.

THE PROBLEM OF WESTERN IGNORANCE ABOUT POLAND [THEN AND NOW]

In conclusion, William John Rose was one of not many westerners who became a Polonophile–a true friend of Poland. Why their rarity? Here are some clues: In the Introduction, Editor Daniel Stone points out that most westerners knew Slavs primarily as unappealing, poor, uneducated immigrants [the Bieganski stereotype]. In addition, the sobering fact was that, in just the years around WWI, Poland was actually more exotic to most westerners than was China! (p. ix). [Nowadays, the problem is not only western ignorance about Poland, but also that what little westerners know is filtered through Jewish narratives.]