To Tusk, you're not a citizen, but a public enemy. "Fighting democracy" is the announcement of tyranny

pch24.pl 9 months ago

Self-will of the prosecution, holding unjudged prisoners, forcefully taking over public institutions, and yet unwarranted “withdrawal” of own signature. specified actions by Donald Tusk's government are simply pre-battled tactics, since the head of the government ruled that his non-constitutional actions were to strengthen the “democracy fighting” over the Vistula River. We have a systematic clash ahead of us where each of us can become a citizen... a public enemy. With the readiness to abuse power and fight the opposition, Prime Minister Tusk openly “gloat” in the advanced chamber of parliament. Therefore, he has already said good-bye to the propaganda of the regulation of law. Now he foretold tyranny, justified by the protection of the "powers of the people."

Lamus law

Non-constitutional" the head of government's decision has sparked strong opposition to the legal environment and broad opposition from commentators. To remind you: with the submission of a "contrasigna" to the appointment by the president of justice Krzysztof Wesołowski as Head of the civilian Chamber of the ultimate Court, Tusk assumed legal work for this decision. It all points to the fact that erstwhile he signed this signature, the president of the Council of Ministers had a intellectual eclipse... shortly it turned out that the PM's environment considered Wesołowski unconstitutionally sworn in. 1 of the alleged “neosaurs”.

Things got fast. 2 lawyers directed the protest to the provincial administrative court, demanding consideration of the legality of the nomination. Donald Tusk, however, preferred to overtake the ruling. Almost with the slogan "Poles, nothing happened" on his lips, he said – in social media – that the countersignata withdraws...

However, the head of government fell from the rain – under the gutter. As indicated by the legal authorities, specified as Prof. Andrzej Zoll, the procedure for withdrawing specified a signature does not be in Polish law. So Tusk signed a paper that he considers unconstitutional... so – besides unconstitutionally – the X platform withdrew its signature.

In this inept slalom between the government's self-will and the political principles of the "lawfulness" election, he was badly beaten. Meanwhile, 1 day later Donald Tusk hosted in the Polish legislature with his Totumfatic Adam Bodnar, who inactive did not separate the function of prosecutor from the Minister of Justice. It's a small awkward... due to the fact that this couple was expected to talk about ways to bring the regulation of law back in the country... 24 hours after a rough trick.

Tusk so decided that he would not explain himself – after all, it is the domain of the guilty – and inactive praised the “crying” of the withdrawal of the signature. In a speech to the Senators, the head of government stated that the resisting decisions of lawyers await us for his power many times.

We'll most likely make mistakes again, or we'll commit acts that, according to any legal authorities, are either incompatible or not full in line with the laws, but we're not relieved of our work all day. – declared the president of the Council of Ministers. – I, however, will proceed to make specified decisions with full awareness of the hazard that not all will comply with the criteria of the full regulation of law from the point of view, for example, of the Purists, in a good sense of the word “As a historian, I think I can hazard the thesis that Today we request to act in these categories of fighting democracy."

Who followed the prosecution's fresh actions against the environment of the March of Independence, priest Michał Olszewski, taking over public institutions through the aggression of the services, and yet settling legal matters by means of resolutions of the Sejm, this 1 had no illusions... Tusk is willing to usage outlaw tricks for his own purposes. This time, however, the head of government admitted it with an open visor. He just announced that not all aspect of the regulation of law is his favorite...

What may be eludes the public, and yet is most crucial in Tusk's declaration, is the fact that the Prime Minister publically and explicitly revealed that he intends to introduce in the country a long-term model of "fighting democracy". Who will this strategy fight? It's not even about the opposition anymore. Anyone can find the list of public enemies – besides the reader of PCh24.pl.

Democracy will fight... with us

The political doctrine mentioned by Tuska is Karl Loewenstein's child. Its core is the belief that a democratic strategy must actively defend itself against... the interior threat posed by citizens and their associations, contesting the foundations of the system.

‘No 1 can benefit from protection abuse of rights for purposes contrary to the strategy and conventional values, and thus reconciles peace and justice, democracy, regulation of law and human dignity", he described this point of view already in 2014 in the pages of the legal diary “Palestra” Dr. Tomasz Tadeusz Koncewicz.

"The Paradox of democratic systems is that, by providing the widest possible scope for the accomplishment of individual autonomy, they contain the danger that the gifts of democracy will be utilized by those who want to destruct it. Political pluralism is based on the acceptance of political forces' ability to proclaim their imagination of the state and the request for change in this area. The promotion of change must, however, be legal and democratic in nature, avoid the antagonistic language that introduces antagonism, hatred and disapproval for others due to the fact that there are others," added the periodical publicist.

There is so a large deal of chance for a career as an opponent of democracy. Whether a circumstantial group of citizens are to be considered public enemies, who request to take distant the rights and political cause, is to be decided by vague and recognised grounds, specified as alleged violations of "human dignity"...

As 1 of the attempts to usage the category of "democracy fighting" in his article Koncewicz cited proposals to ban the March of Independence. Although he himself has distanced himself from this postulate, this clue gives us a sense of what entities will be included in the list of public enemies and sources of "internal threat".

The yearly patriotic march is not a protest against the election of the authorities. Nor is he an effort at an armed coup. It consists of a number of diverse participants. What unites them is the determined reluctance to dominate the politics of the fresh left, the pedagogy of shame and the cutting off of the political class from the interests of the nation. The fact that during the years of the regulation of Tusk, this manifestation suffered oppression from the authorities, media establishment and services shows that it is simply a model of the victim of “wardom democracy”.

If specified an event can be considered a danger to democracy, why not pro-life movements or Catholic environments? After all, it is known that no Catholic can consider abortion even acceptable – even if it is democratically legalised. He is so definitely hostile to the strategy that allows infanticide. So are the movements that indicate the inadmissibility of abortion, according to the United Nations, of "human rights", worthy of silence, marginalisation and political force of the ruling? The question of whether specified consequences will arise will only be a substance of scale. These sizes and influences separate between "anti-democratic" eccentrics and movements that pose a serious threat. erstwhile the message of dissidents becomes competitive for power – then the time for persecution will come.

We know, therefore, that the "fight for democracy" will not concern a dispute with supporters of another form of the system. Its essence will be the clash of the “democratic man” with people attached to values beyond the powers of the state, the limits of tolerance and the power of the people. In practice, "democracy" does not mean how to govern today. It became synonymous with “plurism” and “tolerance”. Principles that forbid criticism of destructive and ungodly attitudes, and with brutality they attack attempts to counter their expansion in society. Democracy is simply a deficiency of standards. Moral principles that, without Parliament's participation, separate between "good" and "bad".

Even at the time of the French Revolution, the imagination of “people’s authorities” did not affect a program as harmless as it tries to survive. Its rule was to believe that the only origin of power was the people. In turn no moral nor divine nor divine nor moral nor divine nor moral nor moral nor moral nor moral nor moral nor moral nor moral nor moral nor moral nor moral nor moral normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical normical We remember very well how much blood the opponents of “freedom, equality and brotherhood” were shed in Revolutionary France. After all, there could be no rights for those who did not give their minds to the fresh regime...

Loewenstein's doctrine is designed to ease the pattern somewhat. It is an internally contradictory sophism, which could as well be summarized by the slogan "democracy by democracy, but for opponents of democrats death". There is no mask that tyrants value more than the likeness of the defenders of liberty, order and liberty. Since Tusk’s tendency to act outside the law is already well known, he remains to effort to clothe it. It breaks the law... to make Poland a law.

Philip Adamus

Read Entire Article