This is where our conversation ends – as it slowly moves towards foggy grounds of malevolent birches, which portends an unnecessary catastrophy.

I see the struggling with the chasm between different discourses on history and national identity as a process of “authentication” of democratic transition in Poland – maybe its crucial element – which will ultimately allow to confirm or deny successful adaptation to the culture of democracy.
Clearly, it has still been a work-in-progress.

With kind regards,

m.bakalarz

Thank you for responding. I did not expect a response. You have raised issues different from that of Prof. Goldfarb. I have read the first two parts and his introduction to “Why Poland”, with which I also have a lot of issues. I am not sure what you meant by the big picture that Prof. Goldfarb presented. Quite on the contrary, he has a very narrow view of Polish history and of Polish-Jewish relations. He is seeing Polish history as part of Jewish Polish history written here in the US rather than Jewish history being part of Polish history written by Polish historians. It is a narrow Judeocentric view. I would even question how accurate was his mother’s perception of why her parents left Poland. If there was a place in Poland where Poles and Jews lived in harmony it would be Lwow. Prof. Goldfarb’s grandparents did not live under Polish rule and I assume that his mother was born and brought up in the United States and her perception was probably shaped by the pervasive anti-Polish propaganda emanating from both Zionist and non-Zionist Jewish organizations. Its source was Bolshevik Russia. Poland’s two “neighbors” were determined to destroy Poland as soon as Wilson announced his ‘14 Points”. I think that her parents left Poland because they were fortunate to get an immigrant visa. Like most Poles, Jews were economic immigrants looking for a better life and were not escaping persecution. Post-WWI Poland was the most war devastated country in Europe, facing mass starvation and of course no employment or means of making a living. Most of the effort of the Hoover humanitarian mission was centered on Poland. It is accurate to say that Hoover may have saved Poland and made its independence possible.
Malgosia, my comments had nothing to do with your notion of historiosophy, no matter what it means, but it has a lot to do with “truth”. I prefer to think in terms of national identity rather than coining new terms which mean whatever one wants it to mean. There is another term which I do not like –“new historiography” meaning revised mendacious history of WWII and post-war period peddled by post-Communists. It is disheartening to observe that Polish-American historians are buying into it. This new historiography began with Gorbachev and his attempt to save Communism in Russia, by admitting to some crimes but greatly downsizing others. It is a rehash of Stalinist version of history with some admission of guilt.
Your statement, when talking about history and traditions: “But it also introduced a dangerous distinction between the truth and the lie; between “us” and “them” willing to invade again”, most likely explains your mind set. You have accepted without any reservations arguments of the post-Communist in power in Poland today, and are ready to forgive, forget and move on. Malgosia, there is a clear distinction between truth and a lie, and it poses no danger to anyone except the liars. Polish national identity was built and is being reconstructed by studying its history and traditions and by a search for truth.
The “Truth Shall Set us Free”. Truth is a constructive force which unites rather segregates contested histories. It is an old saying, but it is as true today as it was in the past. Malgosia, “truth” does exist regardless of Lenin’s views and that of his followers. Communists and post-Communists in Poland and elsewhere, live in mortal fear of it. It is also the only weapon available to Poles in their efforts to finally de-communize Poland. As yet, Poland is not free of control by former Communists. No one in post-communist governments spoke or speaks for her. Only Kaczynski tried and became a target of vicious character assassination not only in post-Communist media but also in the Western media. A lot of people hate “truth” and I hope you are not one of them. I am surprised that you think that anti-Polish defamation, rooted in Soviet propaganda of yesterday, is a good starting point for soul searching discussion of Polish-Jewish issues. How does discussion of anti-Polish fantasies contribute to understanding of the issues? Not only that, to have a discussion the Poles are being asked to accept defamation as a truth and settled history. Gross’s “Neighbors” and “Fear” are Soviet style big lies.
Finally, you seem to be under the impression that the disagreement is between a Jewish version as opposed to “Polish” version of events and history. Nothing could be further from the truth. If one looks at the Kielce pogrom, why would anyone view the official Communist version of the pogrom as a “Jewish” version, when it is based on destruction of all physical evidence (including depositions of the 70 Jewish survivors), records manufactured by a kangaroo NKVD-UB court, fictional confessions written by Soviet Intelligence officers and signed under torture by innocent people, and intense disinformation propaganda campaign against the PSL, AK, the Church, and even boy scouts. Even the UB prosecutor was not allowed to enter the site of the pogrom and examine the evidence. The perpetrators of the crime became “investigators” torturers the next day and then “witnesses” against innocent people charged with the crime. The next morning after the pogrom (might have been earlier) the firing squad arrived in Kielce from Warsaw and 7 individuals were executed 4 days latter after a one day trial. What makes such a version a Jewish version? As I said before, it is not a debate between Jews and Poles, but between the Polish nation and the Soviets and their Polish Communist stooges. The successors of PRL, the post-Communists, continue to peddle that virulent anti-Polish propaganda. Soviet propaganda is not a good starting point for soul searching and one must ask why Gross and others are peddling that version. You don’t think it could be prejudice?
Remember Malgosia, the truth shall set us free and unite us all.

With best regards,

Walter Orlowski

Subject: [deliberatelyconsidered] Re: Why Poland? Part 3: Thinking about Jedwabne, Addressing Premature Holocaust Fatigue

What I heard in your post, though, is a different kind of song.

Historical, deeply symbolical imagination as a way of expressing and preserving Polish national identity is a concept from the 19th century: the times of partitions, but also the times of Romanticism, with its emphasis on the role of literature, its new-born national identity projects, and, in the Polish case, with the development of symbolic, historiosophical interpretation of the role of Poland, chosen as the Christ of the nations of Europe: suffering so much to redeem many.
Unfortunately, Poland’s fate didn’t allow to develop modern discourse: 123 years of non-existence on the map of Europe (1795-1918), 20 years of independence until the WWII, followed by 45 years behind the Iron Curtain – created almost permanent need for the national self-sustaining and resistance. Historiosophy became the arms in the fight for Polish identity.

This historiosophical imagination somehow shaped my patriotism, too. Taught me to proud of my culture, to study history (of Poland, of Europe, of the world) in order to better understand the present and the future.
But it also introduced a dangerous distinction between the truth and the lie; between “us” and “them” willing to invade again. I have been witnessing how this historiosophical imagination in the public discourse has become a template to dismiss any discussion (“you are a liar, as a representative of the anti-Polish enemy X, Y or Z”), to self-defend (“we had no choice”; “our historical situation was so much worse than X, Y, Z”), to white-wash dark spots of the history (“we were victims of a) enemies’ propaganda; b) partitions; c) the greatest tragedy ever”).

Debate about Jedwabne – “lopsided”, clumsy, chaotic as it was – started a public conversation about complex Polish history. The conversation that revealed that Poles are, fortunately, ordinary: not angles, not the tribe of heroes, not the Martyr and the Redeemer of all the nations. Just ordinary people. And that during the war Poles acted as ordinary people, in many different Jedwabnes: some of them with honor and righteousness, some of them – scoundrels and criminals.
When writing “Why Poland”, Jeff Goldfarb depicts well this transitional moment: confrontation with the complex history and an attempt to embrace it, thus constituting a new discourse about Poland and redefining Polish patriotism. For many it was a lost chance – post-Romantic symbolic thinking did not allow starting the conversation anew; yet many took Jedwabne debate seriously – both on the official level and on the level of kitchen table conversations. I find it symptomatic that it is the Jewish-Polish story that marked the beginning of this process.
Maybe it was somehow easier for my generation, brought up in the eighties – far enough from the terror of the war and close enough to the 1989 hope. Unfortunately it is not to say that this debate is concluded; but for sure, it can never be silenced or void again.

**
Clearly, one can continue using “the true history” argument to effectively dismiss any discussion. There will always be a good argument not to listen to “them”: Jews, post-Communists, Masons, atheists, or simply unaware ignorant. But can one be really sure he is the only depositary of truth? It may become an extremely solitary position, when no one true enough is left around.

There is something to learn from the text written by the Outsider; his story may cover more than any insider dares to see.

With best regards,
Malgorzata Bakalarz

What I heard in your post, though, is a different kind of song.

Historical, deeply symbolical imagination as a way of expressing and preserving Polish national identity is a concept from the 19th century: the times of partitions, but also the times of Romanticism, with its emphasis on the role of literature, its new-born national identity projects, and, in the Polish case, with the development of symbolic, historiosophical interpretation of the role of Poland, chosen as the Christ of the nations of Europe: suffering so much to redeem many.
Unfortunately, Poland’s fate didn’t allow to develop modern discourse: 123 years of non-existence on the map of Europe (1795-1918), 20 years of independence until the WWII, followed by 45 years behind the Iron Curtain – created almost permanent need for the national self-sustaining and resistance. Historiosophy became the arms in the fight for Polish identity.

This historiosophical imagination somehow shaped my patriotism, too. Taught me to proud of my culture, to study history (of Poland, of Europe, of the world) in order to better understand the present and the future.
But it also introduced a dangerous distinction between the truth and the lie; between “us” and “them” willing to invade again. I have been witnessing how this historiosophical imagination in the public discourse has become a template to dismiss any discussion (“you are a liar, as a representative of the anti-Polish enemy X, Y or Z”), to self-defend (“we had no choice”; “our historical situation was so much worse than X, Y, Z”), to white-wash dark spots of the history (“we were victims of a) enemies’ propaganda; b) partitions; c) the greatest tragedy ever”).

Debate about Jedwabne – “lopsided”, clumsy, chaotic as it was – started a public conversation about complex Polish history. The conversation that revealed that Poles are, fortunately, ordinary: not angles, not the tribe of heroes, not the Martyr and the Redeemer of all the nations. Just ordinary people. And that during the war Poles acted as ordinary people, in many different Jedwabnes: some of them with honor and righteousness, some of them – scoundrels and criminals.
When writing “Why Poland”, Jeff Goldfarb depicts well this transitional moment: confrontation with the complex history and an attempt to embrace it, thus constituting a new discourse about Poland and redefining Polish patriotism. For many it was a lost chance – post-Romantic symbolic thinking did not allow starting the conversation anew; yet many took Jedwabne debate seriously – both on the official level and on the level of kitchen table conversations. I find it symptomatic that it is the Jewish-Polish story that marked the beginning of this process.
Maybe it was somehow easier for my generation, brought up in the eighties – far enough from the terror of the war and close enough to the 1989 hope. Unfortunately it is not to say that this debate is concluded; but for sure, it can never be silenced or void again.

**
Clearly, one can continue using “the true history” argument to effectively dismiss any discussion. There will always be a good argument not to listen to “them”: Jews, post-Communists, Masons, atheists, or simply unaware ignorants. But can one be really sure he is the only depositary of truth? It may become an extremely solitary position, when no one true enough would be left around.

There is something to learn from the text written by the Outsider; his story may cover more than any insider dares to see.

With best regards,
Malgorzata Bakalarz

I deeply resent your insinuation that any critic of Gross’s lack of scholarship and ethics, or your naïve and rambling discourse is an anti-Semite. You shroud your anti-Polish bigotry with smug self righteous indignation full of moral judgments but little if any knowledge of basic facts. Your flippant responses to deWalden’s’ comments are further proof of your blind bias against Poles. Since your main theme is that Poles were Nazi collaborators, you should ponder the fact that numerically there were more Jewish Nazi collaborators than Polish Christian Nazi collaborators and Jewish collaboration was an integral part of the extermination process. History written through a narrow window of collaboration is a false history.

You seem to love holocaust fiction in place of holocaust history. If you were better informed you would not have chosen Gross’s “Neighbors” or “Fear” as evidence of Polish anti-Semitism and collaboration in the Jewish Holocaust. I have a feeling that you did not realize that in praising Gross you are accepting his construction of events in Jedwabne in which the Poles are the rabid anti-Semites and the Nazis are the protectors of the Jews. He essentially sanitizes the Nazis and demonizes the Poles. Read the last paragraph on pp.103-4 to appreciate Gross’s state of mind.

It is impossible for me to respond to all of your thoughts and biases, so I will try to restrict my comments to the Jedwabne pogrom. As you read these comments, please remember that “show trials” are propaganda instruments and not historical records. “Neighbors” is a holocaust fiction, a fantasy of an anti-Polish mind and not an account of events that happened. None of Gross’s books are based on depositions of survivors of the pogrom or witnesses thereof. His ‘Neighbors” is totally based on a court brief prepared by an UB officer Szmul Wasersztajn for a show trial involving primarily members of the Polish underground. UB was the newly created Polish secret police, a clone of NKVD and under control of NKVD advisors. That was his job, and most likely was written under the supervision of a Soviet NKVD advisor. The period of 1944-53 in Poland can be best described as a “Reign of Terror” waged by the NKVD (Stalin’s secret police) with the Help of UB against the Polish nation and in particular against the Home Army, the largest and most effective anti-Nazi underground in Nazi occupied Europe. Anywhere from 100,000-150,000 people were murdered and over 150,000 deported to Gulags in the Soviet Union.

You should have asked what happened in Jedwabne rather than praise Jan Gross? The only physical and credible evidence comes from partial exhumation of the two graves, and from testimonies of real eyewitnesses who were still alive in Jedwabne. Gross quoted four false witnesses, including Wasersztajn, and confessions exacted by torture from about 40 individuals who were interrogated by the UB. He never spoke to any of the Jedwabne residents who witnessed the event. Based on partial exhumation, all we can say is that 22 Jewish men were brought to the barn carrying the bust of Lenin, and were shot execution style by uniformed Gestapo police (there were 200 of them in Jedwabne at the time). I will be happy to send you a more detailed response on “Neighbors” if you wish.

A lot of details are missing, but later that day the Gestapo police poured gasoline around the barn and burned it. At least three of the four walls were still standing after the fire. The partial exhumation revealed two graves. The grave inside the barn containing 22 remains of the victims was dug by the victims before they were shot. The grave outside the barn was dug a couple days later by a dozen or more peasants who were brought there by the Gestapo to clean up the site. Unless the exhumations are resumed and other graves are found than there is no evidence for the killing of 300 Jews by burning as the IPN report claimed. It may have happened but not the way it was described in ‘Neighbors” or the IPN monograph. IPN was in the hands of post-Communists at that time. Keres, the President of IPN at the time, and Ignatiew, the prosecutor, lied. Their report was a negotiated one and not based on evidence. I might add that it would have been impossible to force 300 people into a small barn, 20×60 feet, about twice the size of a large living room, and cremate them in an open fire. They did not find remains of 300 Jews in the second grave. We can settle the question of who is telling the truth by new exhumations hopefully conducted by American and European forensic pathologists and out of the hands of post-Communist Polish Governments. But, I doubt that you really care to know.

As for anti-Semitism in post-WWII Poland, let me suggest that you read Michael Checinski’s “Poland: Nationalism, Communism and Anti-Semitism”. That author is infinitely more qualified to talk about post-WWII anti-Semitism than Jan Gross. You will learn a lot about anti-Semitism in the Russian Communist Party but also about anti-Semitism in the Polish Communist Party. Gross has essentially transferred the anti-Semitism which came to Poland at the end of the Soviet bayonets, and left when the Russians left, onto the Polish nation. Once you read the book, I doubt if you will again think the same way about Jan Gross.

The libel against Polish nation as anti-Semitic and intolerant, and as Nazi collaborators is rooted in Soviet propaganda which began in 1918, when Poland gained its independence, and has continued to this day. Unwittingly, you chose to propagate this propaganda just as Gross has done.

With best regards,

Walter Orlowski.

http://www.amazon.com/Bieganski-Stereotype-Polish-Jewish-Relations-American/dp/1936235153