Bitwa Warszawska 1920 Warsaw in 1920, the Bolsheviks retreated.
part1
Jak uratowaliśmy Europę
Po dziesięcioleciach przemilczeń i zafałszowań dotyczących wojny polsko-sowieckiej w latach 1919-1920 stopniowo odsłania się coraz pełniejsza prawda o tej tak ważnej dla naszych dziejów i dziejów Europy wojnie. Ciągle jeszcze wśród wielu czytelników utrzymuje się niedostateczna znajomość fragmentów dziejów tej wojny. Stosunkowo najwięcej napisano o samym przebiegu działań militarnych.
Obalono przede wszystkim kłamstwa PRL-owskiej propagandy sugerującej, że wojna polsko-sowiecka zaczęła się dopiero wiosną 1920 roku od rzekomej "polskiej agresji" - "wyprawy Piłsudskiego na Kijów". W rzeczywistości walki z bolszewikami zaczęły się już w początkach 1919 roku od starć z atakującymi Polaków i maszerującymi na Zachód jednostkami Armii Czerwonej. Bolszewickie oddziały pokonały polską samoobronę w regionie Święcian i Lidy, a 5 stycznia 1919 roku polskie oddziały musiały wycofać się z Wilna po trzydniowym boju z bolszewikami. Później walki toczyły się ze zmiennym szczęściem, a samo uderzenie Piłsudskiego na Kijów było tylko próbą uprzedzenia starannie przygotowywanej sowieckiej napaści na Polskę, która miała - według sowieckich planów - ruszyć w lipcu 1920 roku. I wtedy wiosną i latem 1920 roku rozegrały się walki decydujące o losie Polski w tej wojnie, rozstrzygnięte słynną Bitwą Warszawską, nazywaną Cudem nad Wisłą.
W szkicu tym chciałbym wspomnieć o sprawach dużo mniej akcentowanych w mediach, a jakże ważnych, począwszy od roli ogromnego narodowego zespolenia sił w przełomowym dla Polski sierpniu 1920 roku. Wykazane wówczas poświęcenie całego Narodu Polskiego pokazało, jak bardzo dojrzał on do odzyskanej niepodległości, jak bardzo gotów był poświęcić dla niej wszystkie siły. Co najważniejsze, w tym okresie mogliśmy liczyć zarówno na moc ducha milionów prostych Polaków, jak i prawdziwie godne zachowanie ze strony elit, tak wojskowych, jak i cywilnych. Tu chciałbym szczególnie mocno wyeksponować ciągle za mało przypominaną rolę polskiego duchowieństwa w walce o uratowanie Rzeczypospolitej w lipcu i sierpniu 1920 roku. Innym ważnym wątkiem mego szkicu jest zwrócenie uwagi na ciągle za mało docenione międzynarodowe reperkusje polskiego zwycięstwa w Bitwie Warszawskiej i jej rolę w uratowaniu Europy przed bolszewizmem.
Kościół wobec bolszewickiej nawały
Można by długo wyliczać przejawy pełnych poświęcenia wystąpień różnych warstw społeczeństwa polskiego w obronie zagrożonej Ojczyzny. Ze względów objętościowych ograniczę się tu do bardziej szczegółowego przedstawienia ciągle za mało znanej postawy duchowieństwa w najtrudniejszych dniach lata 1920 roku. Jakże wymownym świadectwem bezgranicznego zaangażowania w losy Narodu były rozliczne listy biskupów z lipca i sierpnia 1920 roku apelujące do Narodu o wzmożony wysiłek obronny, a do Ojca Świętego i do biskupów świata o zrozumienie dla Polski znajdującej się w śmiertelnym zagrożeniu, o pomoc i ratunek. W liście do Ojca Świętego Benedykta XV z 7 lipca 1920 roku biskupi prosili m.in.: "Ojcze Święty, w tej ciężkiej chwili prosimy Cię, módl się za Ojczyznę naszą. Módl się, abyśmy nie ulegli i przy Bożej pomocy murem piersi własnych zasłonili świat przed grożącym mu niebezpieczeństwem". W wysłanym tegoż 7 lipca 1920 roku liście do biskupów świata biskupi polscy akcentowali m.in.: "Polska w pochodzie bolszewizmu na świat jest już ostatnią dla niego barierą, a gdyby się ta załamała, rozleje się on po świecie falami zniszczenia". Hierarchowie ostrzegali przed zaślepieniem Europy i świata na rozmiary bolszewickiego zagrożenia. Z goryczą pisali: "Jeszcze nie przebrzmiały echa i wołania, iż bolszewizm zagraża krwawo zdobytemu pokojowi świata, że jest on zarazą, od której wszelkie ginie życie (...).
Jeszcze nie przebrzmiały te hasła, uroczyście wywoływane na usta rządów i dyplomacji, aż oto Europa zaczyna się słaniać do stóp swojego nieprzejednanego wroga (...). Gdy dotychczas piętnowała jego ducha, jako zgubny zaczyn świata, to dziś woła, iż dla zboża i handlu należy rozgrzeszyć sumienie z nadmiernej rzekomo jego wrażliwości (...). Gdy słały narody tak niedawno wojska i amunicje na pokonanie bolszewizmu, to dziś zimnym zdają się patrzeć okiem, jak w krwawych zapasach pławi się Polska, a nieraz odnosi się wrażenie, jak gdyby państwa niektóre, miast odgradzać zarazę wschodu przez Polskę jak najsilniejszą, rade by ją jednak widzieć małą i słabą".
W wystosowanym również 7 lipca 1920 roku liście do Narodu biskupi apelowali o zjednoczenie wszystkich Polaków dla przeciwdziałania bolszewickiej nawale, pisząc m.in.: "(...) Oto wróg zebrał wszystkie swe siły, ażeby zagrodzić nasze granice, zetrzeć naszą bohaterską armię i odebrać Polsce na nowo przecenny skarb jej wolności. Wróg to jest tym groźniejszy, bo łączy okrucieństwo i żądzę niszczenia z nienawiścią wszelkiej kultury, szczególnie zaś chrześcijaństwa i Kościoła (...), szczególniejszą nienawiścią zapałał on do Polski. Bo gdy niektóre mocarstwa zeszły ze swej pierwotnej drogi, aby zawierać z tym wrogiem umowy, własnego niepomne niebezpieczeństwa, Polska jedna oparła się pokuśnym wołaniom tego wroga i jakby murem stanęła, aby mu wstęp do siebie z zachodu Europy zagrodzić. Dlatego to wróg ów poprzysiągł jej zniszczenie i zemstę".
Jakże wymowne było w tych wystąpieniach poczucie polskiej misji bronienia największych wartości chrześcijańskich i Ojczyzny przeciwko bolszewizmowi nawet wtedy, gdy potężne mocarstwa Zachodu poszły na paktowanie z bolszewikami. Dnia 27 lipca 1920 roku biskupi polscy złożyli na Jasnej Górze Akt poświęcenia Najświętszemu Sercu Jezusa i ponownego obrania Matki Bożej na Królową Polski. W wystosowanej tegoż dnia Odezwie do Narodu po konferencji na Jasnej Górze biskupi polscy wystąpili z płomiennym apelem, zagrzewającym do walki w obronie Ojczyzny. Przypominając triumf bohaterskiej obrony Częstochowy sprzed kilku stuleci, dodawali otuchy i wiary w to, że znowu zwycięży "armia narodowego zbawienia".
Warto tu przypomnieć szczególnie dużą rolę odegraną przez ks. kard. Aleksandra Kakowskiego w działaniach na rzecz religijno-patriotycznej mobilizacji ludności stolicy do przeciwstawienia się nawale bolszewickiej. W liście wystosowanym 31 lipca 1920 roku do duchowieństwa archidiecezji warszawskiej ks. kard. Kakowski poza apelem o nieustające modlitwy za Ojczyznę polecał: "Zaoszczędzone przez wiernych z odmówienia sobie przyjemności i zachowania postu pieniądze oraz wszystkie ofiary zebrane na tacę w dniu 8 sierpnia w kościołach winny być przeznaczone w całej archidiecezji na żołnierza polskiego. Pieniądze, złożone przez kapłanów, Kuria prześle do zarządu armii ochotniczej". W dniu 7 sierpnia 1920 roku ksiądz kardynał wystąpił do proboszczów i rektorów kościołów m.st. Warszawy z listem o obowiązku trwania na stanowiskach wobec groźby agresji. Ksiądz kardynał Kakowski akcentował m.in.: "Nie trwoga, nie zemsta pchać nas winna, lecz płomienne wołanie Matki Ojczyzny o pomoc i ratunek. Ze względu na ważność chwili i grożące miastu naszemu niebezpieczeństwo praca około okopów w dni niedzielne i świąteczne jest dozwoloną.
Niech serc nie warzy zwątpienie i małoduszność, bo dopóki tętni w duszy polskiej wiara w opiekę Bożą i prawdziwy patriotyzm, nie masz takiej siły, która by nas złamać mogła".
Te płomienne wezwania księdza kardynała były realizowane na co dzień przez wielką rzeszę duchowieństwa, czego jakże wspaniałym symbolem stała się bohaterska śmierć ks. Ignacego Skorupki pod Ossowem koło Radzymina 14 sierpnia 1920 roku.
Jakże ważne jest przypomnienie tej tak ogromnej więzi Kościoła z Narodem w dobie szczególnego śmiertelnego zagrożenia Polski po przebudzeniu z długotrwałej niewoli. Trzeba o tym przypominać tym bardziej w czasie, gdy tak mocno nasila się ofensywa wrogów Kościoła i religii, gdy tak usilnie próbuje się zacierać zasługi Kościoła dla Polski. Wrogowie Kościoła kontynuują dziś ciągle to samo plugawe kalumniatorstwo antykościelne i antyreligijne, jakie rozpoczęto na szeroką skalę w dobie stalinizmu.
Dość przypomnieć choćby wydawane wówczas w PRL-u paszkwile w stylu "Tysiąca lat zatargów z papieżami" Andrzeja Nowickiego, dziś wielkiego mistrza masonerii w Polsce. Nie będę tu szerzej rozwodzić się na temat, jak oszczercza była głoszona przez Nowickiego i podobnych mu pamflecistów teza o rzekomych ciągłych zatargach Polski z Papieżami. Przypomnę teraz tylko jedną, ale jakże ważną postać spośród licznych Papieży przeczących wspomnianej oszczerczej tezie - Ojca Świętego Benedykta XIV i jego rolę w mobilizowaniu poparcia dla zagrożonej przez bolszewizm Polski. W wystosowanym 5 sierpnia 1920 roku liście do ks. kard. Bazylego Pompili Benedykt XIV dziękował mu za to, że nakazał wzniesienie do Najwyższego uroczystych i gorących modłów "dla ubłagania miłosierdzia Pańskiego nad nieszczęsną Polską". I akcentował: "Przyczyny nader poważne każą nam wyrazić życzenie, aby za przykładem danym przez Ciebie, kardynale, poszli wszyscy Biskupi świata katolickiego" (podkr. - J.R.N., cyt. za "Zwycięstwo 1920. Warszawa wobec agresji bolszewickiej", Paris 1990, s. 111).
W osobnym liście skierowanym do biskupów polskich 8 września 1920 roku Ojciec Święty Benedykt XIV niezwykle mocno uwypuklił znaczenie Bitwy Warszawskiej nie tylko dla Polaków, ale dla wszystkich narodów chrześcijańskiej Europy, pisząc, że uzyskane dzięki modłom zwycięstwo - "dobrodziejstwo Boga Wspomożyciela dziwnie na dobre wyszło nie tylko narodowi waszemu, lecz i innym ludom. Komuż bowiem nie wiadomo, że szalony napór wroga to miał na celu, aby zniszczyć Polskę, owo przedmurze Europy, a następnie podkopać i zburzyć całe chrześcijaństwo i opartą na nim kulturę, posługując się do tego krzewieniem szalonej i chorobliwej doktryny?".
Warto dodać też ważną sugestię prof. Normana Daviesa na temat warszawskich reperkusji ówczesnego pobytu w Polsce dziekana korpusu dyplomatycznego - nuncjusza papieskiego Achille Rattiego. Zdaniem prof. Daviesa: "Wiedza o tym, jak wielkie piętno odcisnął pobyt w Warszawie na siedemnaście lat pontyfikatu monsignore Achille Rattiego (1922-1939), który zasiadał na tronie Piotrowym jako Pius XI, byłaby nader pouczająca. Nie będzie przesadą stwierdzenie, iż encyklika 'Divini Redemptoris', wyklinająca ateistyczny komunizm, stanowiła uogólnienie jego osobistego wyzwania rzuconego armiom bolszewickim pod Radzyminem".
Świadectwo Charles'a de Gaulle'a
Ciągle mało znany jest fakt, że obok A. Rattiego, przyszłego Papieża Piusa XI, w czasie Bitwy Warszawskiej przebywał w Polsce jako oficer francuskiej misji wojskowej największy chyba Francuz XX wieku, słynny później polityk i wódz Francuzów Charles de Gaulle.
Tym bardziej warto więc przypomnieć tu zapiski de Gaulle'a na temat przebiegu zwycięskiej ofensywy polskiej w sierpniu 1920 r., po raz pierwszy przedstawione w zakazanych wówczas w kraju "Zeszytach Historycznych" paryskiej "Kultury" z 1971 r.:
"14 sierpnia: Ogólna ofensywa została postanowiona (...). W tej samej chwili wydaje się, że wszystko do najdrobniejszego szczegółu jest jasne. Wierne wojska polskie, których wyższe kadry były jednymi z najlepszych na świecie, odczuwają natychmiast, że silna i logiczna wola ma zamiar skoordynować wysiłki (...). Jeszcze zanim rozpoczęła się bitwa, czuję, jak tych żołnierzy znaczy powiew zwycięstwa, który tak dobrze znam (...).
17 sierpnia: Ofensywa rozpoczęła się świetnie. Grupa manewrowa, którą dowodzi szef Państwa, Piłsudski, zgrupowana pomiędzy Iwanogrodem a Chełmem, szybko posuwa się na północ. Nieprzyjaciel, całkowicie zaskoczony widokiem na swoim lewym skrzydle Polaków, o których myślał, że są w stanie rozkładu, nigdzie nie stawia poważnego oporu, ucieka w rozsypce na wszystkie strony albo poddaje się całymi oddziałami (...).
20 sierpnia: Tak, to jest zwycięstwo kompletne, triumfujące zwycięstwo. Z innych armii rosyjskich, które groziły Warszawie, niewiele co powróci. Mimo szybkości, z jaką uciekały, Polacy je przeganiali i zachodzili od lasu" (por. Ch. de Gaulle, Bitwa o Wisłę. Dziennik działań wojennych oficera francuskiego, w: "Zeszyty Historyczne", Paryż 1971, zesz. 19, s. 13-16).
Ocaliliśmy Europę
Ciągle za mało mówi się o ogromnym znaczeniu słynnej Bitwy Warszawskiej 1920 roku dla losów całej Europy. Ambasador brytyjski w Warszawie lord Edgar D'Abernon nazwał ją już w tytule swej książki "Osiemnastą decydującą bitwą w dziejach świata". W publikowanym w sierpniu 1930 r. artykule lord D'Abernon pisał: "Współczesna historia cywilizacji zna mało wydarzeń posiadających znaczenie większe od bitwy pod Warszawą w roku 1920. Nie zna zaś ani jednego, które by było mniej docenione... Gdyby bitwa pod Warszawą zakończyła się była zwycięstwem bolszewików, nastąpiłby punkt zwrotny w dziejach Europy, nie ulega bowiem wątpliwości, iż upadkiem Warszawy Środkowa Europa stanęłaby otworem dla propagandy komunistycznej i dla sowieckiej inwazji (...). Zadaniem pisarzy politycznych... jest wytłumaczenie europejskiej opinii publicznej, że w roku 1920 Europę zbawiła Polska".
Francuski generał Louis A. Faury pisał w artykule ogłoszonym w 1928 r.: "Przed dwustu laty Polska pod murami Wiednia uratowała świat chrześcijański od niebezpieczeństwa tureckiego; nad Wisłą i nad Niemnem szlachetny ten naród oddał ponownie światu cywilizowanemu usługę, którą nie dość oceniono". Brytyjski historyk J.F.C. Fuller pisał w książce "Bitwa pod Warszawą 1920" (wyd. podziemne, Warszawa 1980, s. 34): "Osłaniając centralną Europę od zarazy marksistowskiej, Bitwa Warszawska cofnęła wskazówki bolszewickiego zegara (...), zatamowała potencjalny wybuch niezadowolenia społecznego na Zachodzie, niwecząc prawie eksperyment bolszewików".
Warto przypomnieć również, że znany popularyzator historii wojen i wojskowości Simon Goodough w wydanej w 1979 r. książce "Tactical Genius in Battle" ocenił geniusz Józefa Piłsudskiego zademonstrowany w Bitwie Warszawskiej za godny wyróżnienia w kręgu zwycięzców 27 wielkich bitew w dziejach świata. Obok Temistoklesa, Aleksandra Wielkiego, Cezara, Gustawa Adolfa, wielkiego Kondeusza i wielu innych wielkich wodzów!
Zapobieżenie przez polskie zwycięstwo nad Rosją Sowiecką dalszemu rozprzestrzenianiu się bolszewizmu w Europie "zyskało" Polakom trwałą nienawiść różnych środowisk komunistycznych w Europie i świecie, służąc za pożywkę dla różnych zajadłych "czerwonych" siewców antypolonizmu. Niejednokrotnie zauważałem to bardzo silnie w kraju naszych węgierskich "bratanków", dowiadując się, z jaką nienawiścią pisali lub mówili o nas wpływowi komunistyczni weterani dawnej czerwonej Węgierskiej Republiki Rad. Pamiętali bowiem, że Polacy swym triumfem w 1920 roku rozbili im wszystkie nadzieje na ponowne zwycięstwo komunizmu na Węgrzech po obaleniu w 1919 roku żałosnego bolszewickiego eksperymentu - 133-dniowej Węgierskiej Republiki Rad. W 1920 roku w sztabie konnej armii Budionnego przy Stalinie była wielka grupa komunistów węgierskich czekających na triumfalny powrót do Budapesztu wraz z wojskami sowieckimi, które opanują Polskę (por. W. Pobóg-Malinowski, Najnowsza historia Polski, t. II, 1914-1939, Londyn 1967, s. 504).
Polskie zwycięstwo w 1920 roku uratowało od komunizmu Węgry, Czechy, Niemcy i kraje bałtyckie, a może i resztę Europy. Dowodzący armią sowiecką Michaił Tuchaczewski wzdychał z goryczą na myśl o straconych przez Sowietów szansach w 1920 roku: "Nie ulega wątpliwości, że gdybyśmy byli zwyciężyli nad Wisłą, wówczas rewolucja ogarnęłaby płomieniem cały ląd europejski". Czołowa komunistka niemiecka Klara Zetkin uwieczniła swe smętne rozmowy z Leninem (już po zawarciu rozejmu ryskiego) na temat skutków klęski Armii Czerwonej w Polsce: "Przedwczesny przymrozek odwrotu Armii Czerwonej z Polski zwarzył rozwijający się kwiat rewolucji (...). Opisywałam Leninowi, w jaki sposób odbiło się to na rewolucyjnej awangardzie niemieckiej klasy robotniczej (...), kiedy towarzysze z sowieckimi gwiazdami na czapkach, w niewiarygodnie zużytych strzępach mundurów i cywilnych ubrań, w podartych butach, popędzali ostrogami swoje żwawe koniki wprost ku niemieckiej granicy. (...) Lenin przez parę minut siedział w milczeniu, pogrążony w rozmyślaniach.
- Tak - powiedział w końcu - a więc zdarzyło się to, co może musiało się stać (...). Polacy widzieli w czerwonoarmiejcach nie braci i wyzwolicieli, ale wrogów. Polacy myśleli i działali nie jak przystało na socjałów i rewolucjonistów, ale jak nacjonaliści i imperialiści. Ta rewolucja, na którą liczyliśmy w Polsce, nie powiodła się. Robotnicy i chłopi, oszukani przez Piłsudskiego i Daszyńskiego, powstali w obronie swego klasowego wroga, pozwalając, aby nasi dzielni żołnierze z Armii Czerwonej umierali z głodu, zapędzani w zasadzki, pobici na śmierć (...). Gdy Lenin mówił (...), na twarzy jego malowało się niewysłowione cierpienie" (cyt. za N. Davies, Orzeł Biały Czerwona gwiazda. Wojna polsko-bolszewicka 1919-1920, Kraków 1997, s. 270-271).
Największe znaczenie miało polskie zwycięstwo dla małych krajów bałtyckich. Słynny litewski publicysta niepodległościowy Anastar Terleckas pisał w połowie lat 90., że gdyby nie polskie zwycięstwo w 1920 r. Litwa musiałaby przeżyć dodatkowe 20 lat rosyjskiej okupacji i rusyfikacji. Co zaś oznaczałoby to dla małego, kilkumilionowego narodu litewskiego, można sobie łatwo wyobrazić. Pisząc o znaczeniu polskiego zwycięstwa dla krajów bałtyckich, warto przy okazji wspomnieć o mało znanym, a pięknym przykładzie bezpośredniej i bezinteresownej polskiej pomocy wojskowej dla Łotwy. Dnia 3 stycznia 1920 roku dwie dywizje polskie pod dowództwem generała Edwarda Rydza-Śmigłego, wspierając narodową armię łotewską, wyzwoliły z rąk bolszewików jedno z największych miast Łotwy - port Dyneburg. Józef Piłsudski, który przybył pod koniec stycznia 1920 roku do Dyneburga, by osobiście udekorować gen. Rydza-Śmigłego za zwycięską akcję Orderem Virtuti Militari, powiedział podczas uroczystego obiadu z naczelnym wodzem armii łotewskiej gen. Ballodisem oraz gen. Burtem z misji angielskiej: "Przyjemnie mi jest być w oddziale, który spotkało rzeczywiste szczęście walczyć zgodnie z tradycją polską za naszą i waszą wolność - nie tylko za wolność naszego narodu, ale i za wolność naszego sąsiada i przyjaciela" (W. Pobóg-Malinowski, op.cit., t. III, s. 403).
Słynny polonijny naukowiec ze Stanów Zjednoczonych profesor Iwo Cyprian Pogonowski opowiadał mi kiedyś historię o tym, jak po dziś dzień pamięć o polskim triumfie warszawskim 1920 roku jest deformowana przez niektórych zajadłych rzeczników żydowskiego antypolonizmu. Otóż są takie fanatyczne żydowskie środowiska w USA, które obciążają Polaków winą... za dojście Hitlera do władzy w Niemczech. Głoszą one bowiem, że gdyby Polacy nie pobili wojsk bolszewickich pod Warszawą w 1920 roku, to one dotarłyby do Niemiec i połączyły się z tamtymi siłami komunistycznymi. W Niemczech zatriumfowałaby wówczas skomunizowana lewica i Hitler nigdy nie doszedłby tam do władzy. Nie warto chyba nawet komentować tej tak niemądrej antypolskiej "logiki" wywodów!
Skutki klęski 1920 roku dla Sowietów
Poniesiona przez Rosję sowiecką klęska w wojnie z Polską miała bardzo duże znaczenie dla wewnętrznego rozwoju Związku Sowieckiego, decydująco wpływając na przymusową rezygnację Sowietów z tak niszczącego dla ludności systemu komunizmu wojennego i zmuszając do wprowadzenia dużo bardziej elastycznego NEP-u (nowej ekonomicznej polityki). Warto przypominać te fakty, bo są ciągle za mało akcentowane w historiografii polskiej i zagranicznej, choć stanowią jeszcze jeden więcej dowód doniosłości międzynarodowych skutków Bitwy Warszawskiej.
Nader przekonywujące w tym względzie wydają się uwagi Normana Daviesa w książce "Orzeł Biały Czerwona Gwiazda" (s. 278-279): "Wojna polska przyczyniła się bezspornie do kryzysu komunizmu wojennego, a w konsekwencji do wprowadzenia przez Lenina 'nowej polityki ekonomicznej' (NEP).
Latem 1920 roku na froncie polskim walczyło osiem z szesnastu armii bolszewickich.
Wojna polska była poważnym i jedynym zagranicznym przedsięwzięciem Armii Czerwonej, które wyraźnie nadwerężyło program 'komunizmu wojennego' na skutek militaryzacji kolei, nasilenia rekwizycji, wzrostu zapotrzebowania na zapasy i uzbrojenie (...). Prawdą jest również to, że nagła klęska kampanii polskiej spowodowała jesienią 1920 roku szok nie mniej powalający niż chaos, który istniał już wcześniej. Dopóki wydawało się, że Armia Czerwona broni Rosji przed 'polskimi jaśniepanami', dopóty można było usprawiedliwiać i tolerować cierpienia, których przysparzał komunizm wojenny. Wszelako od momentu podpisania rozejmu ryskiego (...) cały ten system stracił sens (...). Komunizm wojenny przestał był użyteczny i trzeba go było zastąpić czymś innym. W okresie trwania kampanii polskiej, kiedy nadzieje na eksport rewolucji były nadal żywe, NEP nie był potrzebny, w momencie klęski tej kampanii stał się logiczną koniecznością".
Dodajmy - stał się logiczną koniecznością, bo klęska pozbawiła Sowietów możliwości złupienia podbitej Polski, a w ślad za nią krajów sąsiednich, które umożliwiłoby dalsze kontynuowanie dotychczasowej polityki "komunizmu wojennego". Jak pisał cytowany już brytyjski historyk J.F.C. Fuller, klęska Sowietów w Bitwie Warszawskiej pozbawiła Rosję "możliwości grabieży, potrzebnej jej bardzo do powstrzymania beznadziejnego kryzysu ekonomicznego".
Był jednak, jak się zdaje, jeszcze jeden szczególnie ponury skutek sowieckiej klęski w wojnie z Polską w 1920 roku. Była to wciąż tląca się, nieugaszona nienawiść sowieckich przywódców bolszewickich na czele ze Stalinem do Polski, która tak mocno przekreśliła ich zaborcze i grabieżcze plany. Słynny rosyjski historyk Dymitr Wołkogonow tak tłumaczył podjętą w 1940 roku decyzję sowieckiego Biura Politycznego o rozstrzelaniu tysięcy polskich oficerów: "Była to zapewne zemsta za sromotną klęskę Rosji Radzieckiej w 1920 roku i upokarzający traktat ryski, którego, jak mówią, Stalin nie mógł Polakom wybaczyć" (D. Wołkogonow, Lenin, Warszawa 1997, s. 474).
Stalin i sowieccy enkawudziści mieli za co się mścić. Polskie zwycięstwo w 1920 roku uratowało Europę na ponad 20 lat przed potwornymi skutkami sowieckiej ekspansji i grabieży.
prof. Jerzy Robert Nowak
Friday, May 28, 2010
Thursday, May 6, 2010
Larum Polskie sytuacja w Polsce Platforma Obywatelska szkodzi Polsce Obudz sie Polsko, na szkrzydlach orlad sie porywaj
Larum Polskie sytuacja w Polsce Platforma Obywatelska szkodzi Polsce Obudz sie Polsko, na szkrzydlach orlad sie porywaj
part1
Larum Polskie (2/3) na gromach niech zakazania stare stawial swoje stopy pdniesc glowe tych co milcza a dzis w przyjazni, zdradzano bez litosni w dyplomatycznym dymie cygar.
Larum Polskie (3/3)
part1
Larum Polskie (2/3) na gromach niech zakazania stare stawial swoje stopy pdniesc glowe tych co milcza a dzis w przyjazni, zdradzano bez litosni w dyplomatycznym dymie cygar.
Larum Polskie (3/3)
Saturday, April 17, 2010
Hitler o wypadku Kaczyńskich (oryginał) Po której jesteś stronie?
Hitler o wypadku Kaczyńskich (oryginał) Po której jesteś stronie?
Saturday, January 30, 2010
Radowslaw Sikorski nie broni mniejszosci Polskiej w Niemczech dla "Die Welt"
Radowslaw Sikorski nie broni mniejszosci Polskiej w Niemczech dla "Die Welt"
Nadal obowiazuje prawo Hermana Geogering
Radowslaw Sikorski nie broni mniejszosci Polskiej w Niemczech dla "Die Welt"
Nadal obowiazuje prawo Hermana Geogering
Pittsburgh Press - Google News Archive - Mar 4, 1940
BERLIN— Activities by Polish minority organizations in Germany were forbidden today in a decree issued by Marshal Herman Goering, No. 2 Nazi . ...
Devastation of Poland, the starving out of its populace and the ... worked out by Field Marshal Hermann Goering and being carried out by Dr. Hans Frank
Plan by Goering to Ruin Poland To Benefit Nazi... - Montreal Gazette - Google News Archive
Nazis Seize All Property Held By Poles .Factories, Forests, Farms...
Deseret News - Google News Archive - Feb 19, 1940
1 when the German invasion of Poland started. Such lands and forests, ... As Field Marshal Hermann Goering, head of Ger many's four-year economic plan
Mandate Over Islands Same As Ownership, Japan Holds .
Reading Eagle - Google News Archive - Mar 24, 1933
Most of the Eastern Jews in the Palatinate emigrated there from Poland since 1914 ... Herman Goering, Minister without portfolio, for the post and the ...
Nadal obowiazuje prawo Hermana Geogering
Radowslaw Sikorski nie broni mniejszosci Polskiej w Niemczech dla "Die Welt"
Nadal obowiazuje prawo Hermana Geogering
Pittsburgh Press - Google News Archive - Mar 4, 1940
BERLIN— Activities by Polish minority organizations in Germany were forbidden today in a decree issued by Marshal Herman Goering, No. 2 Nazi . ...
Devastation of Poland, the starving out of its populace and the ... worked out by Field Marshal Hermann Goering and being carried out by Dr. Hans Frank
Plan by Goering to Ruin Poland To Benefit Nazi... - Montreal Gazette - Google News Archive
Nazis Seize All Property Held By Poles .Factories, Forests, Farms...
Deseret News - Google News Archive - Feb 19, 1940
1 when the German invasion of Poland started. Such lands and forests, ... As Field Marshal Hermann Goering, head of Ger many's four-year economic plan
Mandate Over Islands Same As Ownership, Japan Holds .
Reading Eagle - Google News Archive - Mar 24, 1933
Most of the Eastern Jews in the Palatinate emigrated there from Poland since 1914 ... Herman Goering, Minister without portfolio, for the post and the ...
Saturday, November 21, 2009
Jaka przyszłość mediów katolickich w USA w XXI wieku? A PHILOSOPHICAL CALL TO RENEW AMERICAN CULTURE:
Jaka przyszłość mediów katolickich w USA w XXI wieku? A PHILOSOPHICAL CALL TO RENEW AMERICAN CULTURE:
Prof. Peter Redpath, Saint John's University, New York (2009-11-21) Inna audycja
słuchaj
zapisz
Future of the United States of America XXI Prof. Peter Redpath, Saint John's University, New York
A PHILOSOPHICAL CALL TO RENEW AMERICAN CULTURE:
The Homeschool Renaissance
by Peter A. Redpath, Ph.D.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Redpath is a Full Professor of Philosophy at St. John's University; has received numerous awards and honors for his work in philosophy; was appointed to the Board of Trustees of the Institute for Advanced Philosophical Research in 1988; has made over 70 public program appearances on philosophical topics; has authored numerous books, monographs, and published articles; and has edited two philosophy books. He is a member of the Board of Editors of Editions Rodopi. Dr. Redpath is a Director of The Great Books Academy and Chairman of The Angelicum Academy.
Today, nationally and globally, America is at a crossroad. We face daunting educational and political problems. No social order born of a common conviction in the truth and goodness of its principles can long survive when it cannot rationally justify this conviction. At this historical moment, a critical meltdown is occurring in American educational and political institutions because, increasingly, the general American population and our institutional leaders cannot rationally justify the truth and goodness of the principles upon which our American educational and political institutions depend for their survival and health.
During the twentieth century, totalitarian political systems externally threatened the American democratic concept. In the face of these systems, America generally defended itself through a combination of physical force, free market competition, pragmatic arguments about the superiority of the American way of life, and the moral conviction of the American people about the just nature of their cause and the goodness of their society. At this time in our history, while we still have external enemies, America faces another, more pernicious, internal threat, that we cannot defeat through physical force, the free market, or pragmatic slogans about the superiority of the American way of life: the inability rationally to justify the truth and moral goodness of American society.
Educationally, sophistry reigns supreme in America today. Since 1983, millions of Americans have reached high school senior year without learning the basics of reading, mathematics, and U.S. history. Millions of teenagers have dropped out of high school.1 Today, an average student, even at better American colleges and universities, cannot think abstractly or read a difficult book without individual proctor-ing.2 Many faculty members are illiterate, and, especially in the social sciences, cannot explain the nature of their subject matter, the method their discipline uses, the origin of their principles, or what makes their principles scientific. The State arbitrarily undermines parental authority in favor of "enlightened" social causes. Our public schools cannot teach the philosophical and moral principles that sustain the authority of our political institutions. These schools are crime-ridden. We have reached a point in public education where we cannot agree on curricula, especially in areas of history, ethics, and politics. We are graduating increasing numbers of illiterate students, often warehoused for years by incompetent teachers. Yet our most successful politicians tend to graduate from, and send their children to, private schools.
In politics, we increasingly remove moral principles and truth from the domain of public life. Irrationally and sophistically, we identify the sphere of public life with the secular realm, and justice with the domain of the Machiavellian will-of-the-stronger. Often we judge deceit, selfishness, and subordination of the common good in order to win political office, as hallmarks of wisdom.
States come into being through, are the creation of, other mediating institutions, like families, churches, synagogues, schools, private businesses, and so on. Collections of individuals do not found States as collective wills to which we become serfs. Through representatives, people, as social beings (with skills and factional interests), and as moral agents (with natural rights and duties), and members of communities, establish States as limited, mediating agencies, through which we self-govern ourselves in pursuit of our common good: the more perfect union we achieve through political peace and justice.
The notion of limited government did not begin with modernity or the European Enlightenment. Moses adhered to this principle in his dealings with Pharaoh. The ancient Greeks recognized this principle in their articulation of the four cardinal moral virtues: prudence, justice, temperance, and courage. And St. Thomas Aquinas, referring to St. Augustine, explicitly appeals to this principle in his treatment of the variety of human law in Question 91 of I-II of his Summa Theologiae. 3
Principally and primarily, the State is a peace officer, not a parent, nurturer, clothier, guardian, educator, nor chief economist.
The proper subject of State governance is human freedom. States exist because human freedom exists. States exist to regulate human freedom within the bounds of justice and State competence in order to promote the common good of civic peace and friendship. States exist principally and primarily to regulate human freedom in relation to human exchanges, to maintain peace and order within these exchanges. They do not exist principally and primarily to establish and operate schools, or to run motels, real estate agencies, businesses, hospitals,or restaurants. 4
States come into being because we hu-man beings have a natural desire, and a moral obligation, to pursue our own happiness through exercise of our choices. To pursue our happiness, we must exercise our freedom. To exercise freedom, we need conducive circumstances. The State exists principally and primarily as a peace officer to facilitate the circumstances under which we can justly exercise our political freedom. 5
Freedom is proper to man's nature. In our actions, we have a moral right to exercise our freedom virtuously relative to our personal welfare, and a political right to exercise it justly relative to the common good.
The principal right to reward people for virtue and punish them for vice lies with God, not individual human beings, or the State. Hence, in our dealings with others, we have to be cautious not to overstep the bounds of our moral authority. God has the moral authority to command and reward all acts of virtue and to punish all vice. Individual human beings do not. God's moral authority prohibits all human evils. Individual moral authority only extends to communities over which individuals can exercise competent judgment and influence. For human beings, the domain of any moral authority is always the sphere of the humanly possible relative to some human good. No one, including States or God, has a right to command the impossible, which is what States do when they overextend their authority.
As parents, we cannot outlaw all wrongdoing by our children, and we cannot justly command of them impossible acts of virtue. As human beings, children have a right to exercise their freedom within the bounds of justice and household peace. When they overstep these bounds parents have a moral right to punish them.
Similarly, in the political domain, private morality is the dimension of human freedom related to the pursuit of personal welfare, inasmuch as this has no detrimental impact on civic peace and friendship. From a political perspective, in our private lives, we have a moral jurisdiction that allows us to be as intemperate, cowardly, foolish, and unjust as we please in our dealings with others, until our actions start to undermine civic peace and friendship. The domain of public morality, from which we derive our public moral principles, should not be merely the dimension of secular behavior � the arena of a public secular religion, where only secular reason has a right to speak and where truth is measured by an "enlightened" intellectual elite and governmental bureaucrats. 6
While many people derive their moral principles from religion, others do not. Many people, such as atheists and agnostics, derive their moral principles from personal experience at living, from tradition, or from philosophy. Other people derive their moral principles from revelation. To demand that such people adopt a secular religion before they can enter political debate that involves a common good to which they contribute and common threats by which they are endangered violates human and Constitutional rights to freedom for religion and speech.
Essentially, morality has two domains: our duties toward other people and our duties toward God. Religion is a moral obligation we have toward God. As such, it presupposes, it does not essentially generate, moral principles. God, not religion, is the source of moral principles. God imbeds these principles in human nature, in the voice of conscience, and freely gives this voice to theists, atheists, and agnostics. Religion arises as a reaction in some people to the voice of conscience. The voice of conscience does not arise as an act of religion.
To claim that religion, not God, is essentially the source of morality is a major fallacy of the Enlightenment. It implies that atheists and agnostics are essentially devoid of conscience, are not moral agents, an assertion contradicted by much historical experience. Submission of conscience to the rule of justice imbedded in human inclinations authorizes citizens to have a public voice. This rule of justice relative to the common good, not submission to a secular religion, generates the authority of civil law. The rule of justice relative to the common good, not submission to a secular religion, is the standard of political tolerance. To demand that our right to participate in public moral discourse rests upon adoption of a secular religion and its secularized rules of tolerance violates natural human rights, the American Constitution, and American pluralism.
Public morality is the domain of freedom involving personal exchanges that impact on the common good of civic peace and friendship: the domain of civic justice and public safety. As soon as a human action enters this arena, it passes from morally private to morally public jurisdiction, the arena of public safety regulable by just, not unlimited, tolerance. In this arena, all citizens have a right to a public voice. In this domain, moral responsibility and irresponsibility impact on all citizens regardless of religious or non-religious affiliation. In this arena, the domain of justice and freedom, where human actions impact upon our common good and threaten us with common dangers:
(1) all human beings, by natural possession of a conscience, are competent judges and have a natural right to speak; and,
(2) justice, relative to the common good, establishes the limits of tolerance. Here, the voice of conscience, philosophy, personal experience, and religious traditions all have something to contribute.
Philosophy and the Common Good
For several decades, through increasing identification of the State with the Body Politic, and sophistic appeal to the secularly religious grounds of the State's public morality, we have steadily diminished parental authority over the education of children and decreased the public voice of ordinary citizens, religious leaders, and classical philosophers in political debates that affect our common good and public welfare. The net result of this effort has been an increasing erosion of American educational and political institutions.
Like every constitutional political order, American society came into being through a conventional agreement made by representatives of political factions to unite in the pursuit of a common political good, a more perfect political union. The American government did not create this political vision of the common good. The government's existence presupposed, and arose from, this common goal articulated in the Constitution. The American government exists to preserve, protect, and defend this common good and the principles that sustain it.
The American vision of the common good is historically rooted in Western philosophical and theological convictions about human nature and destiny that the American founders considered to be self-evident. Without familiarity with these convictions, we cannot grasp the nature or meaning of our political institutions and political lives.
We become like strangers wandering amidst foreign and unfamiliar surroundings. We erroneously start to believe that our own self-definition grounds our freedom and political principles.
Central to the Western vision of the common good is a philosophical conviction about the fundamental rationality and dignity of human nature and the theological conviction that human life is guided by a providential creator. The major ancient Greek philosophers never deviated in their judgment that our universe is an intelligible order inhabited by a gradation of beings, each with its own non-relative identity, culminating in human nature, a social animal endowed with the faculty to reason.
The ancient Greek philosophers thought we were born with the natural ability to survey the physical world around us and to extract from our everyday observations of the behavior of physical things the rules whereby we develop our arts, sciences, morals, law, and politics. For these philosophers, inclinations in this organic faculty of reason, whereby we moderate our use of freedom in pursuit of our own welfare and act with reasonable tolerance toward others, constitute the voice of reason - conscience - the locus of the universal moral principles that determine moral normalcy. They thought that to ignore, or to behave contrary to, reason's dictates was vicious, made us less human and more beastly, and eventually led to our emotional, intellectual, and social corruption.7
Medieval Jewish, Muslim, and Christian thinkers inherited and preserved the Greek philosophical view of nature, the arts, and sciences, and built around them our Western cultural, educational, theological, legal, and political traditions. For several centuries, but especially within the past several decades, the ancient Greek understanding of philosophy and human nature has decreased in some of these traditions. Wherever this has occurred, disaster has resulted. Philosophy is the only rational knowledge by which we can judge the principles of demonstration in our arts and sciences, evaluate the worth of our knowledge, identify and evaluate our criteria of truth, distinguish sound from unsound arguments, and unify our sciences into an order of higher learning. And philosophical reflection upon the behavior of human beings, understood as rational animals, is the only means we have to establish a rationally justified ethics and a concept of the person that can sustain democratic government.
Democratic government presupposes a specific vision of the common human good. And our concept of a common human good necessarily contains our concept of human nature. Democratic government is a type of government naturally best suited for achieving the common good of rational animals, not of irrational animals or angels. Totalitarianism suits beasts. Theocracy befits angels.
At present, we Americans find ourselves in a state of educational and political decay because we have lost our understanding of the nature of classical philosophy and the essential role it plays in integrating all our branches of knowledge, our cultural and political institutions, in justifying our common vision of our common political good, and rationally articulating the jurisdictional lines of private and public morality. Having lost our understanding of the nature of this subject, we can no longer find rational arguments to justify and sustain our different educational and religious institutions and the principles that sustain us in our common convictions about our common good. The existence of these institutions essentially depends upon, and can only be rationally justified by, philosophical arguments that presuppose that we are rational animals. Having lost this conviction, we have lost our ability to think philosophically. Thus, we can no longer rationally justify American culture.
Transmission of the principles that justify a culture's vision of the common good is the work of theologians and philosophers. American culture is theologically pluralistic. For this reason alone, it can never theologically justify a unified vision of the democratic common good to its own people, much less to people of different theological traditions who would attack America externally.
Since its inception, America has attempted to use a lowest common biblical tradition as a kind of public philosophy to justify the intellectual and moral norms that sustain our common democratic vision. Given the common Judeo-Christian and European tradition of previous generations of Americans, rhetorical appeal to such a common theological tradition was possible to sustain our way of life. Growing American pluralism and secularization no longer make this possible. Having weakened our
theological traditions, we largely only have sophistry, empty slogans, to justify our cultural, educational, and political institutions. No democracy can rationally sustain itself on sophistic principles. For this reason, our schools have lost their ability to teach, our universities are gradually being transformed into propaganda institutes, and our politicians increasingly think that words mean whatever they want them to mean.
Philosophy is not a lowest common theology, a secular religion from which we get our public morality, or any specific system or body of knowledge. It is a method of rational investigation that involves use of sense observation, abstract conceptualization, and logical reasoning, a natural mode of higher level inquiry employed by human beings, rational animals. This understanding of human nature and philosophy is common to our Western theological traditions and to ordinary human beings in all parts of the world. And it was the general understanding that prevailed in the West when universities first arose during the Middle Ages.
Some Immediate Steps to Take
Universities are the main source from which America draws its institutional leaders. If America's universities are intellectually and morally weak, American institutions will not long remain intellectually and morally strong. America's universities are intellectually and morally weak. Hence, American institutions cannot long remain intellectually and morally strong.
Currently, philosophy is required at perhaps, no more than twenty-five percent of American colleges and univer sities. Even at those schools that require philosophy, what passes for philosophy is often sophistry, having little resemblance to the mode of abstract reasoning that the ancient Greeks considered to be natural to rational animals. The decline of classical philosophy at our universities helps explain the widespread inability of contemporary American college students to think abstractly, reason logically, maintain their attention span, distinguish sound from fallacious arguments, and read difficult books.
A morally vicious and intellectually gullible citizenry cannot sustain democratic government. Loss of our ability to reason well corrupts our democratic institutions, places them in the hands of sophists, and makes us dupes to the persuasive force of ideological slogans and sound bites. We cannot turn to contemporary social scientists, psychologists, political and cultural theorists, literary critics, or contemporary philosophers to remedy our current educational, cultural, and political problems. Generally, their theories are the sophistry that lie at the source of our decay. To seek help from them resembles asking incendiaries to fight a forest fire.8
To renew our nation, we must renew our institutions. To renew our institutions, we must renew our universities. To renew our universities, we need a renaissance of classical philosophical and theological education, from the ground up as well as from the top down. The huge and growing "homeschooling" movement presents an opportunity to initiate this classical philosophical and theological educational renaissance, starting in the elementary and secondary levels and then reaching into the colleges and universities.
Homeschoolers heavily favor those colleges where classical philosophical and theological education still exists (for example, the student body of Thomas Aquinas College is now about 30% homeschooled). These colleges, especially those with a component of traditional theology, are rapidly expanding. Homeschooling is increasing at a rate of approximately 15% per year. Already, competition for these students is exerting tremendous pressure on college administrations to hire faculty and alter their curricula in that direction. This trend will doubtlessly increase.
Many universities, which previously shunned homeschoolers, now actively recruit them. New colleges geared toward homeschoolers and their traditional and classical yearnings are already on the drawing boards (for example, Patrick Henry College, The Great Books University College, Yorktown University). We need to encourage this trend.
Western culture and theological traditions inherited their philosophical principles from the ancient Greek conviction that the world is intelligible to unaided natural reason and that the highest form of human education lies in becoming an independent learner. The Delphic oracle's prescription to "know thyself" captures the motivating principle behind the ancient Greek pursuit of philosophy. As Socrates well understood, principally and primarily, all learning is self-teaching.
To become highly educated, we must facilitate this self-teaching through apprenticeship with great discoverers (of being, truth, unity, goodness, and beauty) and tutoring from masters of the liberal arts of learning: those people who can challenge us to develop the discipline whereby we can acquire the principles for reading great books. In this way, we can enter into conversation with the great discoverers, most of whom are long dead. Hopefully, through life-long conversation with these great intellects, we can ourselves become independent learners and great discoverers, and can pass on to posterity the principles that sustain our culture, those discovered and taught by the great discoverers and teachers of the past and set down in their great books, including Scriptural texts.
Unhappily, public, and most private, education in the United States today inverts the classical order of learning. Our public and private educational systems have lost the Greek understanding that the first and most essential teacher is the student, next comes the great discoverer, and last comes the classroom teacher, whose main task should be to help students learn the liberal art of reading difficult classic books. It should not be to masquerade as a great discoverer oneself. As Mortimer J. Adler is fond of saying, "A classroom teacher is only a better student."
Homeschooling, as most homeschooled students soon discover, is, after the first few years of coaching in the liberal arts (which are best taught one-on-one � hence at home), very largely self-teaching. If we equate self-teaching with the current practical expression of that concept, homeschooling, we can see that the ancient Greeks well understood what our culture is being forced to concede reluctantly: all learning is essentially self-teaching. The superior academic performance of homeschoolers, now widely known and admitted, provides objective evidence of this fact. We best encourage and support self-teaching by preparing students for, and guiding them to, the classic works of the great discoverers, at home, close to the loving arms of parents, who are more likely to be able to give them the one-to-one tutoring attention that professional educators constantly tell us is essential to maximizing student achievement.
Genuine higher education (in the sense of developing the higher intellectual virtues such as understanding and wisdom, and not just the memory) begins when we start to take control over our self-teaching, when we no longer need an auxiliary teacher's help to discover the principles by which to learn. Contemporary public and private educational systems largely invert and undermine this classical view of learning and higher education. While they often give lip-service to developing independent learners, and one-to-one tutoring, the educational practices they employ actually do the opposite: cripple the ability of students to think abstractly and become self-teachers.
Our educational institutions have largely abolished the Socratic method of using discussions and disputations among student-learners to encourage abstract thinking and deepen understanding of difficult and lofty concepts, traditionally called the "Great Ideas." Thus, secondary educational institutions neglect the one area that might be especially helpful to us for promoting abstract thought, higher education, and independent learning. More than any other institutions, our contemporary public and private educational systems sustain and propagate the sophistic educational mindset that has undermined the Greek educational vision that, for centuries, has supported Western culture and our democratic republic. To overturn this mindset, we must restore the classical view that learning is chiefly accomplished by homeschooling (that is, self-teaching) with the help of the great discoverers.
At this juncture in American history, homeschooling (especially classical homeschooling, leading to the study of Western civilization's great books), and efforts to develop ways to support the secondary liberal education of homeschoolers (including the organization of Socratic discussion groups) is one of our best hopes to halt our culture's decline. These homeschoolers now stream into our universities. Soon they will flood them. In my opinion, this is the irrepressible wave of the future. This Homeschool Renaissance may well be the West's last, large-scale, educational reform movement, and so our nation's best practical hope to halt what others have called this twilight of civilization from fading into another Dark Age of ignorance and chaos.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes, Redpath
1. "A Nation at Risk," in Policy Review, 90 (July/August 1998) 23-24.
2. Mortimer J. Adler noted this problem as far back as 1940. See Mortimer J. Adler, How to Read a Book: The Art of Getting a Liberal Education, New York: Simon and Schuster, Inc., 1940) 11.
3. Peter A. Redpath, "What's Wrong with Government Schools?", in Social Justice Review 89 (November/December, 1998) no. 11-12, 164. St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I-II, q. 91, a.4, respondeo. See, also, Plato, Republic, Bk. 1, 334C-354B, and Gorgias, 491D-500D.
4. Redpath, "What's Wrong with Government Schools?", 164.
5. Ibid.
6. Peter A. Redpath, "Private Morality and Public Enforcement," in Curtis L. Hancock and Anthony O. Simon, eds., Freedom, Virtue, and the Common Good (Notre Dame, Ind.: American Maritain Association, distributed by University of Notre Dame Press, 1995) pgs. 332-341.
7. Etienne Gilson, The Unity of Philosophical Experience (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1965) 272-293. Peter A. Redpath, "The New World Disorder: A Crisis of Philosophical Identity," in Contemporary Philosophy, 16 (November/December 1994) no. 6, 19-24.
8. Peter A. Redpath, "Dirty Dancing: Higher Education as Enlightened Swindling," in Peter A. Redpath, Masquerade of the Dream Walkers: Prophetic Theology from the Cartesians to Hegel (Amsterdam andAtlanta: Editions Rodopi, B.V., 1998). I thank Curtis L. Hancock for calling
Prof. Peter Redpath, Saint John's University, New York (2009-11-21) Inna audycja
słuchaj
zapisz
Future of the United States of America XXI Prof. Peter Redpath, Saint John's University, New York
A PHILOSOPHICAL CALL TO RENEW AMERICAN CULTURE:
The Homeschool Renaissance
by Peter A. Redpath, Ph.D.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dr. Redpath is a Full Professor of Philosophy at St. John's University; has received numerous awards and honors for his work in philosophy; was appointed to the Board of Trustees of the Institute for Advanced Philosophical Research in 1988; has made over 70 public program appearances on philosophical topics; has authored numerous books, monographs, and published articles; and has edited two philosophy books. He is a member of the Board of Editors of Editions Rodopi. Dr. Redpath is a Director of The Great Books Academy and Chairman of The Angelicum Academy.
Today, nationally and globally, America is at a crossroad. We face daunting educational and political problems. No social order born of a common conviction in the truth and goodness of its principles can long survive when it cannot rationally justify this conviction. At this historical moment, a critical meltdown is occurring in American educational and political institutions because, increasingly, the general American population and our institutional leaders cannot rationally justify the truth and goodness of the principles upon which our American educational and political institutions depend for their survival and health.
During the twentieth century, totalitarian political systems externally threatened the American democratic concept. In the face of these systems, America generally defended itself through a combination of physical force, free market competition, pragmatic arguments about the superiority of the American way of life, and the moral conviction of the American people about the just nature of their cause and the goodness of their society. At this time in our history, while we still have external enemies, America faces another, more pernicious, internal threat, that we cannot defeat through physical force, the free market, or pragmatic slogans about the superiority of the American way of life: the inability rationally to justify the truth and moral goodness of American society.
Educationally, sophistry reigns supreme in America today. Since 1983, millions of Americans have reached high school senior year without learning the basics of reading, mathematics, and U.S. history. Millions of teenagers have dropped out of high school.1 Today, an average student, even at better American colleges and universities, cannot think abstractly or read a difficult book without individual proctor-ing.2 Many faculty members are illiterate, and, especially in the social sciences, cannot explain the nature of their subject matter, the method their discipline uses, the origin of their principles, or what makes their principles scientific. The State arbitrarily undermines parental authority in favor of "enlightened" social causes. Our public schools cannot teach the philosophical and moral principles that sustain the authority of our political institutions. These schools are crime-ridden. We have reached a point in public education where we cannot agree on curricula, especially in areas of history, ethics, and politics. We are graduating increasing numbers of illiterate students, often warehoused for years by incompetent teachers. Yet our most successful politicians tend to graduate from, and send their children to, private schools.
In politics, we increasingly remove moral principles and truth from the domain of public life. Irrationally and sophistically, we identify the sphere of public life with the secular realm, and justice with the domain of the Machiavellian will-of-the-stronger. Often we judge deceit, selfishness, and subordination of the common good in order to win political office, as hallmarks of wisdom.
States come into being through, are the creation of, other mediating institutions, like families, churches, synagogues, schools, private businesses, and so on. Collections of individuals do not found States as collective wills to which we become serfs. Through representatives, people, as social beings (with skills and factional interests), and as moral agents (with natural rights and duties), and members of communities, establish States as limited, mediating agencies, through which we self-govern ourselves in pursuit of our common good: the more perfect union we achieve through political peace and justice.
The notion of limited government did not begin with modernity or the European Enlightenment. Moses adhered to this principle in his dealings with Pharaoh. The ancient Greeks recognized this principle in their articulation of the four cardinal moral virtues: prudence, justice, temperance, and courage. And St. Thomas Aquinas, referring to St. Augustine, explicitly appeals to this principle in his treatment of the variety of human law in Question 91 of I-II of his Summa Theologiae. 3
Principally and primarily, the State is a peace officer, not a parent, nurturer, clothier, guardian, educator, nor chief economist.
The proper subject of State governance is human freedom. States exist because human freedom exists. States exist to regulate human freedom within the bounds of justice and State competence in order to promote the common good of civic peace and friendship. States exist principally and primarily to regulate human freedom in relation to human exchanges, to maintain peace and order within these exchanges. They do not exist principally and primarily to establish and operate schools, or to run motels, real estate agencies, businesses, hospitals,or restaurants. 4
States come into being because we hu-man beings have a natural desire, and a moral obligation, to pursue our own happiness through exercise of our choices. To pursue our happiness, we must exercise our freedom. To exercise freedom, we need conducive circumstances. The State exists principally and primarily as a peace officer to facilitate the circumstances under which we can justly exercise our political freedom. 5
Freedom is proper to man's nature. In our actions, we have a moral right to exercise our freedom virtuously relative to our personal welfare, and a political right to exercise it justly relative to the common good.
The principal right to reward people for virtue and punish them for vice lies with God, not individual human beings, or the State. Hence, in our dealings with others, we have to be cautious not to overstep the bounds of our moral authority. God has the moral authority to command and reward all acts of virtue and to punish all vice. Individual human beings do not. God's moral authority prohibits all human evils. Individual moral authority only extends to communities over which individuals can exercise competent judgment and influence. For human beings, the domain of any moral authority is always the sphere of the humanly possible relative to some human good. No one, including States or God, has a right to command the impossible, which is what States do when they overextend their authority.
As parents, we cannot outlaw all wrongdoing by our children, and we cannot justly command of them impossible acts of virtue. As human beings, children have a right to exercise their freedom within the bounds of justice and household peace. When they overstep these bounds parents have a moral right to punish them.
Similarly, in the political domain, private morality is the dimension of human freedom related to the pursuit of personal welfare, inasmuch as this has no detrimental impact on civic peace and friendship. From a political perspective, in our private lives, we have a moral jurisdiction that allows us to be as intemperate, cowardly, foolish, and unjust as we please in our dealings with others, until our actions start to undermine civic peace and friendship. The domain of public morality, from which we derive our public moral principles, should not be merely the dimension of secular behavior � the arena of a public secular religion, where only secular reason has a right to speak and where truth is measured by an "enlightened" intellectual elite and governmental bureaucrats. 6
While many people derive their moral principles from religion, others do not. Many people, such as atheists and agnostics, derive their moral principles from personal experience at living, from tradition, or from philosophy. Other people derive their moral principles from revelation. To demand that such people adopt a secular religion before they can enter political debate that involves a common good to which they contribute and common threats by which they are endangered violates human and Constitutional rights to freedom for religion and speech.
Essentially, morality has two domains: our duties toward other people and our duties toward God. Religion is a moral obligation we have toward God. As such, it presupposes, it does not essentially generate, moral principles. God, not religion, is the source of moral principles. God imbeds these principles in human nature, in the voice of conscience, and freely gives this voice to theists, atheists, and agnostics. Religion arises as a reaction in some people to the voice of conscience. The voice of conscience does not arise as an act of religion.
To claim that religion, not God, is essentially the source of morality is a major fallacy of the Enlightenment. It implies that atheists and agnostics are essentially devoid of conscience, are not moral agents, an assertion contradicted by much historical experience. Submission of conscience to the rule of justice imbedded in human inclinations authorizes citizens to have a public voice. This rule of justice relative to the common good, not submission to a secular religion, generates the authority of civil law. The rule of justice relative to the common good, not submission to a secular religion, is the standard of political tolerance. To demand that our right to participate in public moral discourse rests upon adoption of a secular religion and its secularized rules of tolerance violates natural human rights, the American Constitution, and American pluralism.
Public morality is the domain of freedom involving personal exchanges that impact on the common good of civic peace and friendship: the domain of civic justice and public safety. As soon as a human action enters this arena, it passes from morally private to morally public jurisdiction, the arena of public safety regulable by just, not unlimited, tolerance. In this arena, all citizens have a right to a public voice. In this domain, moral responsibility and irresponsibility impact on all citizens regardless of religious or non-religious affiliation. In this arena, the domain of justice and freedom, where human actions impact upon our common good and threaten us with common dangers:
(1) all human beings, by natural possession of a conscience, are competent judges and have a natural right to speak; and,
(2) justice, relative to the common good, establishes the limits of tolerance. Here, the voice of conscience, philosophy, personal experience, and religious traditions all have something to contribute.
Philosophy and the Common Good
For several decades, through increasing identification of the State with the Body Politic, and sophistic appeal to the secularly religious grounds of the State's public morality, we have steadily diminished parental authority over the education of children and decreased the public voice of ordinary citizens, religious leaders, and classical philosophers in political debates that affect our common good and public welfare. The net result of this effort has been an increasing erosion of American educational and political institutions.
Like every constitutional political order, American society came into being through a conventional agreement made by representatives of political factions to unite in the pursuit of a common political good, a more perfect political union. The American government did not create this political vision of the common good. The government's existence presupposed, and arose from, this common goal articulated in the Constitution. The American government exists to preserve, protect, and defend this common good and the principles that sustain it.
The American vision of the common good is historically rooted in Western philosophical and theological convictions about human nature and destiny that the American founders considered to be self-evident. Without familiarity with these convictions, we cannot grasp the nature or meaning of our political institutions and political lives.
We become like strangers wandering amidst foreign and unfamiliar surroundings. We erroneously start to believe that our own self-definition grounds our freedom and political principles.
Central to the Western vision of the common good is a philosophical conviction about the fundamental rationality and dignity of human nature and the theological conviction that human life is guided by a providential creator. The major ancient Greek philosophers never deviated in their judgment that our universe is an intelligible order inhabited by a gradation of beings, each with its own non-relative identity, culminating in human nature, a social animal endowed with the faculty to reason.
The ancient Greek philosophers thought we were born with the natural ability to survey the physical world around us and to extract from our everyday observations of the behavior of physical things the rules whereby we develop our arts, sciences, morals, law, and politics. For these philosophers, inclinations in this organic faculty of reason, whereby we moderate our use of freedom in pursuit of our own welfare and act with reasonable tolerance toward others, constitute the voice of reason - conscience - the locus of the universal moral principles that determine moral normalcy. They thought that to ignore, or to behave contrary to, reason's dictates was vicious, made us less human and more beastly, and eventually led to our emotional, intellectual, and social corruption.7
Medieval Jewish, Muslim, and Christian thinkers inherited and preserved the Greek philosophical view of nature, the arts, and sciences, and built around them our Western cultural, educational, theological, legal, and political traditions. For several centuries, but especially within the past several decades, the ancient Greek understanding of philosophy and human nature has decreased in some of these traditions. Wherever this has occurred, disaster has resulted. Philosophy is the only rational knowledge by which we can judge the principles of demonstration in our arts and sciences, evaluate the worth of our knowledge, identify and evaluate our criteria of truth, distinguish sound from unsound arguments, and unify our sciences into an order of higher learning. And philosophical reflection upon the behavior of human beings, understood as rational animals, is the only means we have to establish a rationally justified ethics and a concept of the person that can sustain democratic government.
Democratic government presupposes a specific vision of the common human good. And our concept of a common human good necessarily contains our concept of human nature. Democratic government is a type of government naturally best suited for achieving the common good of rational animals, not of irrational animals or angels. Totalitarianism suits beasts. Theocracy befits angels.
At present, we Americans find ourselves in a state of educational and political decay because we have lost our understanding of the nature of classical philosophy and the essential role it plays in integrating all our branches of knowledge, our cultural and political institutions, in justifying our common vision of our common political good, and rationally articulating the jurisdictional lines of private and public morality. Having lost our understanding of the nature of this subject, we can no longer find rational arguments to justify and sustain our different educational and religious institutions and the principles that sustain us in our common convictions about our common good. The existence of these institutions essentially depends upon, and can only be rationally justified by, philosophical arguments that presuppose that we are rational animals. Having lost this conviction, we have lost our ability to think philosophically. Thus, we can no longer rationally justify American culture.
Transmission of the principles that justify a culture's vision of the common good is the work of theologians and philosophers. American culture is theologically pluralistic. For this reason alone, it can never theologically justify a unified vision of the democratic common good to its own people, much less to people of different theological traditions who would attack America externally.
Since its inception, America has attempted to use a lowest common biblical tradition as a kind of public philosophy to justify the intellectual and moral norms that sustain our common democratic vision. Given the common Judeo-Christian and European tradition of previous generations of Americans, rhetorical appeal to such a common theological tradition was possible to sustain our way of life. Growing American pluralism and secularization no longer make this possible. Having weakened our
theological traditions, we largely only have sophistry, empty slogans, to justify our cultural, educational, and political institutions. No democracy can rationally sustain itself on sophistic principles. For this reason, our schools have lost their ability to teach, our universities are gradually being transformed into propaganda institutes, and our politicians increasingly think that words mean whatever they want them to mean.
Philosophy is not a lowest common theology, a secular religion from which we get our public morality, or any specific system or body of knowledge. It is a method of rational investigation that involves use of sense observation, abstract conceptualization, and logical reasoning, a natural mode of higher level inquiry employed by human beings, rational animals. This understanding of human nature and philosophy is common to our Western theological traditions and to ordinary human beings in all parts of the world. And it was the general understanding that prevailed in the West when universities first arose during the Middle Ages.
Some Immediate Steps to Take
Universities are the main source from which America draws its institutional leaders. If America's universities are intellectually and morally weak, American institutions will not long remain intellectually and morally strong. America's universities are intellectually and morally weak. Hence, American institutions cannot long remain intellectually and morally strong.
Currently, philosophy is required at perhaps, no more than twenty-five percent of American colleges and univer sities. Even at those schools that require philosophy, what passes for philosophy is often sophistry, having little resemblance to the mode of abstract reasoning that the ancient Greeks considered to be natural to rational animals. The decline of classical philosophy at our universities helps explain the widespread inability of contemporary American college students to think abstractly, reason logically, maintain their attention span, distinguish sound from fallacious arguments, and read difficult books.
A morally vicious and intellectually gullible citizenry cannot sustain democratic government. Loss of our ability to reason well corrupts our democratic institutions, places them in the hands of sophists, and makes us dupes to the persuasive force of ideological slogans and sound bites. We cannot turn to contemporary social scientists, psychologists, political and cultural theorists, literary critics, or contemporary philosophers to remedy our current educational, cultural, and political problems. Generally, their theories are the sophistry that lie at the source of our decay. To seek help from them resembles asking incendiaries to fight a forest fire.8
To renew our nation, we must renew our institutions. To renew our institutions, we must renew our universities. To renew our universities, we need a renaissance of classical philosophical and theological education, from the ground up as well as from the top down. The huge and growing "homeschooling" movement presents an opportunity to initiate this classical philosophical and theological educational renaissance, starting in the elementary and secondary levels and then reaching into the colleges and universities.
Homeschoolers heavily favor those colleges where classical philosophical and theological education still exists (for example, the student body of Thomas Aquinas College is now about 30% homeschooled). These colleges, especially those with a component of traditional theology, are rapidly expanding. Homeschooling is increasing at a rate of approximately 15% per year. Already, competition for these students is exerting tremendous pressure on college administrations to hire faculty and alter their curricula in that direction. This trend will doubtlessly increase.
Many universities, which previously shunned homeschoolers, now actively recruit them. New colleges geared toward homeschoolers and their traditional and classical yearnings are already on the drawing boards (for example, Patrick Henry College, The Great Books University College, Yorktown University). We need to encourage this trend.
Western culture and theological traditions inherited their philosophical principles from the ancient Greek conviction that the world is intelligible to unaided natural reason and that the highest form of human education lies in becoming an independent learner. The Delphic oracle's prescription to "know thyself" captures the motivating principle behind the ancient Greek pursuit of philosophy. As Socrates well understood, principally and primarily, all learning is self-teaching.
To become highly educated, we must facilitate this self-teaching through apprenticeship with great discoverers (of being, truth, unity, goodness, and beauty) and tutoring from masters of the liberal arts of learning: those people who can challenge us to develop the discipline whereby we can acquire the principles for reading great books. In this way, we can enter into conversation with the great discoverers, most of whom are long dead. Hopefully, through life-long conversation with these great intellects, we can ourselves become independent learners and great discoverers, and can pass on to posterity the principles that sustain our culture, those discovered and taught by the great discoverers and teachers of the past and set down in their great books, including Scriptural texts.
Unhappily, public, and most private, education in the United States today inverts the classical order of learning. Our public and private educational systems have lost the Greek understanding that the first and most essential teacher is the student, next comes the great discoverer, and last comes the classroom teacher, whose main task should be to help students learn the liberal art of reading difficult classic books. It should not be to masquerade as a great discoverer oneself. As Mortimer J. Adler is fond of saying, "A classroom teacher is only a better student."
Homeschooling, as most homeschooled students soon discover, is, after the first few years of coaching in the liberal arts (which are best taught one-on-one � hence at home), very largely self-teaching. If we equate self-teaching with the current practical expression of that concept, homeschooling, we can see that the ancient Greeks well understood what our culture is being forced to concede reluctantly: all learning is essentially self-teaching. The superior academic performance of homeschoolers, now widely known and admitted, provides objective evidence of this fact. We best encourage and support self-teaching by preparing students for, and guiding them to, the classic works of the great discoverers, at home, close to the loving arms of parents, who are more likely to be able to give them the one-to-one tutoring attention that professional educators constantly tell us is essential to maximizing student achievement.
Genuine higher education (in the sense of developing the higher intellectual virtues such as understanding and wisdom, and not just the memory) begins when we start to take control over our self-teaching, when we no longer need an auxiliary teacher's help to discover the principles by which to learn. Contemporary public and private educational systems largely invert and undermine this classical view of learning and higher education. While they often give lip-service to developing independent learners, and one-to-one tutoring, the educational practices they employ actually do the opposite: cripple the ability of students to think abstractly and become self-teachers.
Our educational institutions have largely abolished the Socratic method of using discussions and disputations among student-learners to encourage abstract thinking and deepen understanding of difficult and lofty concepts, traditionally called the "Great Ideas." Thus, secondary educational institutions neglect the one area that might be especially helpful to us for promoting abstract thought, higher education, and independent learning. More than any other institutions, our contemporary public and private educational systems sustain and propagate the sophistic educational mindset that has undermined the Greek educational vision that, for centuries, has supported Western culture and our democratic republic. To overturn this mindset, we must restore the classical view that learning is chiefly accomplished by homeschooling (that is, self-teaching) with the help of the great discoverers.
At this juncture in American history, homeschooling (especially classical homeschooling, leading to the study of Western civilization's great books), and efforts to develop ways to support the secondary liberal education of homeschoolers (including the organization of Socratic discussion groups) is one of our best hopes to halt our culture's decline. These homeschoolers now stream into our universities. Soon they will flood them. In my opinion, this is the irrepressible wave of the future. This Homeschool Renaissance may well be the West's last, large-scale, educational reform movement, and so our nation's best practical hope to halt what others have called this twilight of civilization from fading into another Dark Age of ignorance and chaos.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Notes, Redpath
1. "A Nation at Risk," in Policy Review, 90 (July/August 1998) 23-24.
2. Mortimer J. Adler noted this problem as far back as 1940. See Mortimer J. Adler, How to Read a Book: The Art of Getting a Liberal Education, New York: Simon and Schuster, Inc., 1940) 11.
3. Peter A. Redpath, "What's Wrong with Government Schools?", in Social Justice Review 89 (November/December, 1998) no. 11-12, 164. St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, I-II, q. 91, a.4, respondeo. See, also, Plato, Republic, Bk. 1, 334C-354B, and Gorgias, 491D-500D.
4. Redpath, "What's Wrong with Government Schools?", 164.
5. Ibid.
6. Peter A. Redpath, "Private Morality and Public Enforcement," in Curtis L. Hancock and Anthony O. Simon, eds., Freedom, Virtue, and the Common Good (Notre Dame, Ind.: American Maritain Association, distributed by University of Notre Dame Press, 1995) pgs. 332-341.
7. Etienne Gilson, The Unity of Philosophical Experience (New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1965) 272-293. Peter A. Redpath, "The New World Disorder: A Crisis of Philosophical Identity," in Contemporary Philosophy, 16 (November/December 1994) no. 6, 19-24.
8. Peter A. Redpath, "Dirty Dancing: Higher Education as Enlightened Swindling," in Peter A. Redpath, Masquerade of the Dream Walkers: Prophetic Theology from the Cartesians to Hegel (Amsterdam andAtlanta: Editions Rodopi, B.V., 1998). I thank Curtis L. Hancock for calling
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Masonerka żydowska Bn Br usuwa nasz krzyż ze Żwirowiska
Masonerka żydowska Bn Br usuwa nasz krzyż ze Żwirowiska
O możliwości przeniesienia papieskiego krzyża, stojącego na Żwirowisku, nieopodal byłego obozu koncentracyjnego Auschwitz w Oświęcimiu donosi belgijski dziennik "La Libre Belgique".
żródło KAI (rk /a.)
http://ekai.pl/serwis/?MID=16854
-----------------------
Dziś po 10 latach organizacje żydowskie znowu atakują Polaków w imię tzw. "dialogu"
Nakazy jak poprzednio tak i tym razem przyszły z Belgii od organizacji "Sauvegarde d`Auschwitz"
i szefa organizacji żydowskich Lazarda Pereza.
Judajczykowie znowu atakują chrześcijan, chcą usunąć nasz krzyż,
a ofiarami masowych mordów w Oświęcimiu uczynić tylko Żydów.
Do takich celów powołanych zostało wiele organizacji,
stawiających sobie za cel wynarodowienie Polaków, zniszczenie tradycji chrześcijańskich,
zapłatę gigantycznego i nienależnego haraczu oraz budowę "Judeopolonii" na terenie Polski.
Warto wiedzieć, że 9 września 2007 w Polsce reaktywowaną masońską lożę B'nai B'rith
czyli Zakon Synów Przymierza.
Siedziba B'nai B'rith mieści się w Warszawie.
----------- linki ----------
Krzyż na Żwirowisku:
http://www.naszawitryna.pl/krzyze_aus...
http://www.naszawitryna.pl/krzyze_aus...
http://www.naszawitryna.pl/krzyze_aus...
Prasa:
http://www2.rp.pl/artykul/223068_Wrac...
http://wiadomosci.onet.pl/1867334,11,1,1,,item.html
Masonerka żydowska, B'nai B'rith - Synowie Przymierza
reaktywacja 30.9.2007:
http://www.bnaibritheurope.org/bbe/co...,com_rsgallery2/Itemid,134/catid,13/limit,16/limitstart,0/lang,en_GB/
http://www.museumoffamilyhistory.org/...
https://www.jewishpress.com/pageroute...
http://www.bnaibrith.org/
------------
cele masonerii:
CZESC 1 PART 1
http://www.kki.pl/piojar/polemiki/nov...
CZESC 2 PART 2
O możliwości przeniesienia papieskiego krzyża, stojącego na Żwirowisku, nieopodal byłego obozu koncentracyjnego Auschwitz w Oświęcimiu donosi belgijski dziennik "La Libre Belgique".
żródło KAI (rk /a.)
http://ekai.pl/serwis/?MID=16854
-----------------------
Dziś po 10 latach organizacje żydowskie znowu atakują Polaków w imię tzw. "dialogu"
Nakazy jak poprzednio tak i tym razem przyszły z Belgii od organizacji "Sauvegarde d`Auschwitz"
i szefa organizacji żydowskich Lazarda Pereza.
Judajczykowie znowu atakują chrześcijan, chcą usunąć nasz krzyż,
a ofiarami masowych mordów w Oświęcimiu uczynić tylko Żydów.
Do takich celów powołanych zostało wiele organizacji,
stawiających sobie za cel wynarodowienie Polaków, zniszczenie tradycji chrześcijańskich,
zapłatę gigantycznego i nienależnego haraczu oraz budowę "Judeopolonii" na terenie Polski.
Warto wiedzieć, że 9 września 2007 w Polsce reaktywowaną masońską lożę B'nai B'rith
czyli Zakon Synów Przymierza.
Siedziba B'nai B'rith mieści się w Warszawie.
----------- linki ----------
Krzyż na Żwirowisku:
http://www.naszawitryna.pl/krzyze_aus...
http://www.naszawitryna.pl/krzyze_aus...
http://www.naszawitryna.pl/krzyze_aus...
Prasa:
http://www2.rp.pl/artykul/223068_Wrac...
http://wiadomosci.onet.pl/1867334,11,1,1,,item.html
Masonerka żydowska, B'nai B'rith - Synowie Przymierza
reaktywacja 30.9.2007:
http://www.bnaibritheurope.org/bbe/co...,com_rsgallery2/Itemid,134/catid,13/limit,16/limitstart,0/lang,en_GB/
http://www.museumoffamilyhistory.org/...
https://www.jewishpress.com/pageroute...
http://www.bnaibrith.org/
------------
cele masonerii:
CZESC 1 PART 1
http://www.kki.pl/piojar/polemiki/nov...
CZESC 2 PART 2
Saturday, July 4, 2009
1U Rackable Systems Server Dual Intel Xeon 2.66Ghz 4GIG RAM 1X500GB IDE new parts Promo from RAQport.com $559.00 Sun Cobalt RAQ Qube Server Replaceme
1U Rackable Systems Server Dual Intel Xeon 2.66Ghz 4GIG RAM 1X500GB IDE new parts Promo from RAQport.com $559.00 Sun Cobalt RAQ Qube Server Replacement 2009 best Web Hosting Server
We can ship worldwide from Arlington Virginia office or you can purchase and colo with RAQport fiber Connection data Center Fast Bandwith static IP's for $89.00 per month.
1U Rackable Systems Server Dual Intel Xeon 2.66Ghz 4GIG RAM 1X500GB IDE new parts Promo from RAQport.com $559.00 Cobalt RAQ Qube Replacement
Rackable Servers w/centos BQ
or copy and paste entire URL
http://www.raqport.com/store/merchant.mvc?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=R&Category_Code=rackable
1U Rackable Systems Server Dual Intel Xeon 2.66Ghz 4GIG RAM 1X500GB IDE Refurbished with new parts Promo from RAQport.com $599.00
w/ latest Centos BluQuartz 4.8 or Blueonyx
discount for several units call or email
Specs:
-Dual Intel Xeon 2.66Ghz Processors
-Tyan S2721 Motherboard
-4GB Memory
-CD-ROM DRIVE
-Includes Rack mount ears
-Half Depth Server (15.5 inches deep)
-1U Height (1.75 inches high)
-EARS Rack mounds
-1U Height (1.75 inches high)
- 1U 15 1/2 " deeep ( you do not need back support ot rails )
same length as the Sun Cobalt RAQ550 but 10 times more processing power
- CD OS Restore included FREE SHIPPING IN US , INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING APPLY BASE ON THE LOCATION
CentOS + BlueQuartz Server Appliance is built on the community version of Redhat Enterprise Linux called Centos.
RAQport ships all the systems listed below worldwide.
This server appliance uses CentOS as operating system. As GUI interface it uses BlueQuartz, which is based on the open sourced RaQ550 Sausalito architecture from Sun Cobalt.
Sites, users, mailing lists and settings can directly be imported with the built in CMU from any Cobalt RaQ. So this is an inexpensive way to trade the aging Cobalt RaQs against much more modern hard- and software, while retaining the well known functionality and GUI interface.
A CentOS + BlueQuartz Server Appliance can do everything a RaQ550 and it does it much faster. A CentOS + BlueQuartz Server Appliance can do all including Frontpage. We do not have Chilisoft ASP at this moment ) - The serial ATA hardisks have a throughput of approximately 50 MBit/seconds and even the basic model with a 2.8GHz CPU outperforms a RaQ550 by several magnitudes.
Aside from the speed there are other compelling reasons to consider replacing existing RaQ3, RaQ4, XTR and RaQ550 with a CentOS + BlueQuartz Server Appliance
The sudden demise of the Sun Cobalt RaQ has left ISPs and hosting companies with a time bomb: hundreds of thousands of RaQ servers worldwide starting to wear out – with no viable replacement. Fortunately, Linux specialists have the answer.
Features
In short:
It is "BlueQuartz" on CentOS 5.2 and then some.
Has all BlueQuartz updates that accumulated over the last 13 months which never got released.
Has previously commercial add ons pre-installed, including ...
phpMyAdmin
Web based Email
GUI to automatically create and remove MySQL users and databases for sites.
Subdomain management
Better PHP security management on a per site basis.
New default skin for the GUI.
Working vacation messages.
Updated Dovecot and ProFTPd.
JSP support already built in with an improved GUI.
YUM updates are delivered through various mirrors right from the start.
Is still available free of charge and released under Sun modified BDS license.
Comes with PHP5 and MySQL5 preinstalled.
GUI to modify SSHd settings (root access, port, protocols)
GUI available in English, German, Danish and Japanese.
If you still need RAQ3 AND RAQ4 we have over 100 Units we we can preeload the Strongbolt Centos blueQuartz OS prices start with $79.00 OS Restore Included
Alex Lech Bajan
CEO
RAQport Inc.
2004 North Monroe Street
Arlington Virginia 22207
Washington DC Area
USA
TEL: 703-528-0114
TEL2: 703-652-0993
FAX: 703-940-8300
sms: 703-485-6619
Toll Free:1800-695-6200
EMAIL: sales@raqport.com
WEB SITE: http://raqport.com
Replacement for the SUN COBALT RAQ LINE
New Centos BluQuartz Virtualization and Cluster Web Servers
We can ship worldwide from Arlington Virginia office or you can purchase and colo with RAQport fiber Connection data Center Fast Bandwith static IP's for $89.00 per month.
1U Rackable Systems Server Dual Intel Xeon 2.66Ghz 4GIG RAM 1X500GB IDE new parts Promo from RAQport.com $559.00 Cobalt RAQ Qube Replacement
Rackable Servers w/centos BQ
or copy and paste entire URL
http://www.raqport.com/store/merchant.mvc?Screen=CTGY&Store_Code=R&Category_Code=rackable
1U Rackable Systems Server Dual Intel Xeon 2.66Ghz 4GIG RAM 1X500GB IDE Refurbished with new parts Promo from RAQport.com $599.00
w/ latest Centos BluQuartz 4.8 or Blueonyx
discount for several units call or email
Specs:
-Dual Intel Xeon 2.66Ghz Processors
-Tyan S2721 Motherboard
-4GB Memory
-CD-ROM DRIVE
-Includes Rack mount ears
-Half Depth Server (15.5 inches deep)
-1U Height (1.75 inches high)
-EARS Rack mounds
-1U Height (1.75 inches high)
- 1U 15 1/2 " deeep ( you do not need back support ot rails )
same length as the Sun Cobalt RAQ550 but 10 times more processing power
- CD OS Restore included FREE SHIPPING IN US , INTERNATIONAL SHIPPING APPLY BASE ON THE LOCATION
CentOS + BlueQuartz Server Appliance is built on the community version of Redhat Enterprise Linux called Centos.
RAQport ships all the systems listed below worldwide.
This server appliance uses CentOS as operating system. As GUI interface it uses BlueQuartz, which is based on the open sourced RaQ550 Sausalito architecture from Sun Cobalt.
Sites, users, mailing lists and settings can directly be imported with the built in CMU from any Cobalt RaQ. So this is an inexpensive way to trade the aging Cobalt RaQs against much more modern hard- and software, while retaining the well known functionality and GUI interface.
A CentOS + BlueQuartz Server Appliance can do everything a RaQ550 and it does it much faster. A CentOS + BlueQuartz Server Appliance can do all including Frontpage. We do not have Chilisoft ASP at this moment ) - The serial ATA hardisks have a throughput of approximately 50 MBit/seconds and even the basic model with a 2.8GHz CPU outperforms a RaQ550 by several magnitudes.
Aside from the speed there are other compelling reasons to consider replacing existing RaQ3, RaQ4, XTR and RaQ550 with a CentOS + BlueQuartz Server Appliance
The sudden demise of the Sun Cobalt RaQ has left ISPs and hosting companies with a time bomb: hundreds of thousands of RaQ servers worldwide starting to wear out – with no viable replacement. Fortunately, Linux specialists have the answer.
Features
In short:
It is "BlueQuartz" on CentOS 5.2 and then some.
Has all BlueQuartz updates that accumulated over the last 13 months which never got released.
Has previously commercial add ons pre-installed, including ...
phpMyAdmin
Web based Email
GUI to automatically create and remove MySQL users and databases for sites.
Subdomain management
Better PHP security management on a per site basis.
New default skin for the GUI.
Working vacation messages.
Updated Dovecot and ProFTPd.
JSP support already built in with an improved GUI.
YUM updates are delivered through various mirrors right from the start.
Is still available free of charge and released under Sun modified BDS license.
Comes with PHP5 and MySQL5 preinstalled.
GUI to modify SSHd settings (root access, port, protocols)
GUI available in English, German, Danish and Japanese.
If you still need RAQ3 AND RAQ4 we have over 100 Units we we can preeload the Strongbolt Centos blueQuartz OS prices start with $79.00 OS Restore Included
Alex Lech Bajan
CEO
RAQport Inc.
2004 North Monroe Street
Arlington Virginia 22207
Washington DC Area
USA
TEL: 703-528-0114
TEL2: 703-652-0993
FAX: 703-940-8300
sms: 703-485-6619
Toll Free:1800-695-6200
EMAIL: sales@raqport.com
WEB SITE: http://raqport.com
Replacement for the SUN COBALT RAQ LINE
New Centos BluQuartz Virtualization and Cluster Web Servers
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)