Hitler did not hide the fact that he was a firm opponent of democracy. The analysis of his many statements indicates that he substantiated his anti-democratic argumentation with various contentions. He primarily accentuated crucial role played in national life by great individuals. He constantly repeated that great inventions are a result of great personalities’ efforts and not a consequence of majority’s endeavor. Democracy is nothing but a rule of the mediocre and the average; it destroys personality. He also claimed that parliamentarian democracy is closely linked with Jewry. The analysis of this fragment of Hitler’s rhetoric shows that he employed arguments which had been well-known for a long time (for example Plato’s statement that it is difficult to choose boat’s helmsman by vote). The prevalent majority of these arguments can be found on the pages of textbooks on history of political philosophy. Hitler only put them forward in much more primitive, or even brutal, form. Against the background of the above-mentioned arguments, Hitler’s attitude towards the institution of referendum during the Weimar period is provided. Hitler and NSDAP were involved with the referendum initiative concerning the rejection of the Young’s Plan but refused to participate in the referendum initiative which was supposed to lead to the strengthening of presidential powers. According to Hitler, referendums should only be employed to gain approval for already committed deeds. That was a meaning of referendums organized in 1933, 1934, 1936 and 1938 which Hitler linked with popular elections. They only provided elements of democratic decorum but they were of no account as far as Hitler’s activities were concerned. They were nothing more than a useful propaganda tool. By invoking referendums, Hitler attempted to secure for himself – mostly in the eyes of foreign countries – recognition as a national leader who enjoys his people’s support.
2
Dostęp do pełnego tekstu na zewnętrznej witrynie WWW
On the basis of articles published in “Przegląd Zachodni” (“Western Review”) in the years 1945-1989 the author attempts a reconstruction of the image of Germans and Germany conveyed in them. The image changed depending on the intensity of censorship, transformations of the political system in Poland and foreign policy of the Polish People’s Republic. Immediately after the Second World War the account was highly negative and emotional, and amounted to equating all Germans with Nazis. Later on a revisionist picture of Germans and the FRG was sketched and contrasted with the good Germans from the “progressive” GDR. The latter image was evidently counterfeited. A marked change took place after 1970 and in the 1980s. Since criticism of the GDR was avoided, less and less was written about Germans from the GDR, whereas information about the FRG became more and more matter-of-fact. The analysis culminates in the conclusion that the authors of the researched texts gave priority to the Polish raison d’état, i.e. recognition of the finality and integrity of Poland’s western border, while texts on Germany and Germans contain a significant message about life in the Polish People’s Republic.
JavaScript jest wyłączony w Twojej przeglądarce internetowej. Włącz go, a następnie odśwież stronę, aby móc w pełni z niej korzystać.