One list or dead?
The leading figures of the Civic Platform, including Donald Tusk and Rafał Trzaskowski, have argued that once PiS loses power they will build a smiling, tolerant Poland. Yet the conduct of the PO leadership toward potential coalition partners such as Szymon Hołownia and Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz raises questions about these promises. This dynamic is observed by many readers who feel the public debate is straying from democratic norms.
Gazeta Wyborcza openly supports Donald Tusk’s bid for a joint list, particularly through a recently published citizen survey. The daily also runs numerous articles, columns, letters, and appeals that urge other opposition leaders to join Tusk’s party.
Brigand calls for repentance
Despite those calls, opponents like Szymon Hołownia and Władysław Kosiniak-Kamysz resist entering a political alliance before the elections, though they may choose to cooperate later. The question remains whether the sharp language used by some voices will persuade them to change course.
Will they be swayed by a forceful critique from Stanisław Brejdygant, a writer, actor, and director known for his outspoken stance?
The public sphere is asked to consider a broad claim about a wide swath of citizens who feel disenchanted with their elected representatives. The author argues that a shared sense of national duty justifies strong rhetoric aimed at opposition leaders.
He emphasizes that in a democracy the opposition should keep those in power in check. He frames the moment as a pivotal one, urging the opposition to avoid distracting debates and focus on protecting the state.
Brejdygant presses the addressees to reflect on what they are meant to do and why they are in politics at all.
He contends that public service requires looking beyond personal ambitions and considering what is needed to safeguard the republic.
In his view, if the state is at risk, the opposition has a duty to act decisively, and to think beyond party advantage. He asks whether a more united effort would strengthen the country or if factional debates would undermine it.
Brejdygant raises a simple, unsettling question about publishing controversial texts in a time when democratic norms are under strain.
The road ahead, he argues, should be about uniting for the common good rather than scoring political points.
“A degenerate, failed state between Belarus and the West”
The recipients of the appeal are described as procrastinators who may not care enough about the nation’s future. The author casts the political landscape as a pseudo-democratic arena where the state is seen as fragile and under threat.
The message continues that those who seek to position themselves for future seats in the Sejm should consider the broader stakes at hand.
Brejdygant frames the political scene as a battleground where allegiances shift and where the need for strong, principled action appears urgent.
He calls on public figures to reconsider their roles and to align with a broader effort to defend the homeland. The emphasis is on responsibility and collective action rather than narrow interests.
He urges a turn toward a united opposition that can withstand pressures from external influences and internal divisions.
He adds that the moment is historic and that the state faces real peril if the current dynamics persist.
Public figures are urged to set aside personal pride and focus on decisive steps that could secure the country’s future.
The appeal closes with a reminder to remember the task at hand and to act in the name of the nation, rather than personal or party preference.
“Stop dividing the opposition, stop disgusting it”
The text has provoked responses from readers who decided to address Gazeta Wyborcza directly.
The publication has been critiqued for what some see as sensational coverage and for presenting opinions that urge a unified opposition while naming specific figures and groups.
There is a call to pause divisive tactics and to focus on broader democratic goals. The discussion touches on ratings, public trust, and the need for a coherent strategy that transcends individual political cycles.
Readers are reminded that the media landscape shapes the national conversation, and that responsible reporting and constructive critique are essential for a healthy democracy.
Questions are raised about how to balance scrutiny with solidarity, and how to ensure that public debate serves the common good rather than parochial interests.
This dialogue reflects a broader debate about democracy, accountability, and the path forward for a nation navigating tense political times.
In sum, the piece challenges all sides to reflect on their roles, to avoid inflamed rhetoric, and to pursue a politics that strengthens the state and honors the will of the people.