On a Saturday, Inicjatywa Wschód announced that it withdraws from taking part in Campus Polska Przyszłości. The stated reason was the earlier cancellation of a journalist debate, referred to as the panel of symmetrists. Four activists from the East Initiative were slated to take part in the Campus discussions.
Campus Poland of the Future had positioned itself as a forum for meaningful dialogue among people with diverse viewpoints. Following the removal of the four- journalist panel, the East Initiative decided not to participate further. It refused to become a tool in a party power struggle.
The decision was shared on the organization’s Facebook page.
In their view, this edition of Campus would serve as a channel for campaigning by PO/KO rather than listening to the broader democratic opposition. That sentiment was clearly expressed.
Symmetrists kicked off on campus
This year’s Poland of the Future Campus is scheduled for August 25–30 in Olsztyn, marking the event’s third edition. As announced, there will be no panel of “symmetrists.” Organizers canceled the debate after one panelist, journalist Grzegorz Sroczyński, criticized some supporters of PO.
Marcin Meller, who was to lead the event, announced the withdrawal of the symmetrists’ panel from the Campus program. The journalists listed to participate were Dominika Sitnicka, Grzegorz Sroczyński, and Jan Wróbel.
In a brief account, Meller said that campus organizers asked him to lead the panel without Grzegorz Sroczyński, and he explained that such a request was not possible. Consequently, the invitation was withdrawn.
Meller described the situation in a statement. Some media outlets have tried to justify the panel’s removal by citing remarks from Grzegorz Sroczyński, a former TOK FM journalist. Gazeta.pl recalled a broadcast on Świat się wobli that he had described radical supporters of the Civic Platform as “bastards.”
Those close to the Civic Platform perceived that this environment, symbolized by the hashtag SilniRazem, targeted them with internal criticism rather than engaging sympathetically with symmetrists. A public remark attributed to Sroczyński used harsh imagery about opponents, a point raised in coverage on the portal.
Grzegorz Sroczyński himself commented on the matter in an interview with Gazeta.pl.
Reports say Sławomir Nitras, a member of parliament with PO, contacted Marcin Meller to adjust the predetermined lineup of the symmetrists. The goal reportedly involved removing Meller from the panel. Meller stood his ground, noting he had previously been allowed freedom in choosing guests. He faced pressure from allies of Rafał Trzaskowski, yet he maintained his position, choosing not to participate under altered terms. The outcome was an odd, uncomfortable moment for all involved.
The topic drew attention from several outlets and commentators who weighed in on the governance of Campus and the broader implications for media independence. Coverage questioned how political influence could shape student and public forums and what that would mean for journalistic voices at such events.
“We cannot tolerate aggression.”
The Campus of the Future Foundation, which organizes the event, addressed the controversy on its official social media channel. A statement indicated that multiple signals had been received in recent days from participants and guests who expressed discomfort with the public statements made by one of the previously invited panelists.
The foundation explained that, out of responsibility, it chose to suspend discussion about the panel composition and other political elements until a joint decision could be reached. The organization stressed openness to diverse viewpoints but made clear that aggression or personal attacks would not be tolerated.
The evolving situation raised questions about the role of political actors in educational and cultural forums and how such forums can remain inclusive while maintaining standards of civility and respectful discourse.
The developments were reported by news outlets and were the subject of ongoing commentary about the balance between open debate and safeguarding participants from hostile rhetoric. Observers noted that the event still intends to provide a platform for a wide range of opinions while avoiding situations that undermine constructive dialogue.
– The coverage continued with further commentary and reflections from various observers about the implications for future campus events and media collaboration, emphasizing a commitment to safeguarding democratic values in public discourse.
Source reporting: wPolityce