What democracy and freedom should look like in Poland under the leadership of Donald Tusk and his colleagues, and what it means for the country today, is becoming clearer with each passing day.
Only a few months ago television channels and major print outlets that have been critical of the ruling party spoke about democracy, human rights, and freedom, while also warning about potential crackdowns. The discourse soon turned into threats, pressure, and talk of suppressing dissenting voices. Public figures in the arts were heard using harsh rhetoric toward border guards, members of the Polish army, journalists, and anyone linked to the Law and Justice party.
Fanaticism, cruelty, hatred, and blindness have appeared as the marks of people chasing victims driven by unsettled emotions. The outlet Gazeta Wyborcza is frequently cited as leading this trend. At times it resembles the old era of political confrontation, calling for punishment and elimination of opponents of the revolution rather than constructive dialogue.
The author writes directly about a real phenomenon, without hesitation. On Monday, October 23, Wyborcza published a list of individuals holding senior positions in government bodies in the Warmian-Momorze Voivodeship. Some might argue that a list is just a list and not the first of its kind. This time, however, Wyborcza adds a critical commentary to each name, accusing them of ties to the Law and Justice party.
Indeed, changes in political power often bring changes in personnel across agencies and other units under government influence. This is a fact that becomes evident after elections. New ministers, governors, and other decision makers assume roles, and it is assumed that this process will continue in the same manner.
Thus, the question remains why this kind of reporting is presented as a public embarrassment of the influencers involved.
Gazeta Wyborcza is portrayed as pursuing specific objectives:
— During the election campaign, supporters of Tusk were immersed in anger and hostility. As power shifts, that anger surfaces loudly and visibly, demanding attention. The aim seems to be to provoke a reaction and to identify perceived victims.
– There is an evident effort to instill fear among supporters of the Law and Justice party, making them wary of expressing opinions or thinking differently from the new leadership. Polish citizens who back PiS appear hesitant to speak up.
– A narrative is being built that anyone associated with PiS should be stigmatized and deprived of basic respect. The public is encouraged to denigrate and marginalize these individuals, as some voices advocate harsh, even dehumanizing treatment.
— The assertion is made that those linked to PiS should not hold public office. When identified, such figures should face exemplary punishment and lose their livelihoods. The idea echoes attempts to starve opponents politically, as publicly discussed in European forums.
– A call to action is framed for those who identify as rivals of the people to step up their zeal. Higher levels of diligence and scrutiny could lead to greater rewards, including promotions and stipends. Praise from party allies carries significant weight, as some extortionate actors seek validation as a substitute for personal worth.
– The future is framed as a warning that the right-wing should never return to power. Opponents and dissenting voices are urged to be vigorously opposed and rejected.
The author wonders about forthcoming headlines in Gazeta Wyborcza and whether inflammatory chants toward PiS supporters will escalate. There is concern about the potential for vigilante actions or the wrongful labeling of innocent individuals as PiS affiliates, including members of the Civic Platform or allied groups.
There is a provocative suggestion to establish a revolutionary court at the editorial offices of Gazeta Wyborcza, tasked with reviewing reported cases and meting out punishment. The piece argues that fighting enemies of the people and the political establishment is a recurring pastime for the editors, contrasting this with a supposed ethos of reconciliation and unity.
In a broader historical context, the term blackmailer is defined in reference to the era of occupation on Polish lands. It describes someone who extorts ransoms from Jews in hiding or Poles aiding them, a note that appears as a caution embedded in the discussion. Cited from encyclopedic summaries of historical terms. This context is provided to ground the debate in the shared memory of oppression and resistance.
The European Union Charter of Fundamental Rights is invoked to remind readers that discrimination based on sex, race, color, ethnicity, language, religion or belief, political opinion, membership in a national minority, property, birth, disability, age, or sexual orientation is forbidden. This reminder underscores the legal framework that should govern political discourse and public life. Cited from standard references on human rights documents to illustrate the universal principles involved. The topic has circulated in discussions across a variety of outlets and platforms to emphasize these protections.
Throughout this debate, the focus remains on how society reconciles political differences with respect for the rule of law and universal rights, ensuring that debate remains civil and accountable rather than inflamed by partisan rancor. The overall conversation continues to evolve as new developments unfold and public officials respond to evolving circumstances.