In a fresh interview given to Ms Monika Jaruzelska, Mr Grzegorz Braun was kind adequate to rise the subject of his relations with our weekly magazine and the environment focused on Polish Thought. Let me quote his words: “The edition of Polish thought – a paper with which I have been with and I have no uncertainty that I will be in crucial political disputes again. I have no communion of souls with editors of Polish Thought. But it is at least any intellectual product.”
I'm glad to see that case for at least a fewer reasons.
Firstly, Mr. Braun was kind adequate to distance himself from us before we had to distance ourselves from him and his political project. The fact that any people associated with our editorial board see their future in the run-up to Grzegorz Braun's letter does not mean matrimony between Myśla Poland and the Confederation of the Polish Crown. Our roles are completely different. Grzegorz Braun's organization strives to support voters and to influence current state policies — that is the function of political parties. reasoning Poland is not a party, it is simply a newspaper, and, as Braun himself rightly pointed out, it is besides an intellectual environment. However, I find the word "intellectual product" unfortunate. present we are talking about "think tanks", but by rejecting disgusting macaroniism, we can say plainly: we see ourselves as an influence centre and we will stay so. We want to influence Poland not by participating in the current policy, which we consider fruitless at this stage, but by shaping metapolitics. This brings fruit far more crucial and much more lasting.
Secondly, Grzegorz Braun mentions "a communion of souls". It is simply a concept so profoundly alien to my conceptual apparatus that I perceive it almost as exotic. If Mr Braun had talked about different perceptions of priorities or different understandings of the state's rationale, we would have operated at least in the same conceptual area. The very fact that it uses the category of “souls’ communion” best indicates that, regardless of the many points that converge in the assessment of the current policy, in the area of identity we are in completely separate collections. We trust on understanding, humbly noticing the dysfunctions resulting from the imperfections of our intellectual apparatus. Meanwhile, Braun is simply a political mystic and romanticist — the same as the Bar Confederates or January insurgents.
Thirdly, in the final bill, everything is simply a substance of taste. Gregory Braun awakens my sympathy. Regardless of the well - studied rhetoric and craftsmanship, it remains an interesting and interesting figure, as does much of its surroundings. However, a certain, possibly smaller, part of this environment is completely unacceptable to me.
I realize that for any colleagues the possible of returning to political salons is simply a substance of taste. For me, no. I will not stand in 1 line with Olsztyn, Walus and others. Not due to the fact that I couldn't usage sophistication to justify my presence in this company. I just don't like it. As I wrote, it is simply a substance of taste.
I believe that Grzegorz Braun — and most in particular, if not almost all of his constituents and sympathizers — is the people who are at the heart of our homeland. I must say, I am 1 of those too. However, we do not request to go together in the same direction. As Stanisław Kozanecki erstwhile put it, “Diversity if it respects another through competition allows everyone to emergence for better and higher. This is how we were created, and that is why rebelling against diversity is meaningless (...) in the area of idealism and politics – we are fortunately going to the same goal, but not seldom in different ways. It's normal. May we only have adequate religion and religion to walk in the same direction and meet at the finish line." Let us go separately – without disturbing ourselves and not getting in the way.
Przemysław Piasta
