The Order of Piskorski vs. Sekielski phobia

In psychiatry, phobia is defined as a neurotic disorder, which manifests itself as an established fear of certain situations, phenomena, objects, or individuals.

However, in the common sense, we call the phobia, obsession, or fixation related to a peculiar subject, or the viewing of imaginary threats against this background. The most popular phobia in our country is no uncertainty rusophobia – widely promoted by both the power centres and mainstream media. This is definitely 1 of the most celebrated and recognizable journalists – Tomasz Sekielski, who late interviewed on his YouTube channel with Dr. Mateusz Piskorski, under the prominent title: "Agent Kremlin, or the victim of the Spisku?’

Already conducting an interview by a mainstream writer with a individual “cursed” and sentenced to social death without any evidence of guilt may have caused any surprise. To date, mainstream media has not been curious in objectively presenting Matthew Piskorski and proceeding his arguments. Of course, the views of the editor of Sekielski are widely known and it was hard to anticipate that he would be solidarity with his interviewer, but as an acclaimed writer he should hold at least the appearance of objectivity. The worst part, however, was that the way and form of the conversation violated simple standards of culture and good upbringing. During the interview, the editor of Sekielski acted highly unprofessionally – he utilized profanity, applied unacceptable simplification and generalization, and above all he did not let any arguments another than his own. This behaviour contrasted clearly with the attitude of Matthew Piskorski, who responded to the questions asked with stoic calmness and rationality.

Tomasz Sekielski did not even effort to suppress his emotions. Vladimir Putin is “for himCold motherfucker, "murderer and villain" liable for the rape of Ukrainian women and the killing of Ukrainian children. According to Sekielski, this is “The man who should get shot in the head and remainder in the unextinguished lime, so that no part of it remains”. This is simply a show of eloquence and erudition of a man considered by any to be authority in his industry. Nothing to add, nothing to say. Regardless of the assessment of Vladimir Putin – he is the president of the Russian Federation – a state with which Poland is neither at war nor has broken diplomatic relations. The question so arises as to whether there has been a breach of Article 136(3) of the Criminal Code? This provision penalises acts of insulting the head of a abroad state. It does not substance whether it is the head of the country with which Poland has a appropriate relation or not. Of course, no editor of Sekielski will be held accountable, as his statements fit into the communicative that has been in the Polish public space for a long time.

Although the opinion on the decision Vladimir Putin about the invasion of Ukraine, however, it is an aberration to claim that it was a one-man decision (as Sekielski believes) and the war broke out overnight. According to this logic, it should be considered that Ukraine before 24 February 2022 was simply an oasis of security, stableness and peace. Unfortunately, the war in the east of Ukraine has been taking place since 2014, following events in Majdan and the overthrow of the president Viktor Yanukovych. In the background there was an expanding territorial and national conflict between Russia and Ukraine, and above all a geopolitical conflict between powers. On 24 February 2022, there was only an extension of this conflict on a full scale and the launch of regular armed action.

While the attitude of Sekielski to Vladimir Putin can inactive be understood in any way, given his views, his insulting the full Russian nation cannot be justified in any way. “Russians are Russians”, “since February 24, 2022, I lost respect for the Russian people”, “The arrogant Russian people crap themselves in fear and don't even go out on the streets“ He proclaimed lice and to Sekielski, with finesse. I wonder if anyone would follow the logic of red. Sekielski, or the logic of collective responsibility, insulted en bloc Jews, blaming them for mass crimes committed in the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip, would he avoid criminal liability? The above question seems rhetorical. Unfortunately, we live in a country where even the smallest criticism of judaic people is publically branded as an act of anti-Semitism, as opposed to attacks on Russians that can be insulted and insulted without any legal consequences.

It is besides crucial that Tomasz Sekielski wants to remember about any crimes, and he completely forgets about others, specified as the crime committed in Odessa in 2014 by right-sector extremists, which resulted in more than 40 deaths in flames. So are the crimes committed by Ukrainians no longer crimes, just due to the fact that they are committed in the name of ‘single Ukraine’? Nor have I heard the editor of Sekielski call the war criminal, for example Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, liable for the massacres of Palestinians in the Gaza Strip. And did the U.S. Presidents who made decisions on armed interventions in Vietnam, Yugoslavia, Iraq or Afghanistan (to limit themselves to these examples) have no blood on their hands? So, is Russia's aggression on Ukraine the only assault war to be condemned? akin questions can be multiplied, and it is not about defending Putin and Russia, but about applying the same criteria of moral evaluation for all. There is no uncertainty that all war is evil, and evil has no nationality or religion, which editor Tomasz Sekielski should know.

Michał Radzikowski