User talk:Bobby1011/Archive 1

Welcome!

Welcome to Wikipedia, Bobby1011/Archive 1! My name is Ryan, aka Acetic Acid. I noticed that you were new and haven't received any messages yet. I just wanted to see how you were doing. Wikipedia can be a little intimidating at first, since it uses different formatting than other sites that use HTML and CSS. In the long run, though, you'll find that the WikiSyntax is a lot easier and faster than those other ways. Here are a few links to get you started:

How to write a great article

There are a lot of policies and guides to read, but I highly recommend reading over those first. If you have any questions, feel free to leave me a message on my talk page. Please be sure to sign your name on Talk Pages using four tildes (~~~~) to produce your name and the current date, along with a link to your user page. This way, others know when you left a message and how to find you. It's easier than having to type out your name, right? :)

I hope you enjoy contributing to Wikipedia. We can use all the help we can get! Have a nice day. Sincerely, Ryan 09:57, August 3, 2005 (UTC)

Sadly

Sciurinæ continues to ignore all sources and puts POV tag without stating any reasons for it on the Kulturkampf article. --Molobo 20:31, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When arguments lack, blizzards of denouncing claims will do it, right, Molobo? You asked for Molobo's origin, Bobby, well, I can't remember when he said it but it was "Upper Silesia" if I remember correctly. And he doesn't study history but journalism and international relations if he told the truth.[1] Sciurinæ 20:48, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History is integral part of International Relations Sciurinæ :) Besides I find your interest in my personal life quite disturbing. As to When arguments lack, blizzards of denouncing claims will do it, right, Molobo? I provided enough arguments using sources, You failed to present a single one supporting your POV. I even made a list of sources that I used which you either ignored or named "cherrypicked": http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Kulturkampf#My_sources --Molobo 20:52, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

When studying, just don't confuse international relations with public relations on the international level ;-) I'm not at all interested in your private life, really, (nationality is not really that private, is it?) but could it be that it is a lack of anonymity that is causing you unease? I, for one, wouldn't behave like you do and then concede personal data, either. ... You know, you're acting so refined, so rational, so wise, that you might get unwanted press attention, as anyone would want to meet such a Jesus II. ;-) As for your claims I was ignoring sources - bah, I'm not, you know that. We shouldn't carry on the dispute on Bobby's page - it's getting ugly anyway. Sciurinæ 21:08, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not at all interested in your private life, really, (nationality is not really that private, is it?) but could it be that it is a lack of anonymity that is causing you unease? I know cases where people writing about Nazi war crimes were harassed by NeoNazis-that is why I prefer not to be known by my real name, address or picture. Recentely there has been information in Polish newspapers that Neonazi groups are making lists of people who they view as hostile to the movement.

As for your claims I was ignoring sources - bah, I'm not, you know that. This is contradicted by your behaviour on Kulturkampf talks page, where you either ignored or called cherrypicked every source I provided, going to a point to claim that Bismarcks speech isn't true. The fact of the matter is that right now we have several books, articles against your single objection to write about persecution of Poles in the article.

it's getting ugly anyway. Its all up to you-from my side you will find no name calling, you seem pretty emotional about the issue of German genocide or discrimination against minorities.Perhaps it would be wise from you to distance yourself from such topics ? --Molobo 21:18, 2 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good Onya

Thankyou for serving our country. michael ^talk 07:42, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Your proposition=

In short:

   * Remove section "Effect on Poles"
   * Remove reference to Poles in Introduction
   * Leave reference to Poles in Overview, but only in reference to Bismark's excuse.

This is unacceptable, it would erase an important part of history of Kulturkampf.As my sources show this was a major event for Poles. The fact that it took part in Germany is irrelevent as it consisted of Polish territory taken in Partitions of Poland, and unfortunetely Poles had to share history as members of German Empire.Kulturkampf isn't just German history, its also Polish history and the article should also focus on this as well. I provided enough sources on the discussion page proving this.May I know why want to ignore them ? Why should the effect on Poles be deleted if it is one of the focal points of Polish national revival in Wielkopolska ? --Molobo 13:14, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

From Polish PWN Encyclopedia: http://encyklopedia.pwn.pl/39338_1.html Kulturkampf na ziemiach polskich pod panowaniem prus. wyraził się w powiązaniu polityki antykośc. z zaostrzeniem polityki germanizacyjnej (gł. po 1878); w konsekwencji spowodował opór i zjednoczenie całej ludności pol. w pokojowej walce z niemczyzną. Kulturkampf on Polish territories under Prussian rule was expressed by merging anti-Church policy with sharpening of Germanisation policy(mainly after 1878), in consequence it caused unification and resistance of all Polish people in peaceful fight against Germans. --Molobo 13:21, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.clevelandmemory.org/ebooks/polish/part01.html The relationship of the Prussians and their Chancellor Otto von Bismarck to the Poles provides insight on the effects of partition. Bismarck believed that a rehabilitated Poland would mean disaster for Prussia. He would not tolerate the prospect of any separatist movement in his drive to create a unified Germany. This was probably Bismarck's main motive for embarking upon the infamous "Kulturkampf,"--the "War of Civilizations," "Prussianism against Christianity." This war began as a Prussian policy against the interference of Rome in the unification of Germany. To Bismarck it became a personal matter of race and culture, especially where the Poles were concerned. In a conflict with Rome, he knew that Catholic Poland would be more difficult to control. The notorious "May Laws" of 1873 forbade the clergy from speaking about state affairs in church, made civil marriage compulsory, and demanded that the state supervise all school inspection. Other provisions of the 20 Laws were more harsh, and directly involved Polish Catholics. No priest could hold office in the Church unless he was German and educated at a German university. Bismarck underestimated Polish tenacity regarding matters of faith. The Church provided a great source of solace and a sense of unity to the Polish people. Polish Catholicism combines fervor with mysticism and nationalism. In May, 1874, German was declared to be the only official language of instruction. Because of their refusal to comply, many priests were imprisoned and the churches stood empty. For the Poles, the "war of civilizations" had become a war against them and their culture THE HISTORY AND CULTURE OF POLAND by Judith Zielinski-Zak

I see no reason to ignore this source. --Molobo 13:23, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Another source : http://www.dhm.de/ENGLISH/ausstellungen/bismarck/169.htm The conciliatory policies of Leo XIII, who had succeeded the late Pius IX, did much to help settle the dispute between church and state. In subsequent years, all laws pertaining to the Kulturkampf were repealed, except those on misuse of the pulpit, state supervision of schools, civil marriage, and the ban on the Jesuits. In Prussia's eastern regions, the Kulturkampf coincided with a policy of Germanization, which was intensified by resettlement in the 1880s. Bismarck had made his anti-Polish stance known in drastic statements written to his sister as early as 1861: Beat thc Poles until they despair of living [.] . . . I have all thc sympathy in the world for their situation, but if we want to survive we can do nothing othcr than wipe them out. The wolf cannot help it, either, that God made him the way he is, and one shoots him dead anyway for it if one can. Spreading anti-Semitism also played a role in the deportation of Polish immigrants ordered in 1885 one third of the people expelled were Jews. --Molobo 13:26, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

History 1871-1939 Warszawa 2000 dr.Anna Radziwił prof.dr.hab Wojciech Roszkowski

Anna Radziwil-vicemnister of education in Poland, senator,history teacher, director of several Gymnasiums in Warsaw Wojciech Roszkowski-director of Institute of Political Studies PAN, lecturer in Main Trade School,Collegium Civitas, gives lectures in United States Universities, author of several works from history of Poland and the world.

Page 80. The fight against Polishness had a widespread range-it touched political sphere, national-cultural sphere, as well as economic one, and was led thru legal methods, by "law". You could process with Prussian authorities-something unthinkable in Russian part of partitoned Poland, where such an attempt would end in arrest or deportation. Intesification of the fight against Polishness happened after unification of Germany.(1871), when nationalistic(pangerman) feelings rose, whos representant was von Bismarck.This fight was led mostly in Grand Duchy of Poznan which was renamed Posen Province.Polish population had majority there(60 %) and had its own strong intelectual elites.On other lands of Prussian partition of Poland for example Pomerania Poles were minority and hadn't got strong intelectual elites.In Upper Silesia the few polish intelectuals for example Karol Miarka-who discovered his polish roots as an adult men-tried to preserve or even resurrect Polishness of the common people. In Poznan the fight with Polishness and about Polish culture took many forms.It was a fight over land, language and Church.In this fight the whole Polish society took part, both its upper classes, as well as peasents, which led to creation of GrandPolish ethos(etos wielkopoznanski)-which was made of interclass solidarity, strong connection to catholicism-the mark of being a Pole, and patriotic justified ability to selforganise and development. Centralne Towarzystwo Gospodarcze-existing from 1861, peasent circles, many forms of communes,peoples banks, and also Towarzystwo Czytelni Ludowych(Society of Reading for the Folk), singing societies-created an social infrastucture, which opposed the germanisation offensive.Gen. Dezydery Chlapowski,Maksymilian Jackowski, Roman Szymanski, priest Piotr Wawrzyniak were great patrons of these forms of national activity of Grand Polish society(...) Quite unexpectly a hero of the fight against german policy was to become archbishop of Gniezno Mieczyslwaw Ledóchowski, who at first period of his activity cut himself off from Polish activities.In 1872 however Bismarck started to pursue Kulturkampf policy.According to this priests were turned away from education for example.In schools german language was made compulsory apart from religion.Government wanted to have say in who will become who in church hierarchy.Civil marriages have become compulsory, and made of course only by german. officials.Ledóchowski who opposed this was arrested in 1874.This merging of fight against Catholicism with figh against Poles created in Polish society a feeling of identity between being a Pole and being a Catholic.It was then when the stereotype of "Polish Catholic" was created.Bismarck retreated from the most severe laws of Kulturkampf in late 70s.However antipolish legislation remained in place, and in 80s German government conducted another offensive. --Molobo 13:32, 3 February 2006 (UTC) All of this information is relevant to Kulturkampf.[reply]

Perhaps then it would be advisable to give a chapter Kulturkampf in Poland ? The fact that histography is short on Polish subject shouldn't stop us-most of the sources I provided aren't Polish anyway, as the wiki is international it should present all points of view-including the Polish aspect of Kulturkampf. --Molobo 13:44, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You could create the article Kulturkampf in Poland. But the definition of Kulturkampf does not include a refernce to Poland or Poles or the discrimination thereof, so it would most likely be deleted on the grounds that it is irrelevant. The fact is that Kulturkampf is understood differently in German, Polish and English, and the English word that describes the plight of the Poles is Germanization. Bobby1011 13:50, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but you are incorrect: Bismarck instituted the Kulturkampf, with a special anti-Polish emphasis as Germanification intensified.
—The Encyclopedia of World History, Sixth Edition at Bartleby.com—Your claim then that Kulturkampf isn't linked in English texts to Poles is incorrect. —Molobo 13:57, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

We can also see that Bismarck himself claimed Kulturkampf was aimed against Poles.So far no evidence has been provided that the speech is forged, or he lied. The link to the speech is titled "Polish Question", is among materials recommended for German teachers and the speech is given a forwad explanation: [The immediate background for this long speech was the brutal expulsions from Prussian territory of Poles and Polish Jews carried out in 1885. Many of these people had been resident in Prussia for years but had not become citizens, no easy matter in Germany. Polish deputies in the Reichstag formally questioned the government on these policies. Bismarck responded by denying the competence of the Reichstag in Prussian state matters. Shortly thereafter a majority of the lower house of the Prussian parliament moved a declaration for the protection of German interests in the eastern provinces. With this friendlier stimulus, Bismarck laid out the principles of the government's Polish policies. A typical Bismarck speech, it was delivered extempore (as were all speeches in the Reichstag and German state parliaments), filled with innuendo and threats and short on specific details. The intention here is to stifle criticism of an increasingly rigorous anti-Polish government policy, justifying it as an entirely reasonable response to Polish provocation. All the good will comes from the German side; all the bad faith belongs to the Poles. Source: Eugen Kalkschmidt (ed.), Bismarcks Reden (Berlin, n.d.), pp. 173-86. Translated by Richard S. Levy.] http://www.h-net.org/~german/gtext/kaiserreich/speech.html

The source you just quoted indicates that it is Germanization and not Kulturkampf that was directed against the Poles. Kulturkampf does not refer to the plight of Poles. What Bismark said is only relevant insofar as to his stated intentions. His actual intentions are subject to historical review. The concensus is that he used the Polish as an excuse. That is the accepted view, and challenging it is original research. Bobby1011 14:06, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry but you claim Ministry of Education of the Republic of Poland that published History 1871-1939 Warszawa 2000 dr.Anna Radziwił prof.dr.hab Wojciech Roszkowski is doing 'original research ? May I see your source claiming work done by doctro Anna Radziwil and professor Wojciech Roszkowski is "original research" or discrediting the book ? Or are you against using Polish sources as a rule ? --Molobo 14:13, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Kulturkampf does not refer to the plight of Poles. What Bismark said is only relevant insofar as to his stated intentions. His actual intentions are subject to historical review. The concensus is that he used the Polish as an excuse. That is the accepted view, and challenging it is original research

Kulturkampf does not refer to the plight of Poles.

1. Kulturkampf didn't persecute Poles ? Care to give a source on that ?

What Bismark said is only relevant insofar as to his stated intentions. His actual intentions are subject to historical review

2.Please then give historical source claiming his speech is false.

The concensus is that he used the Polish as an excuse.

3.Please give source claiming that.

and challenging it is original research

4.I already gave you a book published by Ministry of Education of the Republic of Poland. You are claiming it is original reasearch ?

--Molobo 14:16, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Polish sources that have incorrectly translated the Polish word Kulturkampf with the English word Kulturkampf are out. The word has different meanings in different languages.

Bobby1011 14:18, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In fact your claims that Kulturkampf isn't connected to Polish people seems an original research in itself. Care to give a source claiming Poles weren't persecuted during Kulturkampf and as a result of its policies-as it is shown by History 1871-1939 Warszawa 2000 dr.Anna Radziwił prof.dr.hab Wojciech Roszkowski ? --Molobo 14:22, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Polish sources that have incorrectly translated the Polish word Kulturkampf with the English word Kulturkampf are out. Please give a source claiming that the Poles incorrectly translated the word "Kulturkampf". I see no reason to throw Polish sources out of the window ? Why should we ? Care to explain. --Molobo 14:22, 3 February 2006 (UTC) The word has different meanings in different languages. Source of this statement ? Anyway thats good since we are writing on international wiki :) --Molobo 14:22, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1. Kulturkampf didn't persecute Poles ? Care to give a source on that ? I didn't say it didn't persecute poles. I said it wasn't directed at poles exclusively. So if it did then they its notable and should be put forward in the article.

2.Please then give historical source claiming his speech is false.

I don't need to. His speech is generally ignored in historical reviews of his intentions, the concensus is that he used the Polish as an excuse.

You DO need to. Otherwise its your POV, and not supported by anything.

3.Please give source claiming that.

Asked and answered.

4.I already gave you a book published by Ministry of Education of the Republic of Poland. You are claiming it is original reasearch ? Of course I am. It is orginal research, but is acceptable because it was Published. It makes use however of the Polish term Kulturkampf which differs in meaning from its English cognative. Bobby1011 14:25, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please give me a source claiming Polish word is different ? Anyway that is irrelevent since its isn't a word but a event that is described under such title, unless you prove that Polish sources are wrong I see no reason why they should be ignored. Just because in your view English sources ignore persecution of Poles under Kulturkampf doesn't mean International Wiki shouldn't take into account sources from various countries.And indeed it often does as research on some topics is limited in English speaking word. --Molobo 14:37, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Correction: English Wikipedia

The word has different meanings in different languages. Source of this statement ? Anyway thats good since we are writing on international wiki.

I gave a source.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=Kulturkampf

Read it. Show me where Poland comes into it.

And I gave a scholary source refering to persecution of Poles under Kulturkampf. Why should it be ignored ? Why should we ignore The Encyclopedia of World History. 2001. which mentions persecutions of Poles ? Anyway I presented english sources mentioning this.Could finally, finally show me a source contradicting them ? --Molobo 14:37, 3 February 2006 (UTC) http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=Kulturkampf Read it. Show me where Poland comes into it. Here is what I read : No entry found for Kulturkampf. --Molobo 14:41, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ok I found it. There is nothing there that contradicts the book I presented. No sentence that Poles weren't persecuted.As we have a scholary source showing this you must find me a source denying that view. --Molobo 14:44, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hardly a Polish or Non-English source: http://www.texasalmanac.com/culture/groups/polish.html Back in Poland, another insurrection was put down in 1863, resulting in increased restrictions from the ruling powers. In the Prussian partition, Bismarck’s Kulturkampf, a program enforcing German culture onto the Polish people, caused about 152,000 Poles to leave the provinces of Pozan, Bydgoszcz and Silesia. --Molobo 14:47, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The source stated Bismarck instituted the Kulturkampf, with a special anti-Polish emphasis as Germanification intensified. Now I don't know what you understood by that, but it is refering to Germanification(which isn't even a word, germanization is), as being the policy that was directed at Poles. Ofcourse the Kulturkampf affected Poles; they are predominantly catholic, but it affected them only due to that coincidence. It was a side effect. Sure, the number of Poles in the German Empire increased the number of catholics, so it may have even been a motivating factor, but it was not due to ethnicity, but rather due to religion. I don't need to contradict your source; it's correct. I think you are misinterpreting it.

Ok I found it. There is nothing there that contradicts the book I presented. No sentence that Poles weren't persecuted.As we have a scholary source showing this you must find me a source denying that view.

That's laughable. Your're saying that because it's not excluded from a definition, it is therefore included. By that logic any word could mean anything on the basis that its definiton doesn't exclude *insert concept here*. I'm not going to entertain this argument if you don't stop being ridiculous.

Bobby1011 14:49, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

In the Prussian partition, Bismarck’s Kulturkampf, a program enforcing German culture onto the Polish people, caused about 152,000 Poles to leave the provinces of Pozan, Bydgoszcz and Silesia.

The source only refers to the polish refugees. It therefore only reports the facts from the aforemention Catholic Poles who were discriminated against. It does not say that the Poles were the exclusive target, and, as a matter of fact they weren't. It does say that they were a target, a fact which I have never disputed. The article does not support your contention that they were targeted as Poles, they were targeted as catholics. Bobby1011 14:54, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article does not support your contention that they were targeted as Poles Incorrect the article speaks clearly: Bismarck’s Kulturkampf, a program enforcing German culture onto the Polish people --Molobo 15:01, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By that logic any word could mean anything on the basis that its definiton doesn't exclude *insert concept here*

Incorrect-I already provided definition that includes certain things. If you want to prove they are not correct then you need to find a source contradicting what I showed.That is that Kulturkampf didn't have a Polish aspect which you are arguing. --Molobo 15:01, 3 February 2006 (UTC) they are predominantly catholic, but it affected them only due to that coincidence The book I presents says otherwise-it says that the laws had an antipolish character in regions of Poznan. So please give a source contradicting what the book says. --Molobo 15:01, 3 February 2006 (UTC) so it may have even been a motivating factor, but it was not due to ethnicity, but rather due to religion. Several sources claim otherwise.Bismarck claims otherwise.Bismarck's antipolish quotes are presented. Please provide sources denying sources I presented, that is denying that the laws in region of Poznan were motivated by attempt to persecute Polish people. --Molobo 15:01, 3 February 2006 (UTC) Basically you are saying though that Poles weren't persecuted in Germany for being Poles then ? Quite original research I would say. Provide source please.I did provide several claiming otherwise. --Molobo 15:01, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Basically you are saying though that Poles weren't persecuted in Germany for being Poles then ?

No, that is not what I am saying. I'm saying that when they were persecuted for being Poles it's called Germanization, and when they're persecuted for being catholic, that's called Kulturkampf IN ENGLISH. Polish or German definitions of Kulturkampf are irrelevant. They article's title is the English cognative of the German word. The term Germanization refers to the persecution of Poles for their ethnicity during that period. Kulturkampf refers to the stuggle of the government against the Catholic Church, of which many poles within the Empire were members.

Why would there be two similtaneous programs in the german empire to solve the same problem?

Bobby1011 15:09, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm saying that when they were persecuted for being Poles it's called Germanization They were users already that alreadt told us that Germanisation was quite neutral and didn't persecute Poles in any way :) But joking aside Kulturkampf in Polish territories was part of Germanisation and I see no proof on your part that Polish sources are wrong. I am still waiting. As the Wiki is internationa all points of view are presented. I showed scholary sources from Poland and elswhere.Please show yours that support your opinion that Kulturkampf wasn't part of Germanisation. --Molobo 16:32, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

As the Wiki is internationa all points of view are presented.

No. Major points of view are to be presented with added weight. WP:NPOVUW states that you must give weight to the prevailing POV and only lightly mention others. The prevailing point of view is clearly that the Kulturkampf was directed against Catholics in general. The Kulturkampf was not a part of germanization, and the assertion that is, is unjustifiable. Kulturkampf discriminated against Catholic Germans as well, how could that possibly constitute germanization? I'm not wasting my time googling for internet sources that proove my point, because it's accepted by the dictionary that the Kulturkampf was meant to keep the catholics in check. The assertion that germanisation is neutral is even more ridiculous. It was a process designed to eliminate other cultures in favor of the German one.

In short: Religious policies were Kulturkampf. Ethnic policies were Germanization. That is the english terminology. I'm not disputing that the Kulturkampf affected Poles, but it affected Germans aswell, and Bismark already had a program to get the poles to germanize.

The entire reason for the existence of these two terms in English is to differentiate between them. Can you show me an example of a policy that falls under Kulturkampf that affected Poles exclusively?

Bobby1011 16:54, 3 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]