User Rating: 0 / 5

Star inactiveStar inactiveStar inactiveStar inactiveStar inactive

Danger - Democratic Process AheadIt has been brought to our attention (see, we can be politically correct too when we want), that Polish people are struggling with a new “initiative” that their former president pushed. This is the impending September 6th referendum. This massive undertaking will be used to settle, once and for all, key questions that Polish people deserved answered. Such questions cannot be answered through normal political and legislative means and deserve a deeper and more widespread consensus…

Or would you like to know the truth?


The core of the matter are three questions that the former president pushed on the referendum ballot. They are (in no particular ludicrous order):

  • For/Against the introduction of single-seat constituencies
  • For/Against the current method of funding political parties from the state budget
  • For/Against the introduction of the general principle of doubt as to the interpretation of tax law

If you are interested (and you real Polish), you could check Polish Radio searching for the article “Bogdan Borusewics speaks about the possible interference with the content or date of the referendum because it could demolish the legal system in Poland”.

Let’s take a look at them.

Single Seat Constituencies

The first one is the introduction of single-seat constituencies. Poland is a multi-seat constituency country, which means that a single constituency can be “represented”… ajem! … by more than one person. The notion that a single person can somehow “represent” people with diametrically opposing views is a ridiculous contradiction in terms in and by itself. Basically, this is bad enough. Now, if we consider that multiple-people claim to represent the same people, with the same opposite views and do this simultaneously, is really stretching the limits of comedy and pushing it into the realm of tragedies.

As we have stated many, many times before, the theory and application of so-called democratic principles is simply non-operational. In other words, it does not work. Period. Attempting to switch from a multi-seat constituency representation to a single seat is useless because it will still operate within the same democratic boundaries!

Consider this. Let’s say that you are “represented” by multiple people in the parliament. Are you happy with what your government is doing? Most likely the answer is a blunt NO! But if this is so, do you actually believe that having one politician “representing” you instead of several will change anything? Other than the political balance of power? Of course NOT! It won’t make any blinking difference in your life. You will still be ruled by the oligarchical tyrannical minority that democracies are based on. It makes no frigging difference!!!

Party funding

This is another ludicrous proposal. As a taxpayer, do you agree that a state, any state, must fund parties and if so why? What have parties done for you over the last 200+ years? Not much. People did. The market did. Entrepreneurs did. But a “party”? Not a chance!

If this is not enraging enough, let’s go a step further. Let’s say that (suspending disbelief) parties do make a positive difference in your life. Why should they be funded by taxpayers who do not believe in them? Or for those who hold different views? Or by those who voted against them? Speaking of adding insult to injury. It is bad enough that taxpayers need to pay for government bureaucracies but in addition to that, taxpayers are also funding parties who they do not want!


How would you react if walking down the street a stranger approached you and at gunpoint forced you to purchase a product you don’t want? Would you be happy? Would you be contempt? Of course friggin NO! Robbery is robbery regardless of how many laws they promulgate and a referendum won’t make any blinking difference. This referendum question is about screwing one party over the others. It is about the survival of worthless and useless politicians who are wasting tax money with their salaries. It has absolutely nothing to do with so-called “democratic improvements” (as if democracy could somehow be “improved”).

The principle of doubt

This would be hilariously funny if it wouldn’t be so tragic. Did you know that in the vast majority of countries in the world, you are innocent until proven guilty… except when it comes to tax law? In this kind of law you are… drumroll please… guilty until you can prove to be innocent!!!

That’s right. If you ever have the disgrace of having to deal with so-called “tax authorities” (which are independent organizations in and by themselves, basically answering to nobody) and be subjected to “tax judges” and “tax laws”, you will notice something strange. They will demand that you prove to be innocent even in absence of evidence to the contrary! In other words, they can simply “claim”, for example, that your expenses “exceed” your income. Or any other idiotic concept that they may concoct. No basis in reality is necessary. And then, you, must prove to be innocent. You. On your time. On your budget. You stand alone against the awesome power of the state. You.

And so the concept that a country would consider introducing the idea of “innocent until proven guilty” into tax law is nothing short of revolutionary… if you enjoy a discount while being robbed.


Let’s say that somebody demands your money at gunpoint but you begin to negotiate. Dear robber, are you sure I have money? What if I don’t? How can you know that I have money? And so on. Does this make any difference? At all? Of course not! You are still being robbed!!!


But of course, every time somebody wants to re-shuffle money given to political parties, the “other” parties complain. Thus we now have an array of “other” Polish politicians complaining about the “illegality” of the referendum and so on. Ridiculous!

The whole democratic system is invalid! This is so because as we have said in multiple occasions, democracies are based on Social Contracts and Social Contracts Are A Scam!

But of course, this is not enough. Now, many other Polish politicians want more questions added ranging from retirement age, compulsory schooling, political positions and others “To Be Determined”. Yes. The circus has finally made it to Poland and it is hilariously effective. All the clowns are out in force stating that they want their answers added to the referendum, which may now extend to October 25, the day of parliamentary elections.

But if this is the case, if Polish people need to keep answering questions that a Parliament is supposed to answer, why do they need the Parliament to begin with? Why do they need politicians to screw-up the answers? The answer? They don’t!


As with anything that has to do with politics, the reality is that this is simply a power play. A play that does not involve Polish people as they don’t have any real choice in the matter. We can pretty much guarantee that whatever the outcome of such referendum may be, it will be either ineffective, bypassed, ignored or all of the above. There is no chance in hell that any of their decisions will matter. Polish future is sealed for as long as they “enjoy” democracy.


Polish people will go to the polls to answer a bunch of questions and to elect new representatives. Nothing will change. There. We summarized it for you. No need to have suspense keeping you awake at night. See, we provided a true public service!

Unlike Polish politicians who’s jobs will be renewed. They don’t provide any so-called “service” to Poland. But your point of view may differ. That’s OK. It is only your live and livelihood you have to loose. What’s the worst that can happen?

Note: please see the Glossary if you are unfamiliar with certain words.

English French German Italian Portuguese Russian Spanish
FacebookMySpaceTwitterDiggDeliciousStumbleuponGoogle BookmarksRedditNewsvineTechnoratiLinkedinMixxRSS FeedPinterest
Pin It