Talk:Roman Dmowski

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]

	Poland Portal Roman Dmowski is within the scope of WikiProject Poland, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to Poland on Wikipedia. To participate simply edit the article or see our current projects and discussions. On the main project page we have some tools to help you out. Don't hesitate to ask questions!
B	This article has been rated as B-Class on the quality scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

[edit] LGBT? Source, please

What is the basis for adding LGBT category? There is nothing about this in the article itself. It was added by a bot. I am removing this until this claim can be proven. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 21:27, 4 May 2005 (UTC)

Dmowski is reputed to have been gay, and to have been blackmailed by the Russian secret police (Okhrana) due to his homosexual activities.Faustian 02:40, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Removed reapperaing entry again Guest 13:00, 17 October 2006

Reputed and rumored - perhaps. This however is a controversial piece of info and requires reliable sources.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 00:37, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Here is another source for this information: [1]. I think it's important to call it a rumor, not fact. But it is an important and common rumor so it needs to be in the article.Faustian (talk) 00:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Can you provide a scholarly reference for this rumor? A webpage of a political organization, one that is on the opposite spectrum that Dmowski represented, is not the most reliable of sources.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 01:00, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't have access to a university library (haven't been a student for a few years), I only have the internet to go by. There are enough such rumors about Dmowski, however, that they deserve to be mentioned, albeit clearly labelled as rumors. Here are the results of a google search: [2]. A message board [3]: "W świetle odnalezionych przez Andrzeja Friszke dokumentów (z Archiwum Państwowego w Petersburgu), nie ulega watpliwości, że Dmowski od 1902 roku był agentem Ochrany z zadaniem zwalczania polskiego ruchu niepodległościowego. Wersal można by więc traktować jako odkupienie win albo po prostu gwałtowną woltę polityczną związaną z bankructwem jego mocodawców. " The consensus is that his homosexuality was the means through which the okhrana blackmailed him. (Incidentally, Dmowski would be one among many politicians of the right who are closeted homosexuals; Americans are quite aware of this phenomenon.

I agree that without a good scholarly source we should not make a factual statement about his sexuality. However the fact that these rumors exist, and seem to be widespread, seems to be noteworthy in and of itself. This noteworthiness means that inclusion into the article is appropriate. As a precedent, unproven rumors about the actor Tom Cruise are included in the article about him.Faustian (talk) 04:12, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I found this on a discussion board:

"oparte na artykule Andrzeja Friszke z 2 nr "Przeglądu Historycznego" z 2000 r.)

Tekst dotyczy sensacyjnego odkrycia w Petersburskim Archiwum Państwowym. W kwietniu 2000 r. Andrzej Friszke odnalazł tam w aktach Ochrany, carskiej tajnej policji teczkę zawierającą raporty i dokumenty współpracy "agenta D." Agentem tym był przywódca prawicy nacjonalistycznej Roman Dmowski.

Liga Narodowa powstała w 1893 r. miała za cel walkę o niepodległość Polski, przez lat 10 trwała na stanowisku konieczności przygotowania narodu do akcji powstańczej. Wspomóc to przygotowanie miała intensywna działalność oświatowa i akcja nastawiona na gospodarcze usamodzielnienie Polaków prowadzona we wszystkich zaborach. Do czasu...

Pewna zagadka była zawsze kwestia niechęci Dmowskiego do kobiet i życia rodzinnego. Ten wyznający oficjalnie konserwatywne zasady życia społecznego nie miął żony i dzieci. Sprawa ta wyjaśnia się dzięki "teczce D.", Dmowski był homoseksualista i ten zgubny popęd doprowadził do współpracy z Rosja. W 1902 r. wedle dokumentów z "teczki D." Ochrana zaaranżowała w jednym z hoteli warszawskich schadzkę Dmowskiego z pewnym młodym człowiekiem, agentem Ochrany zresztą. Tajna służba rosyjska użyła sposobu, po dziś dzień stosowanego przez wszystkie tajne policje - sfotografowała pieszczoty przez umieszczone w pokoju lustro weneckie. Tydzień później na przesłuchaniu Dmowski skonfrontowany z dobrej jakości fotografiami podpisał współpracę."Faustian (talk) 04:29, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Since this is your primary source, and based on above, since you seem to known Polish, please take a look at the end of the article. The rumor seems to be 1) false 2) spread only on the Internet. -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 04:31, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Sprostowanie.

dn.05.01.2007r

Z przykrością muszę poinformować, że opracowując w/w tekst padłem ofiarą zamierzonej bądź niezamierzonej dezinformacji zamieszczonej w kilku miejscach w Internecie. Ta historia uczy jednak, że nie należy tak bezkrytycznie przyjmować wszystkiego co można w nim znaleźć. Niestety ponieważ te informacje często znajdują się w różnych miejscach, łatwo wziąć je za pewnik i tylko zasięgnięcie opinii u źródła jest w stanie sprostować wszelkie nieścisłości. Trochę czasu trwało nim udało mi się dotrzeć do Pana Andrzeja Friszke i zadać pytanie o prawdziwość tych informacji.

Oto odpowiedź Pana Andrzeja Friszke na mojego maila:

Cytat:

   Szanowny Panie!
   Oczywiście nie znalazł Pan artykułu, bo taki nie istnieje.
   Rozpowszechnianie informacji o tych "rewelacjach" rzekomo przeze mnie
   odkrytych jest dziełem jakichś złośliwców. Nic podobnego o Dmowskim
   nigdzie nie pisałem, ani nie mówiłem. Nie prowadziłem żadnych badań w
   Rosji. Ostatnio pisałem o Dmowskim w 1989 r. w książce "O kształt
   Niepodległej". Nie ma tam rzec jasna nawet sugestii o podobnym charakterze.

   Swego czasu próbowałem doprowadzić do usunięcia tych informacji ze
   strony Wikipedii, jak widzę bez wyniku. Pozostaje więc tylko przyczynek
   do tego, jak ostrożnie należy korzystać z tego, co znajduje się w
   internecie.

   Z poważaniem

   Andrzej Friszke

I read Polish through my understanding of Russian and Ukrainian, so it is not so good. I have however heard of Dmowski's alleged homosexuality not only through the internet but from Polish friends. The source above was what I found on the internet. As I said, even if false, the rumor is widespread enough that it is notable, and because it's notable it warrants inclusion. Another example, the first two hits from a google search of Dmowski and gay: [4]Faustian (talk) 04:46, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Another reference to that article: [5]

Could you please summarize what this means (end of that article): 'Wskutek licznych nieporozumień interpretacyjnych oficjalnie zaprzeczam, iż powyższa opowiastka jest autentyczna. Oczywiście profesor Friszke niczego nie odnalazł w Petersburgu, w "Przeglądzie Historycznym" nie ma żadnego artykułu nt. współpracy Dmowskiego z Ochraną. Cała ta historyjka ma służyć "kompromitacji" myślenia spiskowego, tłumaczenia ważnych zjawisk historycznych (takich jak postawa prorosyjska Dmowskiego i endecji) w tak prosty sposób jak szantaż agenturalny. Zresztą ironiczna dedykacja coś powinna tłumaczyć.'

My impression is that this confirms the false nature of the rumor. In that case, the rumor should still be included but its false nature should be described.Faustian (talk) 06:14, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Let me translate a few phrases from that I quoted above for your convinience:

Zbigniew Kwaśniewski: I regret to inform the readers that I was a victim of a desinformation, propageted intentionally or not by several websites.

Polish historian pl:Andrzej Friszke: Some time ago I tried to get that information removed from Wikipedia; unfortunately without success.

Your source above: I officially deny that the above story is true. Of course professor Fiszke did not find anything in Peterburgh, in "Przegląd Historyczny" there is no article about Dmowski cooperation with Ochrana.

I don't belive we should spread hoaxes, unless it can be clearly shown that they are widespread and thus notable. Two or three websites 'widespread', neither are a few forum posts/usenet posts or simple gossip.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 06:44, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I agree. But clearly showing that something is a hoax is good. Dmowski has appeared on several lists of gays and lesbians, it's probably good that the wiki page shows that this is a hoax and provides the link to prove it (i.e., through Friszke's own statement linked to my reference).Faustian (talk) 15:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

This bad joke somebody made is not notable. Hence has no place here. We don't list every practical joke that appeared, in biographies.--Molobo (talk) 15:21, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Why do you consider it not notable, if as a result it got the guy and the story about him onto several lists of prominant gays and lesbians? Don't you think it important that this is debunked here?Faustian (talk) 15:38, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Can you show those prominent lists? The only one I have seen so far was an old Wikipedia fork.-- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 18:34, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

I heard the allegation from a pro-Pilsudski friend that Dmowski was gay and blackmailed by the okhrana. Curious about this rumor, I googled the words "Dmowski" and gay". As you can see: [6] the first two listings are of a list of gays that he appears on. While looking for a more scholarly source I found that other article allegedly written by Fiszke that has now been shown to be a hoax. I think that since the rumor is out there it's a good idea to have it debunked on this page.Faustian (talk) 20:03, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Regarding My So-called "Uncited Slurs"

Recently, this page was subjected to a drastic editing by an anonymous user who removed what he or she called "uncited slurs" against Dmowski. Chiefly, all th material that argued that Dmowski was a vicious anti-Semitic was removed. The author of this essay is something annoyed by this for the following reasons:

• Almost every book and article I've ever read on the subject states quite clearly that Dmowski was a an anti-semitic. The books that deny that Dmowski was an anti-semitic are books that in this author's opinion are not very scholarly. Only here on Wikipedia is a Dmowski is a opponent of anti-Semitism. And people wonder why Wikipedia is not considered by an reliable source of information.
• Nowhere did the anonymous user post any proof that what I wrote was false. He or she simply called my work "slurs" against Dmowski. In fact, Dmowski was quite proud to call himself an anti-semitic, so how I am slurring him by calling him an anti-semitic, I don't understand.
• True, the material was not cited; but then the overwheming majority of articles don't offer citations either; in fact, the overwheming majority of the articles don't offer any references at all. Moreover, there were no references to this article until I posted them. And had the anonymous user taken the time to read Paris 1919, he or she would see that what I wrote was true. True, I didn't add the book by the great Polish-Jewish historian Ezra Mendelsohn until now, but it was something I was meaning to do. But since the anyonymous user already decided I was making this up, I doubt he or she would taken the time to read The Jews of East Central Europe Between The World Wars either. If people were actually take the time to read the books I list as sources, they would see that anything I write is true. Furthermore, there is no citation for the quote allegedly from Dmowski saying Poland would be poorer without the Jews. I don't want to accuse anyone of lying, but there is no source for a quote that dramatically contrasts with everything I've every read about Dmowski. Perhaps Dmowski did say that, but I would be very interested in reading about the precise context that he made that remark, if really did make that remark. Normally, I don't like to change other people's work unless it is something that is untrue, misleading or poorly written, so I left that quote in despite my misgrivings about it. But the point, material that is favourable to Dmowski does not need citations, but material that is unfavourable does need citations. This anyonyomous user is not playing fair.

But to sum it all up, I will expand upon this article and offer a citation for every assertion I make, and when I am done, hopefully we won't be having this argument anymore about whatever Dmowski was an anti-semitic or not. And if some people are uncomfortable with the idea of Dmowski as a anti-semitic, I would suggest that they build themselves an time machine, travel back in time, meet Dmowski and tell him that if wants to improve his historical reputation, he ought to stop going on about "Jewish conspiracies" all the time and stop slandering the Jewish people.A.S. Brown 06:23, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

More references would be great. I am looking forward to your expantion. The quote you mention is unsourced at Polish wiki ("Polska bez Żydów, byłaby jak zupa bez pieprzu: bez smaku"), and nowhere else on the Polish net (at least, not in the form similar to that used on Polish Wiki). If no sources are provided, I think it can be moved here for verification.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 20:32, 23 December 2005 (UTC)

Update: One Polish wikipedian on pl wiki assures me that he has heard this phares '20 years ago, so if it is a hoax, it is an old one'. He suggest checking some books - and I found an English source for a smiliar quote tnx to Google Print: Gunnar S Paulsson, Secret City: The Hidden Jews of Warsaw, 1940-1945, Gunnar S Paulsson, Yale University Press, 2003, ISBN 0300095465. What was his source, that's another question. And please note that the quote is somewhat different: "a little salt may improve the taste of the soup, but too much will spoil it". Perhaps we can use this quote in the article, and move the old one here until a reference for it exact wording is provided.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 18:17, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

I am moving this line “a Poland without Jews would be like a soup without pepper: tasteless" until can be verified, which thanks to Piotrus's good work may be sooner then later.A.S. Brown 18:30, 12 February 2006 (UTC)

Dmowski hardly wanted ALL ethnic minorities purged-he viewed them as welcomed but only if they are small and serve as source of diversity in the country. He hardly was supportive of Christanity(having atheist views himself in private), and actually believed that Poles were beneath Germans and Jews in terms of social development. The changes and additions i brought come from "Nation in perspective of Roman Dmowski" by Bartosz Smolik:W kręgu historii i politologii. Księga jubileuszowa dedykowana Profesorowi Stanisławowi Dąbrowskiemu, Wyd. Uniw. Wroc. Wrocław 2002.--Molobo 09:46, 13 February 2006 (UTC)

The 'latest' study of Dmowski and Polish National Democracy is:

Brian Porter, When Nationalism Began to Hate. Imagining Modern Politics in Nineteenth-Century Poland, New York/Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000.

It is much removed from earlier, apologetic analyses of the Endeks and regards them as radical antisemites and proto-fascists. Porter notes, p. 228: 'The image of the Jewish parasite shaped Endek anti-Semitism. It facilitated the construction of the Jews as irrevocably alien, without granting them the status of nationhood and without inscribing them with any specific cultural, linguistic or religious features. To occupy their place in the National Democratic universe, the Jews had to remain amorphous and ephemeral, often unseen yet always present. The impossibility of assimilation had become axiomatic.'(Sammy67 16:13, 5 June 2006 (UTC))

I added the salt quote back in with the Paulsson source. I came across the source before I saw this talk page and didn't know the book was that popular! Aaрон Кинни (t) 11:17, 21 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Claims of Dmowski's sexuality

We have discussed the issue concerning the hoax about Dmowski's homosexuality in the heading above this one. The information is currently being blanked out by a new editor, who admits to being very ideologically motivated, and who seemingly has not read the content of the article that clearly states that Dmowski's rumored homosexuality is a hoax.Faustian (talk) 05:47, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Is this information really notable? It seems more fit for a tabloid than an encyclopedia... Ostap 08:49, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

As discussed above, I am not convinced on their notability.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 15:45, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

It's no less tabloid-worthy than the allegations about an affair with Pilsudsky's first wife. As I explained earlier, the information is out there (the guy is falsely on lists of prominant gays and lesbians) and apparently the hoax is spread by some Polish leftists. Isn't it a good idea to have a refutation here?Faustian (talk) 16:02, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Per two above editors -the hoax is not notable.--Molobo (talk) 17:40, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

The hoax is repeated on webster's on-line list of prominant gays and lesbians [7], and neohumanism.org's website [8] among others. It's at least as notable as the rumors about he and Pilsudski's first wife.Faustian (talk) 19:10, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Both of those sites what you gave as have same text - "This article is from Wikipedia". Everyone can add to Wikipedia whatever they want and without any proofs we have to delete some things such as "List of famous gays, lesbians etc. in history". Still any of the sites doesn't include any proofs. --Krzyzowiec (talk) 19:31, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Indeed; they are old wikipedia mirrors. So far I have not seen much evidence that this hoax has been 'notable and widespread'. It's discussion on this article's talk page is probably as far as it should ever go in our project.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 06:30, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

IMO the fact that they are old wikipedia mirrors is irrelevent; they are out there. I do not know many Poles, but apparently the rumor is widespread enough that I heard this story from one of them. Any time someone googles "Dmowsky", "ochrana", and "gay", those false rumors come up. Look at the first two article: [9]. If some of them come from an old wikipedia mirror, so what? The rumors still come up. It seems to me that debunking this hoax (briefly, of course) would be a good thing for the wikipedia page. I don't think that this should be censored because some nationalists hate to see the word "gay" linked in any way to Dmowski, even if it's in the service of disproving a hoax.Faustian (talk) 14:00, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

That's very relevant, as per WP:V and WP:RS Wikipedia articles (and by logical extension, their forks) and not reliable sources of information. We should not propagate hoaxes, unless it can be shown they are notable (see also WP:HOAX). I don't see evidence of such notability. Can you show a single printed source with this hoax? --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 20:22, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree that such articles are not reliable sources of information. But it's still irrelevent. The reason this is irrelevent is because the reliability is irrelevent. Noone here is claiming that those allegations are true. The claim is that the allegations are out there and relatively common, at least common enough that they are easily accessible on the web. Dmowski does show up on numerous lists of prominant gays and lesbians. Indeed, can you find on the web as many lists of prominant gays and lesbians which do not include Dmowski? Whether or not those lists are reliable does not change the fact that he appears on them. Moreover, this hoax appears on multiple forums (see my earlier comments, below, for a few of many links). That is enough to make it noteable for the article in my opinion. As for a printed source - I don't have access to those. Since the hoax is only a few years old I imagine it wouldn't have appeared in many books. I don't have access to newspapers, and Dmowski isn't exactly Tom Cruise for rumors to appear in tabloids. As for "propogating" hoaxes, perhaps you should reread the article. The article very clearly states that the allegations are a hoax. How is that propagating the hoax?Faustian (talk) 22:17, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Perhaps you should ask for more input from WP:FTN. I'd say that most editors here don't agree that we should include this in the article.--_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 23:30, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

WP:FTN states "This noticeboard aims to serve as a place to report incidences where undue weight is being given to fringe theories, including cases where the theory being promoted is original research or original synthesis." In this case this would be inapropriate. Including two sentances or so in a fairly long article is hardly "undue weight." And, the rumors are clearly not being promoted; on the contrary they are described as a hoax. It seems to me that at least two of the editors who don't want to include the info are somewhat ideologically driven (I don't include you as one of those).Faustian (talk) 04:12, 8 January 2008 (UTC)

Lets not discuss "nationalist" motivations, and rather the Wikipedia:Notability of this "hoax". I am sure you could google "gay" with just about anybody nowdays and get rumors. This is not notable enough to be included in my opinion. Are there reliable sources that discuss this issue or hoax? If not, I don't think it should not be included. Ostap 19:54, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I don't think that just about anyone is on lists of prominant gays and lesbians such as this one :[10]. Incidentally false rumors such as the one about Dmowski are described in wiki articles such as the one on Tom Cruise, in which the gay rumor about him has its own section. The rumor about Dmowski appears on some Polish forums such as this one [11], this one [12], [13], and others and has been put up on a Polish left-wing website [14]. Since the rumor about Dmowski is out there, it in my opinion ought to be addressed rather than ignored.Faustian (talk) 20:18, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

I agree with Molobo, the hoax is made by "Unia Lewicy" - "Left-wing Alliance" which is against any right-wing or "middle" movement in politics. Everyone knows in Poland that left-wing organizations hate everything what is pro-Polish, patriotic or religious so for example Polish hero - Roman Dmowski. I never heard anything about Dmowski's "homosexuality" during the Polish Professor's disputes about him. Dmowski's homosexuality and his membership in Orkhana is base on left-wing lies. One left-wing page says that Dmowski was a mason... These sites doesn't include any historical proofs/references for Dmowski's "homosexuality", "freemsonry" or other lies. We can't include in any article things like these without any strong references, same thing with "Jewish control of the World" or "Vatican's Freemasonry Roots" etc. This is an Encyclopedia not a crazy theories book. --Krzyzowiec (talk) 19:26, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

I suggest calming down, and sticking to the facts, without emotions and no need for political overtones that are offtopic, such acts will be condemned here.--Molobo (talk) 19:45, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

If Krzyzowiec had bothered to read what is written, he would have seen that those claims were clearly labelled as a hoax.Faustian (talk) 22:53, 6 January 2008 (UTC)