How do Lithuanians view Commonwealth?

You admit that Upite is rightful Polish clay then? :D

What sort of mental gymnastics are you going trough?

I have a great time laughing at Lithuanians and THEIR mental gymnastics. Whenever your nobility did something good they are Lithuanians. But when they fucked up, they immediately turn into Poles.

Why are you moving goalposts? Władysław Siciński was not a Lithuanian, just held a post in GDL territory, or just because you hold a post in a different region you automatically change your ethnicity and nationality? Or your idiotic claim just because some Pole was a governor of a region that makes it a Polish clay? And for example again you shifting blame that supposedly Lithuanian magnate bribed him there's literally no evidence for this other than Polish propaganda and eternal victim complex that everything that has happened to it is because of others not yourselves.

> though Wisner observed there is no evidence to support this theory.[1]

>Whenever your nobility did something good they are Lithuanians. But when they fucked up, they immediately turn into Poles.
Guess that's what happens when actual "Lithuanians" were a bunch of swampnigger tribes occupying a tiny region of lithuania proper interested mainly in incestuous relationships.

And the Sicinski family hails originally Przemyśl, but you can pretend that they're Lithuanians lol.

>just held a post in GDL territory

Wasn't there a requirement that one had to be born in Lithuania to hold a post in Lithuania? It's been ages, but I am sure I read it in Volumina Legum.

>Władysław Siciński, he bad he Pole
>Władysław Jagiełlo, he good, he lithuanian

Attached: 1517932245657.png (645x729, 147K)

Lithuanians have very mixed opinions on the subject. But the commonwealth was a failed state from the get-go if you ask me. Truly a shame

Its not possible to have a discussion with the poles about it though because both sides are biased against one another. Poles tend to be bigger spergs about it imho becuz of their rampant nationalism

I just wish we could be bros again

Difference one is from a Polish noble family and other one is from a Lithuanian noble family and only acquired name Wladyslaw as his baptismal "Christian" name in his 30's. But no one likes him in Lithuania anyway retard.

Not neceseraly there were plenty of outsiders like Kiszka family originally from Masovia of course by second generation no one gave a shit and the permit could be acquired trough marriage or some people like Oginski was hetman of GDL even though he was born in Warsaw.

OP. Here, just wanted to add that I like concept of commonwealth for it essentially being a republic, instead of some shitty monarchy. Sure, liberum veto was idiotic, but thats besides the point.
>But no one likes him in Lithuania
That's kind of a surprise for me

It was a brilliant idea to have a decentralised semi-anarchist government system while surrounded by powerful expansionist enemies ready to fuck you up any second.

>instead of some shitty monarchy.

Shitty monarchy would've at least worked in those times liberalization should've come at a later stage at least a strong central authority King could've passed some reforms or legislations what we had was oligarchy in which King was a voiceless cuck who couldn't do anything because it would upset nobility and add liberum veto on top of that and you've got completely anarchy. For example there was period between 1730-1760~ where only one legislation was passed because everything was liberum vetoed and the the this eventually led to downfall because barely any reforms or legislations were passed since mid 16th century near the end of it's life Commonwealth had like an army of like 20k or less while it's neighbors like Russia/Prussia/Austria had 150-300k.

>I like concept of commonwealth for it essentially being a republic, instead of some shitty monarchy

"Rzeczpospolita" literally means "the republic". And it was a republic, because the king was elected by the people. The only difference was that he was named "the king", but he could be named "the president" as well, what would it change?

so the problem was not with monarchy/republic per se, just with retarded unanimity in voting in the parliament.

there was nothing wrong with a weak king or a king who reigns but does not rule, as this concept had been already implemented in the UK, the problem lies with the voting system in the parliament

user, all parliaments of the day had the unanimous rule. The point was to create bills that would constitute a consensus. This was also the case in England and Netherlands, i.e. the other two states that also had a functioning parliament.

The Sejm in PLC was derailed because of the rise of the magnate class, who had a vested interest in seeing it paralyzed. They didn't want a compromise bill. They wanted no bills. And truth to be told, if not Liberum Veto, they would devise other way.

ffs which books have you read? I want to know history too.

>the problem lies with the voting system in the parliament

Which happened due to nobility pressuring king and curbing his power. This is is pretty much prime example of anarchist society where nobles didn't really give a shit what happens to others or the state as long as they keep profiting and they have their estates.

>The monarch's power was limited in favor of a sizable noble class.
>From that point onwards, the king was effectively a partner with the noble class and was constantly supervised by a group of senators. The Sejm could veto the king on important matters, including legislation (the adoption of new laws), foreign affairs, declaration of war, and taxation (changes of existing taxes or the levying of new ones).

So in order to get elected he King usually was sponsored by some noble family's Jew gold and when got elected he wouldn't do anything that would potentially upset nobles that elected him in the first place and he couldn't do any important changes because they could veto his proposals. King was basically glorified cheerleader.

Liberum veto was one of the symptoms of having nobility running shit.

>Which happened due to nobility pressuring king and curbing his power. This is is pretty much prime example of anarchist society where nobles didn't really give a shit what happens to others or the state as long as they keep profiting and they have their estates.

Like in England? The idea that only absolutism could save the PLC is a meme created by Tsarist Russia.

>user, all parliaments of the day had the unanimous rule.

Maybe in tribal "democracies" in the medieval era. In 16th century the English parliament had the majority rule. Well, even in the Polish parliament the majority rule became the basic one at the end of the 18th century in so called "confederated Sejms" but it was already too late to fix the country.

>The Sejm in PLC was derailed because of the rise of the magnate class, who had a vested interest in seeing it paralyzed.

how were they any different from the Lords in the UK?

King is not the only force that can suppress magnates, in 16th century Poland "middle szlachta" involved in "ruch egzekucyjny" was doing this job pretty well.

>Like in England? The idea that only absolutism could save the PLC is a meme created by Tsarist Russia.

No what I've meant to say the King should've retained at least some degree of power I'm not advocating for absolutism, for example if one retard from whole Sejm is clearly bribed and tries to derail an important reform just kick the faggot out.

What we had was any inbred noble in Sejm who's high on swamp fumes could block king proposal on any important matter.

No, they couldn't. This is the pop-history we are led to believe. The noble couldn't block a legislation, he was too afraid of what would happen to him. That shit was too serious. The Sejm was blocked by MPs who were bribed and protected by magnates and later by foreign powers. There's a reason why vetoing the Sejm was idiomatically called "running to Praga", because Praga was the part of Warsaw (I know, back then it was a separate city) where the residences of Eastern magnates were located.

I really wish we had a (con)federation together with Lithuanians, we'd have this friendly rivalry English and Scottish people have, we would learn each other's languages and laugh at each other but in fact we'd be bros.

Of course given that both Poland and Lithuania are completely separated entities with its own cultures, languages, economies etc only connected by the same king and free movement of goods, people + common defense policy and foreign relations.

I adore culturally diverse countries with lots of local identities and cultures (inb4 cultural enrichment by refugees)

>The noble couldn't block a legislation, he was too afraid of what would happen to him. That shit was too serious. The Sejm was blocked by MPs who were bribed and protected by magnates and later by foreign powers.

Same shit different hand, you get the point. Not like any of them got lynched of course there would be people upset with them, but it still happened regularly like 15-20% of all Sejms got Veto'd.

yeah it was a nice time, such a throwback
*sup*