so why did the PLC fall?

>>526386
Noblemen having the "Golden liberty", they literally had as much power as the king, so they obviously abused this to benefit them as much as possible.
Being fucked by Russia, Sweden, then later on Prussia, Austria & Russia hurts.
Too much shit to fight (Crimean Khanate, then Ottomen, then Sweden, then Russia,Austria,Prussia)

>>526386
democracy

>>526386
The should had built a wall to keep their neighbours out

>>526386
It was like shitty roman republic with king that couldn't do anything.
it fallen because they never adopted absolutism. You cant lead a republic with 3 huge neighbours bribing your people.

>>526600
>How The West Fell To China, a retrospective of the 21st century

>>526386
p*les

>>527229
l*twins

>>526386
Liberum Veto

>>527287
/thread/

>>527229
only thing Lithuanians contributed to the Commonwealth was the name

>>526386
Democracy

>>527420
Is the West going the same path as PLC cause it's allowed to much "freedom" compare to Russia and China ?

>>527287
this

>>527339
And a golden age, desu chapladfamalal.

>>527432
I don't know what's the level of "freedom" in the West but if the people will understand that sacrifices sometimes must be made it will survive.

>>527432
The effect of interest groups and intelligence agencies shouldn't be underestimated

>>526386
imagine the glorious heritage if they would survive
>muh golden freedom
>muh nobility

Imagine a country ran by rednecks, who will oppose any change, because a law requires universal agreement in any matter discussed. Then, imagine this country had fought over 100 years of costly and destructive wars, from which they had almost no gains. Finally, when peace comes, they find themselves destroyed and with foreign influence creeping as Swedes and Russian use their country as a battlefield in a war they don't fight. Suddenly you realize this country is surrounded by much stronger neighbours and wealthy landowners hold all power, while being paid off by said neighbours. Finally the rednecks start a rebellion because of a propised civil laws for heretics, lose and run away to America where they are venerated as heroes. Then, when King wants to turn the country into a constitutional monarchy, other bunch of rednecks ask Russia to invade and stop the terrible king.

>>527651
this is super wrong
>propised civil laws for heretics,
the golden liberty was established 200 years before that, Poland was safe haven for heretics and jews.
>lose and run away to America where they are venerated as heroes
wat
few polish revolutionaries joined America in their struggle against British, one of them saved American president. They weren't "rednecks" by any means.
>Then, when King wants to turn the country into a constitutional monarchy
Bullshit. The king opposed constitution because he was Russian puppet but was convinced to sign it. The entire constitution was inspired by American revolution and they hoped it would remove foreign influence and corruption. Then some pro-Russian nobles decide to create Targowica confederation and even the king himself joined it under pressure of Russian empress to crush the revolutionaries who would threaten Prussia, Austria and Russia (it was typical to squash any resistance to absolutism, so such constitution was naturally seen as threat to their regimes)
And after rebellion got destroyed the Poland ceased to exist, and some poles would emigrate to America as they seen them as familiar nation.

>>527717
>the golden liberty was established 200 years before that, Poland was safe haven for heretics and jews.

The reason for the first partition of Poland was the Bar confederation, that was in opposition to raising the status of non-catholics. It was lobbied heaivly (even forced) by Russia, but it wasn't of any political significance. Just a case of "defending catholic faith".

Confederates are considered to be patriots because they were anti-russian, but their whole plan was to kill the king and see what happens next. That did not happen because after kidnapping the king, he convinced the guards to let him out. Confederation failed and the leader, Kazimierz Pulaski fled to America because he was essentialy a traitor to the state. Now they have a day to commemorate him in Illinois. The days of tolerance were long gone, it wasn't the XVI century anymore. I even found out about a hilarious anti-semitic dystopy novel from that period, called "3333, the Moszkopolis"

>Bullshit. The king opposed constitution because he was Russian puppet but was convinced to sign it.

No, the king wanted to pass reforms, but he was convinced that Catherine would help him (they were lovers like 30 years before), but she kinda did not give a fuck. He was a pussy, but he was probably the only ruler since the Jagiellons who was somewhat of a reformator. He wasn't forced to sign it, in fact, he helped to sign it while most of the Sejm was on holidays. Other way, it would have never happened.

File: pic 1.png (145KB, 502x677px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 502x677px

>>528116
>but he was probably the only ruler since the Jagiellons who was somewhat of a reformator.
this. pic related

File: Screen Shot 2016-01-08 at 6.00.44 PM.png (61KB, 495x217px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 495x217px

>>529065

>>529065
>who is bathory
>who is sobieski
And it doesn't change the fact that he was Russian puppet. Catherine was pulling his strings and he never disobeyed her. He changed sides in Polish-Russian war in defense of constitution and it was the biggest reason why they lost.

>>529309
Your right, I didn't mean to contest that part. Bathory was arguably goat. I mean to argue that Stanislaw Augustus was making the best of a bad situation. Previous kings and magnates had utterly wrecked the political situation years before he came to power.

>He changed sides in Polish-Russian war in defense of constitution and it was the biggest reason why they lost.
Doesn't that go to show that he wasn't Catherine's lackey?

>>529636
>Doesn't that go to show that he wasn't Catherine's lackey?
I mean he switched sides from revolutionaries to targowica confederation which pretty much started the Russian invasion by begging Catherine to intervene as people were losing rights over serfs (they seen constitution as "attack" on their freedom)
Sure, maybe he had some honest good intentions but at the end of the day he was weak willed and under his rule Poland ceased to exist on world map.

>>527432
This is a stupid question.

>>529309
>Sobieski and Batory
>Reformators
LOL

Sobieski is very overrated, because of two excellent battles and Batory was to be honest just a wartime leader in a time that PLC did not need that much of a reform. Great king tho.

SAP did change sides after voting with his ministers, because he thought that would save Poland from a second partition. It did not. Biggest reason for the defeat was that Polish army was invompetent, unready and Lithuanian hetman actively avoided combat with the Russians.

i think its funny that from all of their neighbours the ottoman were the nicest one

>>529824
Ottomans and Poland had acutally OK relations most of the time, at least until Cossacks burnt Varna in 1620 for little to no reason.

>>526386
>so why did the PLC fall?

Seriously, it was about the economic decline of the middle nobility which was the backbone of the system once it was workable. The mid-17th, early-18th century wars, especially the Deluge and Great Northern War ruined the middle nobility which basically disappeared as a social class. The country was basically run by a little over a dozen of superrich magnate families who hoarded land at the expense of nobles and later kept the impoverished nobles on their payroll as clients. The magnates were openly hostile to any idea of central government (which would control them), so they paralyzed it entirely.


>>526447
>>527287
>>527432
>>527545
>>527631

>Hur durr, it was the democracy, freedum and anarchy of the nobility

That's a meme that was created after Poland disappeared. Poland was extinguished by three oppressive regimes that scorned freedom, so it was mandatory in any historical research to pinpoint excessive freedoms as the main cause of the state's failure. Academic research have long time ago abandoned this bullshit, but proles keep repeating the meme.

>>532427
>That's a meme that was created after Poland disappeared. Poland was extinguished by three oppressive regimes that scorned freedom, so it was mandatory in any historical research to pinpoint excessive freedoms as the main cause of the state's failure. Academic research have long time ago abandoned this bullshit, but proles keep repeating the meme.
Whats your source?
The anarchy refers to the fact that country had extremely rich magnates who would own their own provinces, armies (kinda like modern Ukraine) etc and that there was no king to hold authority.
The freedom was only for nobles, Poland still had serfdom.

What are your sources provided that not all of you are Poles?

>>532472
>The freedom was only for nobles, Poland still had serfdom.

Surely there was serfdom. Just like in most other countries. Still, the noble class was actually never rigid and there were lots of ways for talented individuals to worm their way into the noble class. There is a reason why sensationalist book called "Liber chamorum" was an absolute bestseller in the PLC. It was a book that "uncovered" peasant origins of several prominent noble families. In fact, the Polish noble class became stabilized only in early 19th century, when the Polish noble class was incorporated into the nobility of Prussia, Austria and Russia, together with their rigid structure and titulatury. Before the partitions, Poland knew no equivalent of "duke", "count" or "baron". All those titles came after partitions.

Polish noble democracy was an incredible experiment with 10% of male population fully enfranchised. United Kingdom did not reach similar franchise rates until the Great Reform of 1832. It worked really well until the demographic and economic catastrophe of the Deluge, after which the few magnate families seized the opportunity to grab cheap land from impoverished and indebted nobles. After that the system became a sad mockery of itself, with magnates using it to ensure no one would dare to interfere in their affairs and politicking.

>>532472
>Whats your source?

Don't remember exactly, but I remember reading a biography of one of tsarist-era Polish historians and it was stated openly that any research on Polish history could be published only if it compared unfavorably the Polish "anarchy" to the "efficiency" of Russian autocracy.

>>532553
Great Polish 19th century historians usually published their works in other countries like France (Lelewel) or even Austria where Poles had some kind of autonomy (Bobrzyński and the so-called Kraków School which still is the most relevant school of thought in Poland).

File: 1431541308111.jpg (32KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

32KB, 480x480px

>>532677
>polish historians

>>526386
Liberum Veto and the corrupt elective monarchy in general, and being placed right between Brandenburg, Russia and the Swedish Empire. Everyone wanted a piece of the sweet pie that was the PLC. Sweden wanted Royal Prussia to expand their domination of the Baltic. Russia wanted Lithuania and Brandenburg wanted western Poland. And the Sejm was unwilling to do anything since the nobles who held the veto could be influenced by foreigners or they simply had their own reasons for not voting with the King-elect.

>>533049

read
>>532427

>>526386
There are many reasons, exploitation by power-hungry neighbors being the most fatal. Good night, sweet prince, and flights of angels sing thee to thy rest!

It was literally too good for this world.

Didn't it have a really really really huge Jewish population? Having a giant mafia cartel leeching off your society isn't exactly conducive to long-term stability and prosperity.

File: bertreadsthequran.gif (1MB, 193x135px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 193x135px

>>532553
>IT WASN'T EXCESSIVE DEMOCRACY YOU PLEBS
>IT WAS ECONOMIC DECLINE BROUGHT ABOUT BY THE DISAPPEARANCE OF A SOCIAL CLASS AND A CONCENTRATION OF WEALTH AND POWER IN THE MAGNATES (which then abused a horribly democratic political system) AND CAUSED POLITICAL STAGNATION

>>532502
see this bibliographic article on polish-lithuanian commonwealth:
http://pastebin.com/r0ZTJbvK

>>532963
If you study hard enough you may have historians too in your poor country.

>>527287
liberum veto was a symptom not a cause of decay

File: electorate.png (201KB, 697x549px) Image search: [Google]

201KB, 697x549px

>>532553
>Polish noble democracy was an incredible experiment with 10% of male population fully enfranchised. United Kingdom did not reach similar franchise rates until the Great Reform of 1832.
nope :^)

>>533751
It was fine until one day they suddenly acknowledged one guy's veto. Nobody ever abused it for so long until then.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W%C5%82adys%C5%82aw_Sici%C5%84ski

The article isn't clear enough. The system existed way before him but before that nobody cared and no Sejm was ever called off because of that.

>>529067
>>529065
Sauce

>>526592
you vote for trump don't you?
don't get me wrong, it's not a bad idea

File: szlachta gentry.jpg (33KB, 361x428px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 361x428px

>>526423
>"Golden liberty"

Indeed, Poland literally choked to death on it's own freedoms.

>>534364
I talked about the book in some posts in this thread:
>>516576
but I forgot to add the free dl link:
http://bookzz.org/book/738828/3c5f10

also, if your interest in books that focus on the last years of the commonwealth check out
>>533274
and its section on "The Age of Reform and the Fall of the Commonwealth (1768–1795)"

>>533188
>>>/pol/

Russian barbarian hordes came and fucked up everything.