Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth

Poles and Lithuanians

>>3031186
this tbqh senpai

Trying to keep a descentralizing constitution that greatly reduced the power of the monarchy and strenghtened the nobles while surrounded by Russia and Prussia.

Decentralization and aristocratic liberalism works if you are an island, like Great Britain, or removed by two entire oceans from your competitors, like the United States, it doesn't work in Central/Eastern Europe.

>>3031195

It would have worked just without the Liberum Veto clause.

Most of the sejm realized shit had to be done, but it was too easy to bribe a handful of nobles to just cock block everything.

I wonder if Poland-Lithuania could've been a thing post-WW1. Sure would've helped to allow the German Empire to not lose Danzig or be cut off from East Prussia.

>>3031712
>I wonder if Poland-Lithuania could've been a thing post-WW1.
I can tell you - no.

>>3031725
Why not? All I know about the Commonwealth is that it apparantly just decayed over time until the Partitions just erased it from the map.

>>3031740
Nationalism.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lithuanian_National_Revival

>>3031174
>Poland
>democratic, decentralized, freedom-oriented
>raped and conquered by everyone around them, repeatedly

>Russia
>tyrannical, anti-liberal and autocratic
>never conquered

Russians were right.

>>3031766
Checked. And inb4 "muh Mongols conquered Russia" - sort of, but they never took Moscow, and the Muscovites grew in strength while the Mongols weakened - and went on to kick them out. Sort of like how most of Iberia was conquered by the Moors/Arabs - but not all of it, and that was all the Reconquista needed. Russia didn't take as long tho.
Lesson from history - finish what you start.

>>3031776
>Mongols
That's actually a point in my favor. Mongols conquered Kievan Rus which was decentralized and pretty liberal, at least by medieval standards.

>>3031776
Why were the Iberian Muslims called "Moors", and the African Muslims "Berbers"?

Liberum Veto is literally twitchplays of their time.

>>3031740
If you mean when exactly the possibility and the idea of a P-L state ended, then the answer is, as it often seems to be with medieval-born notions and ideas in Europe, in the 19th century, the latter part more specifically, and nationalism.

After two failed Polish rebellions, which the polonised Lithuanian nobility naturally took part in, the newly (re-)starting national awakening of Lithuanians was based on specifically on the peasants and (peasant) lithuanian culture. Deliberate effort was made to take stance against slavic culture and influences which included the Polish speaking Lithuanian (as in blood not in name only) aristocracy. And during the first years of the 20th century it was this nationalistic Lithuania which came out on top and realised the new independent Lithuanian State in its image. The Polish-Lithuanian war and the following frozen and unresolved conflict just cemented the already evolved situation and understanding.

Tl;dr IT WAS NATIONALISM

>>3031252
>It would have worked just without the Liberum Veto clause.
To be honest, the problem was the first time someone used Liberum Veto and left, because if the precedens of ending Sejm without doing anything wouldn't be established there (the head of Sejm should continue without him), then Liberum Veto would remain as it were before - vetoi'ng poseł would simply talk with others with possibility of being convinced of letting changes through.

>muh liberum veto
Everytime 1 or 2 nobles thought of cockblocking some decision they were bullied into voting like everyone else, so it wasn't as much of a shitshow as you'd think it should be

>>3031785
Berbers are an ethnic group you dink

>>3031766
Yet the Poles are still kicking. Seriously though, they and the Japs are some of the only peoples who won't be fully AngloAmericanized in a century. Plucky little bastards :).

Liberum veto was a symptom of decaying empire, not a cause that made it start to become degenerate
elective monarchy was mistake, in fact only two out of 9~ kings were competent and one of them ruled for a very short period of time. Sigimund Vasa was worst of them all seeing as he ruled for longest time and royally destroyed every single chance of making Poland a lot stronger and its enemies weaker.
Another problem was shift of rulling class from middle class majority to rich magnates which effectively made country playground of rich families in 18 century and again a lot of the blame on that problem can be pinpointed on shitty Vasa king.
Also the fact that economy was mostly dependant on grain didn't help when western countries started to diversify their food thanks to shit like tomatoes and potatoes from new world.

>>3031766
they got conquered by commies

File: 1618.png (623KB, 6857x4441px) Image search: [Google]

623KB, 6857x4441px

>>3033136
also muh geographical position meme is sorta true, enemies were on pretty much every side even the idea of semi-friendly austria unifying germans and eventually possibly wanting prussian clay was fucking horrifying
fighting for useless eastern clay with Russia wasn't fun and productive either