A few insights from Poland for our Israeli friends fighting the populist authorities for the independence of the judiciary. 🧵👇 (1/9)
In 2017, Poland found itself in a similar situation to Israel today. The populist PiS government introduced changes to the law on the Supreme Court, making it easier for politicians to control the courts. (2/9)
After an intensified wave of protests against the reform of the judiciary, the PiS president Andrzej Duda vetoed the law, clearly under the pressure of mass protests that took place in more than 250 cities. (3/9) politico.eu/article/polish…
In his speech justifying the veto, he appealed to the common identity and democratic beliefs of Poles, reminding that the authorities should be elected in elections, not on the street. He suggested that his decision was influenced by a respected dissident, Zofia Romaszewska.(4/9)
From today's perspective, we can see that President's veto was staged by the ruling party in order to demobilize the protests. In the following years, the PiS government and the president introduced further changes to the law on courts. (5/9)
As a result, new judges of the Supreme Court and hundreds of judges of other courts were illegally appointed. Lawfully adjudicating judges have been suspended and are subject to disciplinary action. The authorities took full control over constitutional court. (6/9)
Now back to 2023. This morning, the Polish deputy foreign minister boasted on the radio that his government was advising Netanyahu's cabinet on how to “effectively” reform the judiciary. (7/9) rmf24.pl/tylko-w-rmf24/…
It is important, therefore, that Israeli society does not succumb to what Israeli psychologists call the "irony of harmony" and that it perseveres in its resistance until the full resignation of populist power. (8/9) pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19152543/
Only the European Union and its financial sanctions protect us against the complete takeover of the courts by populist politicians. Does Israel have such a "parachute" if the protests get silenced? (9/9)
Dziś miałem przemyślenie, że system grantowy w obecnej formie jest archaiczny. Najwyżej cytowane, najbardziej fundamentalne prace w mojej dziedzinie, powstały bez grantów. Chyba wiem dlaczego. 1/4
Współczesna nauka jest szybka. Czytając publikacje, jeżdżąc na konferencje, wpadamy na przełomowe pomysły. I wtedy od razu należy zacząć robić badania, liczyć, pisać teksty. Bo zwykle ścigamy się wtedy z kilkoma innymi ośrodkami. 2/4.
Przyjmując logikę grantową to dobry pomysł trzeba opisać w formie projektu. Składamy go w maju na konkurs ERC, trafia do recenzji (pewnie do konkurencji) i dopiero za rok mamy wyniki. Badania realnie zaczniemy za półtora roku. Musztarda po obiedzie. 3/4
The role of politics in vaccination is not as simple as previously thought. In this new paper we try to disentangle two different worldviews that are commonly considered "conservative". Their impact on vaccination intentions is however different. 1/6 🧵👇 journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.11…
It is widely known that rejection of science is more common among conservatives. However, studies looking at the role of politics in vaccination hesitancy show different patterns: in some countries anti-vaxxers are conservatives, in others - leftists. 2/6 sciencedirect.com/science/articl…
We propose that among the two components of conservative ideology (authoritarian and hierarchical), only the latter leads to vaccination hesitancy. Universal vaccination program against COVID-19 provides immunity to all people, regardless of their status. 3/6
Słuchając wczoraj wywiadu z Prezydentem @AndrzejDuda zrozumiałem, na czym polega największy z nim problem. Na większość pytań odpowiadał rozsądnie, ale mówiąc o prokuratorach ujawnił zupełne niezrozumienie idei państwa, jego instytucji i pracy w nich.[1/7] tokfm.pl/Tokfm/7,103087…
Najważniejsze stwierdzenie: "Niekoniecznie trzeba w zawodzie państwowym prawniczym pracować". W tej wizji praca w sektorze publicznym oznacza realizację polityki partii, która aktualnie jest u władzy oraz zaniechanie działań i wypowiedzi niezgodnych z interesem tej partii. [2/7]
Choć rzeczywiście można tego oczekiwać od członka rządu albo dyplomaty - to już w odniesieniu do prokuratora, pielęgniarki, pracownika pomocy społecznej, strażaka, naukowca czy dziennikarza mediów publicznych wymóg taki pachnie totalitaryzmem. [3/7]