0

Poles hold the most negative views of Russia among all countries included in a new global survey by the Pew Research Center, which also shows that attitudes towards the United States, NATO and the European Union are the most positive ever recorded in Poland.

Only 2% of Poles hold a favourable view of Russia, while 97% have an unfavourable opinion. For the US, those figures are reversed, with 91% positive and 3% negative. Meanwhile, 94% now see Russia as a major threat to Poland, up from 65% when the question was last asked in 2018.

enter image description here

https://notesfrompoland.com/2022/06/22/only-2-of-poles-view-russia-favourably-lowest-of-any-country-in-global-study/

According to a Pew research paper, 97% of the Poles have a unfavorable view of Russia while only 2% hold a favorable view of Russia, the highest of any country surveyed. Is there a particular reason why Polish people view Russia unfavorably?

JJJ
  • 39,094
  • 10
  • 121
  • 182
Sayaman
  • 40,192
  • 9
  • 139
  • 290
  • 30
    Not to be obnoxious, but while many of your questions are good, quite a few would benefit from a minimum of basic research before asking. This is one is so obvious that I doubt it benefits anyone who is seriously interested in getting an answer. – Italian Philosophers 4 Monica Mar 20 '24 at 01:27
  • 3
    This question (and a couple similar questions) are being discussed on meta. – Philipp Mar 20 '24 at 09:44
  • 2
    How is this even a question? – whoisit Mar 21 '24 at 09:28
  • Are Poles truly the least positive towards Russia of the countries surveyed? I don't see a margin of error or even a response count (n) given. That conclusion may not be statistically significant. – user71659 Mar 22 '24 at 20:33
  • @ItalianPhilosophers4Monica The same reasoning could be used for not having a Wikipedia page for an "obvious" subject. 1. Not everybody in the world or in every field has (or should be expected to have) the level of knowledge of "obvious" European history that many westerners who participate in Politics.SE have, any more that we should expect you to have the basic knowledge of, say, South East Asian history that is common among educated Indonesians. – cjs Mar 28 '24 at 02:59
  • Even for those with that knowledge, having a well-written reference that gives the "obvious" answer to a question is very handy when talking to others. In particular, it helps avoid wasting time reworking and retyping answers when discussing particular topics even with those you suspect may not be "seriously interested in getting an answer," or where the answer is tangential to the argument.
  • – cjs Mar 28 '24 at 03:00
  • The point of SE is to serve as a good reference for the Internet on the SE's topics. Saying, essentially, "too obvious for this SE" is saying, "this answer should be elsewhere," and undermining the whole point of SE. 4. This particular question is fine for "basic research" supporting the question itself. Complaining that a question doesn't include the answer is nonsensical; we have answers for the answers and their supporting research.
  • – cjs Mar 28 '24 at 03:00
  • @cjs done with the lecture (4 messages)? The OP has a tendency to ask a lot of questions. That's fine, but a minimum of trying to figure things out by oneself also keeps the clutter down hereabouts. Even if you don't know Western history googling "XXX YYY relations" goes a a long way - in this case direct to the wiki page of those 2. Many SE. sites have a good-faith-effort-before-asking expectation, doesn't really hurt things any. – Italian Philosophers 4 Monica Mar 28 '24 at 03:21
  • @ItalianPhilosophers4Monica Again, your "clutter" (from the point of view of someone with fairly deep knowledge of this stuff) is someone else's useful new information. The whole point of SE is to create the very things that come up when you tell someone to "google XXX." If you feel the question is too simple for you, simply ignore it, rather than deciding that an audience with significantly less knowledge than you shouldn't be looking on this site for answers to questions that would otherwise be clearly within its remit. This site is for a lot of people other than you. – cjs Mar 28 '24 at 05:12
  • @cjs methink you need to repeat this once more. i didn't quite get you. – Italian Philosophers 4 Monica Mar 28 '24 at 07:46
  • @ItalianPhilosophers4Monica Your snide comments and general "don't ask questions with answers obvious to me" attitude is one I've seen before in other folks with fairly high rep on some SEs. If you still can't accept any of the above, I don't think that there's any way I can convince you that there are other folks in the world with vastly different experience from yours that find these sorts of questions useful. But it would be good if you could at least try to step back and realise that, just because you're here a lot and have a high rep, that does not make this SE your personal playground. – cjs Mar 28 '24 at 09:15
  • @cjs C̵a̵n̵ ̵y̵o̵u̵ ̵e̵x̵p̵l̵a̵i̵n̵ ̵i̵t̵ ̵a̵g̵a̵i̵n̵?̵ Sigh, much fun as it would be to elicit more lecturing... you could have just edited it? 2 words... I made my point at the time, I don't care all that much if it remains there now. – Italian Philosophers 4 Monica Mar 28 '24 at 15:16