Valruzia

[Aethan]

"I'd love to lead the government for as long as the people want me to"

We have a conversation with Chancellor Szymon Nowik halfway through his first mandate and 10 years since the Valruzian revolution

February 5633

Official picture of Szymon Nowik for this interview. Source: Valruzia Today

---

At only 34-years old, Chancellor Szymon Nowik has already lead the Valruzian coalition government for three years, navigating contradictions and clashes in the parliamentary chamber. The last one, the same-sex civil unions law, passed at the end of last year after pressure from the KPW and despite Nowik's initial statements calling it "not a priority" for its first government despite his own sexual orientation. This controversy, the Valruzia 5700 economic plan, his initiative to restore military service in the nation, his international views and much more are discussed in this very personal interview that we have had with him.

Interviewer: You became Chancellor at the age of 31. At that age, many young people are still managing to find their ideal job, or even their first one. Would you say you have found it?

Szymon Nowik: To be honest, when I finished my Biology studies at the age of 22 I didn't imagine myself where I am now. I remember it was 5621 and nobody even could imagine what would be happening merely two years after. At that time, my cousin had merely started his Medicine studies - Szymon Nowik's cousin, Robert Obrzut, was murdered by the Morawki regime and his death sparked the 5623 Valruzian revolution - and dreams where small living under a fierce dictatorship. My family and I were already under scrutiny since my father had been imprisoned due to his perceived "antionational" sentiments, so my mother had to raise my sister and I all alone. The death of my cousin changed everything for me. Before that, I never thought about getting involved in politics, seeing what had happened to my father. I had resigned to living a completely normal and dull life, but his murder sparked something inside of me. As I was working as a research assistant in my home campus, I started helping with the various protests that were springing here and there against the death of Robert [Obrzut], and I kept telling myself "there must be something else than this life". That was my first contact with underground political groups. At that time, I had already discover my sexuality and I knew well what the regime did to people like me. I wanted everything to change. 

Now it is 10 years later, I'm 10 years older and, to be honest, I some days still wake up surprised to see that I'm the one leading the government of the nation I love so much. For me, being the Chancellor of Valruzia is not just a job, but a huge responsibility that I accept with the upmost respect, and I'd love to lead the government for as long as people want me to. Some people say I'm too young for this post, but is there such a thing? Sure, we cannot have a 8-year old managing government issues, but why it is always a problem when it's a relatively young politician the one that take the reins of a country but nobody ever claims anything when it is the opposite, when the world is ruled by the so-called gerontocracy? I like to think as my figure a being kind of inspirational for all these young people interested in politics so that they can see that you do not have to wait until you are in your mid 50's to start making huge changes and having an influence.

I: As you have talked about it, just a few months ago there was this enormous controversy during the debate of the same-sex civil unions law that the Communist Party of Valruzia threatened to put to a referendum if it was not presented to the Sejm by your government, basically offering you an ultimatum, whilst members of other parties such as Valruzian Alliance or National Renewal attacked you for backing off from your previous words at the start of the legislature that you did not consider this issue "a top priority for the first post-dictatorial government". Can you explain yourself?

S.N.: Politics is a complex world and sometimes words are mistaken or purposelly manipulated. Let me say this loud and clear: neither this government nor myself ever said that we were not going to approve a same-sex civil unions law or that we were against it. What I did say was that I did not consider it to be a "top priority" for the first post-dictatorship government, and I still abide by my words. However, and let me stress that, if another parliamentary group comes to us and tell us "listen, we believe this needs to be a priority" we are open to debate, discuss, and ultimately approve if needed. I do not appreciate the way the Communist Party of Valruzia dealt with this issue, and I have told that personally to Tobiasz [Bernas] - KPW party leader - but ultimately, both this coalition government and the KPW were in the same lane about this issue, so there was no major problem to be overcome. A different thing would have been if they have told us to legislate on some issues that we do not see eye to eye, in which case we would have told them: "go ahead and then you'll have to explain to Valruzians why you have brought the government down". But that was not this case, and that is something people need to understand. There is no big controversy surrounding this, and that's how it should stay. 

I also do not appreciate how certain parliamentary groups have used my own sexuality and my own personal life against me or against this bill. I have always kept my personal life separated from my political life, and my partner and I are very happy that way. To use my orientation to try to diminish me or my capacities has a name, and I'm sure they are very well aware of that. But they will not intimidate me, that I can tell you for sure.

I: Unknowingly, you caused a major rift within National Renewal - the main opposition - when your "Valruzia 5700" economic plan was approved. Some deputies were not happy with National Renewal's support for it and founded the Agrarian Voice. Can you explain the plan for our readers and debate why this split?

S.N.: Well, I'm not the leader of National Renewal, am I? (sighs) First, let’s be clear: Valruzia 5700 is about the survival of our nation. The dictatorship left our economy in ruins—factories rotting, farms struggling, whole regions cut off from basic infrastructure. This plan isn’t some ideological experiment; it’s a blueprint to drag Valruzia back into the modern era.

As for National Renewal’s split? That’s their problem, not mine. Their leadership supported the plan because even they recognized we can’t keep living in the past. But a faction of their rural hardliners revolted, calling it "a betrayal of Valruzian tradition." Hence, Agrarian Voice was born. But let’s dissect their hypocrisy. These are the same people who demand subsidies for failing farms but scream "socialism!" when we propose modernizing them. Who weep over depopulated villages but block roads when we try to connect them to cities. Valruzia 5700 offers rural communities new roads, renewable energy, and fair land reform—yet Agrarian Voice dismisses it as "urban elitism." Look, I respect farmers. How could I not? My grandfather plowed fields near Pzemylje. But nostalgia won’t feed this country. If they’d rather chain Valruzia to the 54th century than let us build a future, fine—but they won’t hold the rest of us hostage. 

Now, about Valruzia 5700: I truly believe it is an ambitious, long-term economic revitalization plan designed to modernize Valruzia’s infrastructure, boost industrial and agricultural productivity, and ensure sustainable development over the next century, all of that while ensuring Valruzian economic independence and sovereignty and placing our nation as a top economic contender. A truly win-win.

I: Speaking of rebuilding Valruzia, another one less controversial policy has been the restoration of mandatory military service. Many see it as a regression, even a dangerous echo of the old regime’s militarism. How do you respond to these accusations?

S.N.: (leans forward, expression firm) First, let me correct a misconception—this is not a return to the Morawski era. And I wouldn't say "many" see it as a regression, maybe I'd say "some". The dictatorship used conscription as a tool of oppression, sending young men to die in pointless conflicts or to brutalize their own people. Our model is different. And if I'm correct, polls showed that around 60% of our youngsters are in favor of it.

Our approved proposal follows two tracks: first, it is created around military training for those who choose it or are assigned based on skills, but it is also focused on civil defence and disaster preparedness, with our young generations receiving medical training, emergency response, infrastructure repair, and so on. What's more, we try to build a younger generation linked together by the same sane sense of patriotism, learning about the mistakes of the past, ensuring it is not repeated, and teaching them to respect, value and protect our Constitution. Why is this necessary? Because for 30 years, Valruzia had no real defense structure beyond the dictatorship’s thugs. Now, we’re a democracy surrounded by unpredictable neighbors - take for instance what is now happening in our southern neighbour, Tukarali, involved in a similar revolution like ours. We must be able to defend ourselves—not to wage wars, but to prevent them. And beyond defence, this program teaches skills, fosters national unity, and gives young Valruzians—urban and rural—a shared sense of duty to their country. Is it controversial? I'm sure that for some, it is. But so was the revolution. Sometimes, you must make hard choices to secure the future. And I'm not afraid to be the one making them.

I: All these proposals—Valruzia 5700, civic service, even your stance on LGBT rights—stem from one ideology you helped define: Valruzianism. Critics call it a "Third Way" muddle; supporters hail it as a blueprint for post-dictatorship Valruzia. How do you explain it?

S.N.: (smirks) Ah, I was waiting for that question. Let me put it plainly: Valruzianism isn’t an ideology—I like to think of it as an antidote.

The Morawki regime rotted this country from the inside. It turned politics into a choice between obedience or exile, the economy into a kleptocrat’s playground, and national pride into a cudgel to silence dissent. Valruzianism is what grew from the rubble.

You see this? (showing Valruzia 5700 blueprint from his desk) It’s not "socialism" or "capitalism". It’s common sense. We rebuild roads not because some foreign bank demands it, but because our people need them. We modernize farms not to erase tradition, but to keep farmers from starving. That’s the core: pragmatism with purpose.

Let me explain it to you by focusing on three pillars (Nowik counts on his fingers):

First: Active citizenship: "If there's one thing the dictatorship has taught us is that democracy dies when people shrug and say, ‘That’s someone else’s job.’ For this, Valruzianism demands participation—not just voting, but debating in town halls, serving in local councils, even criticizing me if I’m wrong. (grins) Many do."
Second: Meritocracy, not oligarchy. No more generals’ sons parachuting into boardrooms. If you want to lead, prove you’re fit—whether you’re a dockworker’s daughter or a professor’s son.That’s why we opened military academies to competitive exams, why state contracts go to the best bidder, not the best-connected.
And three: Culture without coercion. You can’t forge unity at gunpoint. We celebrate Valruzian art, language, history—but as shared heritage, not a weapon to exclude. Assimilate? Yes. Abandon your faith or language? No. The republic is strong enough to hold multitudes.

Of course Valruzianism is much more than that. You have the economic perspective, the social perspective, and much more, but that's something we explain every time in Sovereign Valruzia's electoral program.

I: Yet you’ve called same-sex marriage a "distraction"—despite being gay yourself. Doesn’t that clash with Valruzianism’s "meritocratic" ideals?

S.N.: (leans back and crosses arms) Context matters. In my first year, with factories idle and orphans sleeping in train stations, prioritizing marriage debates would’ve been criminal. We decriminalized homosexuality, banned workplace discrimination—that was urgent.

But Valruzianism isn’t about my identity. It’s about what strengthens the republic. If two men or women want to marry? Fine—but don’t expect the state to prioritize it over feeding children or defending borders. (voice hardens) And spare me the hypocrisy. The same conservatives who scream about "family values" voted against school lunches. The leftists who call me a "traitor" for delaying marriage laws? They’ve never set foot in a village where kids share one coat. Valruzianism cuts through that nonsense. But as we said, if there are some demands for that, we are more than willing to go forward with it. We talk, and there's a done deal. 

I: So it’s a rejection of both globalism and nationalism?

S.N.: (laughs sharply)
Globalism says, "Tear down borders, let markets rule." Nationalism says, "Bar the gates, purity above all." Valruzianism says: "Build a home worth defending". We trade, we talk, we learn—but never kneel. Not to any nation, not to any continent, not to some spreadsheet-worshipping NGO. The Morawski regime sold us out to foreign oligarchs. I won’t let any ideology—left, right, or "Third Way"—do the same.

I: Finally, on foreign policy—your government is taking a neutral but engaged stance, refusing to align fully with any major power bloc. Some call it prudent; others say it leaves Valruzia isolated. What’s your vision?

S.N.: (smirks) Ah, the eternal question: "Whose side are you on?" My answer is simple: Valruzia’s side.

We trade with Artania, we talk to Dovani, we cooperate where interests align—but we do not kneel to foreign agendas. The Morawski regime sold our sovereignty to the highest bidder; we will not repeat that mistake. That doesn’t mean isolation. It means independence. Valruzia’s future will be decided in Nowogard, not in some distant capital. And if that frustrates the great powers? (shrugs) Good.

I: This month marks 10 years since your cousin Robert’s murder sparked the revolution. Is the government planning any special celebrations or remembrances?

S.N.: You know, my family still have the shirt Robert was wearing when they gave us his body. Bloodstains and all. (pauses) That’s not in any museum. Some wounds don’t belong behind glass. Every day in this office is a commemoration. When I sign a law restoring land to farmers stolen by Morawski's cronies—that's remembrance. When a child who grew up in fear now studies engineering under our scholarships—that's the revolution alive.

But yes. There are plans in sight for this decade anniversary. We're digitalizing a million pages of regime documents—arrest warrants, secret police files, etc. No more burning evidence. Every citizen will get access. Let the truth stand.
There will also be parades, there will be remembrance places, there will be minutes of silence and there will be monuments. We will show that Valruzia does not forget its heroes and martyrs.

I: One last thing—you’ve said you’d govern "as long as the people want me to." Realistically, how long is that?

S.N.: (laughs) However long it takes to finish the job. I didn’t fight a revolution just to quit halfway.