Green Voice from Poland

Tusk Attacks his Base (and then some!) - by Gavin Rae

2012-01-27T10:17:00.002+01:00

Gavin Rae on the ongoing protests in Poland:

Map of anti-ACTA protests in Poland.

Donald Tusk has managed to do something truly amazing. He has riled his own political base and brought them out onto the streets to demonstrate with his opponents. He has managed to cause such social anger over his decision to sign the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement (ACTA) that for the first time in a generation’s memory Poland is standing at the forefront of an international protest movement. Read more

Young Poles outraged by ACTA

2012-01-26T23:19:00.003+01:00

Demonstration against ACTA in Warsaw, photo by Joanna Erbel.

2011 was a year of discontent throughout the world, but apparently not in Poland. Poland's political class was spared the challenge of massive protests that blossomed in many places, from Egyptian and Tunisian revolutions, through the Indignados of Spain, to the US Occupy movement. There is much to be angry about, to be sure. Life in Poland is getting harder, the privatisation-by-stealth of health service and education is going on, schools and kindergartens are being closed down, which makes it especially difficult for young parents, there's no affordable housing, the prices of municipal services and staple foods are rising (both at least partly due to recent changes in tax rates). Poland is now the leading country in Europe in terms of non-permanent job contracts (having outrun Spain), and the vision of having a decent retirement in the future is becoming increasingly remote.

There have been plenty of reasons to get angry, and yet nothing happened -- at least nothing comparable to the Indignados or Occupy phenomena. And now, all of a sudden, we have a protest movement against ACTA -- Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, international treaty aiming to protect "intellectual property." The treaty is hermetic enough for professional lawmakers to get confused as for its consequences. And yet it was precisely this treaty that proved capable of sparking protests throughout the country.

The protests started the previous week, when it was announced that Poland is to sign ACTA on Thursday, 26th January. Activists and NGOs working in the fields of human rights, open culture or privacy protection sent protests to the government. They demanded that the government refrained from signing the ACTA and organized genuine public consultations of the document. At the same time tens of thousands of people discussed on the internet, sharing information and analysis concerning ACTA. On Saturday, 21st January, the Anonymous attacked the websites of the Parliament, Prime Minister and Minister of Culture, among others. On the PM's website the hackers left the following message: "Prime Minister Donald Tusk is an evil man!" Oddly enough, the government proved unprepared to defend themselves against a cyber-attack, but at the same time they felt enough self-assured to raise the possibility of announcing a state of exception.

A couple of days later, the protesters flew out of the cyberspace and onto the streets. The first street demonstration against ACTA was organized on Tuesday in front of the European Parliament Office in Warsaw. Three thousand people came to express their discontent. Both left-wing and right-wing activists, free market libertarians, communists, human rights liberals, football supporters and teenagers of both genders gathered together. For many teenagers it was apparently the very first time they ever took part in a political event. They cried against ACTA, against censorship, and against the government. The event may well have marked the end of uncritical euro-enthusiasm among Polish youth; "Union, Union, rub your penis!" ("Unio, Unio, zwal se ch...!") was one of the most ear-catching exclamations of the day. Clearly, for many people the case of ACTA means that the equation "European Union = freedom = modernity" no longer seems to be self-evident.

On Wednesday, there were protests in many other Polish cities, gathering between a few hundred and fifteen thousand participants (fifteen thousand protested in Kraków). On Thursday, a major protest was organized in Poznań. Five thousand people gathered on the Liberty Square, and then some of them went to the regional office of the Civic Platform to smash a few windows. It is estimated that up to 100,000 people took part in a street protest during this three days.

Meanwhile, both the Polish Ombudsman Irena Lipowicz and the General Data Protection Supervisor Wojciech Wiewiórowski expressed serious concerns with the ACTA and summoned the government not to sign it.

The PM tries to play the role of a tough guy, but this time it does not seem to work. When the hackers revealed how they broke into the PM Office's website (login: admin, password: admin1), it made Donald Tusk's situation all the more vulnerable. Many people find it ridiculous that those who lack basic computer skills should create laws in this domain. The government lacked a consistent PR strategy: when the Minister of Culture Bogdan Zdrojewski was assuring the public that the document had been indeed properly consulted, the Minister of Administration and Digitization Michał Boni expressed regret that it had not, and promised to consult it... after the signing ceremony. Let's add that the Pirate MEP Christian Engström exposed serious misinformation in Boni's reassuring statement (see: Polish Minister Telling Lies to Get ACTA Signed). And that the goverment had 7,774 comments removed from the PM Office's fanpage on the ground they were "vulgar" (an independent investigation proved that only as much as 1.49% of them contained any vulgar words whatsoever, whereas 6.5% were weird or off-topic).

The whole situation may be a shock for the ruling Civic Platform party. In the previous years, they succeeded in strengthening the powers of the state: they gave the police more powers against citizens, built major data bases containing sensitive data about citizens (System of Information in Education, System of Information in Health Care), enabled the Supreme Chamber of Control to collect any data about the citizens, including those concerning their sexual orientation or their genetic features. Some of those changes encountered opposition, and some did not. But nothing prepared them for the resistance they have to deal with right now.

And yet, in some way, this should be obvious. All of the previous reforms effectively deprived people of some of their entitlements, but they were consistent with the overall message of the present-day system: the state is not responsible for your good life, you have not got a right to the good life, you have got only the right to be let alone. Like it or not, the internet policy is the ultimate test of this promise. The internet users, especially the youth, understand that, with ACTA, the "System" is breaking even its modest promise to let people alone. And now they got into the streets and discover how it feels to be a "we." Will this experience empower a new generation of activists? The issue remains open, but the hope is out there.

We are more progressive than our political elite

2011-02-17T01:35:00.014+01:00

Poland enjoys a reputation of a country rather hostile towards sexual diversity. Last week, a Robert Węgrzyn, an MP for the Civic Platform, did something to reinforce this view. When asked on the TV about his opinion on legal acknowledgement of gay and lesbian unions, he answered: "you can forget about gay men but I would gladly watch lesbians." His words provoked outrage and indignation, and his local party structures demanded that he be expelled from the PO. Węgrzyn apologised, half-heartedly, though he does not seem to be quite convinced he should. The apology notwithstanding, on his official website one finds also a statement entitled bravely "I did not offend a person". "I won't let myself be offended in public", he cautions, as if in a pathetic attempt to reverse the charge.

Węgrzyn is, at best, a third-rank MP, so one needs not ascribe too great a weight to his calamities. It is much more discomforting, however, that the foreign minister Radosław Sikorski came to his rescue. "Journalists complain that politicians are boring and speak only in slogans, but when someone makes a dubious joke they crucify him," he said on radio. And he added a joke of his own, saying that Węgrzyn "should get a rap across the knuckles and be made to do 30 push ups." Some may find Sikorski's sense of humour no less embarassing than the Węgrzyn's. The implied acceptance of corporal punishment is hardly enjoyable, as is the way the minister reframed the debate. Instead of taking the issues of sexism, homophobia and verbal aggression as seriously as they deserve, he seems to focus attention on the possible inconvenience into which the MP's words may have put the governing party.

The political correctness is still shallow, and the aacceptance of homophobic language within the political class seems to be widespread. But in what extent does this reflect the popular mood? When we look at the developments in public opinion during the recent decade, we can see that anti-gay opinions remain widespread, but the overall trend is progressive.

Trends in anti-gay attitudes in Poland, 2001-2010 (CBOS, June 2010)

The most striking change concerns the level of acceptance of the view that "Homosexuality is not a normal thing and should not be tolerated." Between 2001 and 2010 the ranks of those ready to agree with it halved, going from 41% down to 23% (green line). It seems there are more opponents of marriage equality than at the beginning of the noughties (red line), but this is explained by the growing ranks of those who support civil unions as a separate institution for LGBT people (yellow line).The most interesting change concerns the acceptance of LGBT Equality Marches. The number of those ready to curb the right of assembly to exclude LGBT is still high, but it went down significantly within a couple of months between July and December 2005 (blue line). It seems that the growth in acceptance of Equality Marches belongs to the lasting effects of the culture wars waged in the era of the "Fourth Republic."

The opinion is divided on civil unions. (CBOS, June 2010)

The attitudes of the Polish population towards LGBT rights are on average more conservative than in the West of Europe, and in some respects more conservative than in other Central European countries, like the Czech Republic or Hungary. But the Polish society is neither as conservative or as homophobic as our political class. One may expect that a moderate LGBT rights agenda should attract as many voters as it might repel. Oddly enough, the society has already moved on. It is the elite that seems set to stay behind.

Nuclear power and public trust

2011-01-31T02:53:00.015+01:00

Last week the cabinet accepted guidelines for the draft law regulating the use of nuclear energy in Poland. The ministers discussed i.a. the question of liability for 'nuclear damage,' separate insurance for the transport of nuclear material, government's guarantees, as well as the information of general public and local communities about the safety of nuclear installations. The governement's plan is to have the new nuclear regulation bill passed until June this year, construction works are to begin by 2016 and an nuclear power plant is to be operating since 2022. Whether the blueprint is realistic or not, the coalition seems determined to follow the chosen path, and the nuclear ambitions of the goverment enjoy support of major opposition parties. There seems to be an overwhelming consensus on the political scene.

And what about social attitudes? According to the surveys realized by CBOS (Centre for Public Opinion Research), between 1987 and 2008 the opponents of nuclear power clearly outnumbered those ready to accept it.

Nuclear power plants in Poland -- for or against? (CBOS, August 2008)

Since 2008, the opinion seems to be shifting. According to different surveys, there is either a small majority in favour, or a small majority against the Polish nuclear programme. As far as the public opinion is concerned, the issue is undecided.

The change in public mood can be also seen in the report Europeans and Nuclear Safety published by the Eurobarometer in March 2010. Poland is among the countries, where more than a quarter of the population (25% - 30%) supports an increase in the use of nuclear energy. Even though as many as 50% of the respondents agree that the risks of nuclear power as an energy source outweigh its benefits, while only 38% thinks the opposite, there is a visible shift in the opinion. In 2006 only 26% tended to think that there are more benefits than risks involved. The rise of 12 percentage points is the biggest one in Europe, with Ireland (+10pp) and the Czech Republic (+9pp) coming next.

Interestingly enough, six out of eight countries with biggest support for an increased use of nuclear energy (25% - 30%) are postcommunist ones. What does this strange legacy of the Iron Curtain precisely mean? Is it just the fear of being dependent on Russia as energy provider? Or does it also express an East European civilizational complex, the feeling of being belated in terms of technology, and the wish to "catch up with the West"?

Whatever the explanation, there still the issue of public trust. Will government be able to convince the public that nucleaer energy may be safe? And, which is more difficult, that it can be produced safely even in Poland? There are in Europe countries like Sweden or the Czech Republic, where the great majority of people believe that nuclear energy may be safe. There are countries divided, like France or Germany, where only half of the population seems to be convinced. But Poland -- together with Romania and Ireland -- represents still another pattern. While many people tend to agree that It is possible to operate a nuclear power plant in a safe manner (64%), they seem less convinced that The nuclear safety authority in Poland sufficiently ensures the safe operation of nuclear power plant(s) (38%), and even less that The Polish legislation sufficiently ensures nuclear safety (31%).

Europeans and Nuclear Safety (Eurobarometer, March 2010)

It seems that a significant portion of the population believes that nuclear energy may be produced safely, but... not in Poland. Poles mistrust their own government and institutions more than they mistrust the technology.

And they may well have good reason not to trust. On 3th December 2010, the President of National Atomic Energy Agency (Państwowa Agencja Atomistyki), Prof. Michał Waligórski, was dismissed from his function. His pro-nuclear stance notwithstanding, he had had a highly critical assesment of the atomic draft law proposed by the government. Along with many specific concerns, he had pointed out that the goverment's nuclear programme was "chaotic and inconsistent," and had "incomprehensible logical structure." He was also asking, why the government ignored the Safety Infrastructure Guide (DS424) adopted by the International Atomic Energy Agency. The Civic Platform's government found his remarks "unconstructive," and instead of changing the policy, changed the man. It seems that even those in favour of Poland's nuclear ambitions may have good reasons to be scared.

Civic Platform's white power

2011-01-11T22:10:00.003+01:00

I am well aware that many voters choose us as 'the white men's last hope.' This is what Jarosław Gowin, a prominent politician of the Civic Platform (PO), pronounced last Sunday in an interview for Onet.pl. Or rather white collars', he hastened to explain. Our core voters, that is the young, educated and entrepreneur-minded, may turn their backs on us unless we finally reform the state finances, healthcare or pensions.

The journalist did not go into details over the notion of 'white men' and its racist connotations. Instead, he asked what would happen, if white collars indeed turned their backs on the ruling party. The answer was as follows: To me, entrepreneurs are the salt of the earth, the most valuable social group. Should we disappoint them, we would better look for another job.

Should it be shocking? Jarosław Gowin smoothly combines Catholic and free market fundamentalism. He is widely known to be a free market hawk even within the largely pro-market Civic Platform. He is also famous for a virtually superhuman ability, since he once confessed to having heard the cries of frozen embryos. (Gowin is the author of a draft law regulating IVF. He wants IVF to stay basically legal, but would penalise the freezing of embryos.) The public may be thus used to extravagant statements on his part. None the less, I find the lack of public reaction to what he said surprising. To date, obviously racist statements by even marginal politicians did not go either unnoticed or uncondemned in the media. This time, only the nationalist "Nasz Dziennik" seems to bother; perhaps they envy Gowin for his impunity?

Why this silence? Gowin seems nothing wrong in figuring his voters as 'white men.' For him, apparently, it is just an innocent figure of speech. I think most of the enlightened public would not concede. But one thing is that he uses a racial metaphor, another -- what is the group who is to be hurt. If Civic Platform supporters are to be seen as 'white men,' who are those 'non-white' people to whom he implicitly refers? Who are those who would be less than happy with a next wave of neo-liberal reforms? And why are they figured as non-white?

How Poland became greener in 2010

2011-01-07T21:05:00.006+01:00

2010 was a strange year for Poland, with the Smoleńsk tragedy and its aftermath, early presidential elections, and floods. Also for the Greens, it was a long and unusual year, a year of breaking through. The electoral breakthrough in the local elections in November, with our first ever elected councillors and members of regional parliaments, did not happen in a void. First there were significant changes within the Green Party, as well as important changes in the general political context.

The sense of breaking through first came to my mind in April, during Green Party Conference. At the Conference we accepted four policy documents, precising our aims and values in the domain of electoral law, social policy, health service, and education. The discussion was informed, passionate, and fruitful. The new policy documents resolved a prolonged tension within the party concerning our stance on social and economic policies. It gave our leaders and activists a tremendous sense of empowerment.

Małgorzata Tkacz-Janik
(photo from Wikipedia)

Then there was a series of changes in the political situation. In the presidential elections, the Greens supported Grzegorz Napieralski, the Democratic Left Alliance (SLD). His political programme proved closer to the Green vision than the programme of any other candidate. Then there were long and difficult talks about a coalition in the local elections. We achieved an agreement, and in the November elections many Green candidates (though not all) ran on Social Democratic ballot. Now we have two members of regional parliaments: Małgorzata Tkacz-Janik (co-leader of the Greens) in Silesia and Ewa Koś in West Pommerania, and three members of municipal councils: Beata Kubica in Opole, Krystian Legierski in Warsaw and Sebastian Kotlarz in the rural commune of Kąty Wielkie. Sebastian Kotlarz was elected as an independent Green candidate in a first-past-the-post constituency, he highlighted his Feminist convictions in his campaign. Krystian Legierski is not only the first Green councillors in Warsaw, but also the first out gay candidate elected to a political office in Poland; we have made history.

But there was also an important breakthrough in Polish media. In 2010, two strong taboos were definitely broken. First, there is no longer a taboo concerning the Church and State relations in Poland. Until August 2010, the overwhelming majority of Polish people discontent with the dominant position of the Catholic Church in political life or its economic privileges had been virtually voiceless and invisible. Those who would question the privileges of the Church would be often dismissed as 'extremists.' Now it has all changed. The position of the Church started to lose its unquestionable status in April, when the Church supported the controversial burial of the late president Lech Kaczyński in the Wawel Cathedral. Then the media started to discuss the workings of the Property Commission that was responsible for transfering to the Church institutions valuable properties and tremendous sums of money on grounds that seem quite unclear, to say the least. And then there was a conflict about the cross put by scouts in front of the Presidential Palace in Warsaw in the days of Smoleńsk mourning. On 9th August, a huge crowd of young people come to demand the displacement of the cross and a closer separation of Church and State. Now it is evident that anticlerical demands have supporters ready to come out and defend their right to be heard.

And there is also a second taboo that did not survive the turbulences of 2010. It is the Polish system of pensions introduced by the infamous government of Jerzy Buzek. Until recently, it was unquestionable. Now, even some neoliberal experts denounce it as irrational and costly. So there is also much more space for its progressive critics to speak out.

The Greens start the new year empowered -- with our new programme, with our councillors, and with media more open to debate. But 2011 will also be a year of challenges, parliamentary elections and debate on nuclear energy in Poland not least important among them.

A new opening for the Left (and Greens)

2010-07-09T10:33:00.016+02:00


May Day: Greens march with trade unions and SLD (photo by Alicja Szymczak)

Of course, I am less than happy with the outcome of the presidential elections, but the struggle carries on. Many among the Greens feel that the main obstacle for a reemergence of progressive politics in Poland is the anti-Law and Justice (PiS) hysteria. It prompts many otherwise left-leaning voters and opinion leaders to support the Civic Platform (PO), a deeply conservative and market fundamentalist party passing for "liberal", but hardly representing any progressive agenda at all. The anti-PiS mobilization wipes everything that is progressive, green, feminist, social democratic or even liberal out of the scope of reasonable political choice. I am amazed how many in the liberal media follow this suicidal path.
It is in this context that the result of Grzegorz Napieralski, the leader of the Democratic Left Alliance (SLD), also supported by the Greens, is considered to be a miracle. He obtained nearly 14 per cent of the popular vote. Were the circumstances different, it would not be that impressive. But it was deemed to be a failure. In the time of sharp polarization, with only reluctant help of most other SLD leaders, and with some of them (Włodzimierz Cimoszewicz) even openly supporting his Conservative rival Bronisław Komorowski, he was expected to win no more than 3 or 5 per cent of the vote.

But why is it a new opening for the Left? And, even more so, for the Greens?

Napieralski showed his political cunning in not supporting either Komorowski or Jarosław Kaczyński in the second round. He let them struggle for the minds and hearts of his voters by including left-wing agenda in their programmes. And they did it, or at least they did try. Komorowski started to talk about public financing of in vitro fertilization, 35 per cent obligatory quotas for women on the lists to Parliament, and cheaper railway tickets for students. Kaczyński raised the issues of labour relations, public health care and the model of welfare state. He even called the institution of permanent employment contract "one of the very fundaments of our civilization." So, progressive agenda unexpectedly appeared in the very center of debate between... two right wing candidates.

But obviously, it is not the Right that is going to represent this agenda in the future. But will the Left be able to do it? Napieralski declares he wants to cleanse his party of neoliberal elements that proved so unuseful and even disloyal during his presidential campaign. He probably will attempt a renewal of the SLD in a close cooperation with the Greens, the Women's Party, and trade unions. If only he is consistent and determined, he can transform SLD from the party of postcommunist establishment into a genuine Social Democracy. And this would open the way, in Poland, for a more progressive future.

Two short comments on the ongoing elections in Poland

2010-06-30T17:00:00.004+02:00

Quoted in Le Journal du Dimanche (20th June) about the rise in support for Jarosław Kaczyński among young voters: Pologne: Le face-à-face des droites. In NRC next (21st June) about the good result of pro-gay left candidate Grzegorz Napieralski: Homovriendelijke kandidaat deed het goed in Polen.

If animals could vote

2010-05-17T21:39:00.022+02:00

For left-wing voters, there does not seem to be a big choice in the coming presidential elections. Both major candidates, Bronisław Komorowski (Civic Platform) and Jarosław Kaczyński (Law and Justice) happen to be right-wingers. Their is no substantial difference in what they say on the war in Afghanistan, NATO, nuclear energy, women's and LGBT rights, relations between the State and the Church, and so on. There is a trade union link in the case of Kaczyński, making him look a bit more "pro-social" of the two, but he is far from the "one-nation Conservative" image of his late brother Lech. Although he is visibly more cautious about privatisation than Komorowski, and much more supportive of the public health care system, he still boasts about his government having lowered taxes (for the rich, to be sure). Even those differences taken into account, no impressive choice for a progressive voter anyway.

Oddly enough, this creates an occasion for hitherto neglected topics to come into the fore. The issue of animal rights, or rather of the complex relations between humans and animals, appears to be quite important. At least, it enables one to really distinguish between the two main rivals. One of them lives with a cat, while the other is a devoted hunter. As it can be seen on the banner profligated by the (hitherto unknown) Animal Protection Party:

I KILL ANIMALS BECAUSE I LIKE IT. VOTE FOR ME!

The fact of Komorowski's killing animals for pleasure is being raised not only by animal rights activists, but also by some of his right wing opponents. The pro-Kaczyński "Rzeczpospolita" published at least two cartoons about the hunting candidate (both by Andrzej Krauze). One of them displays a "Honorary Committee of support for the Hunter" in form of a row of hanged animal corpses, while the other represents voting as a unanimous action by a herd of frightened-to-death animals.

The other side raises the issue of human-animal relations as well. Last Sunday, on the inauguration of the Honorary Committee of support for Komorowski, Professor Władysław Bartoszewski (Poland's former minister of foreign affairs) made an allusion to Kaczyński's being a bachelor: "If Poland is to be degraded to the Rwanda's or Burundi's level of world's attention, it would be the best reason to vote for a man who has the experience in raising fur-bearing animals, but does not have the experience of being a father." This is a wonderful example of how racist, homophobic, and speciesist formulations may still pave their way into the mainstream of respectable political discourse. Though I would not bet it helps.

Anyway, it is fascinating to watch how new topics emerge as a means to make a difference between the two otherwise so similar rivals. I am going to watch it carefully. And as you may have already guessed, I would be more than happy to cede my vote to one of my cats this time...

P.S. Today's news (Thursday, 19 May): Komorowski gives up hunting. Good news. Maybe animals cannot vote, but it seems they sometimes do count.

Greens after Party Conference

2010-04-27T16:30:00.023+02:00

The previous weekend (16 and 17 April) Polish Greens gathered in Warsaw for the fourth Party Conference. It was my third party congress since I joined the Greens, and so far the most exciting one. We made some changes in the ranks of our leadership: Dariusz Szwed has retained his position of the male co-chair, while Agnieszka Grzybek has been replaced by Małgorzata Tkacz-Janik as the female co-chair of the party. But what is the most important, we had occasion to discuss and update our political programme. What it means to be "Green" in today's Poland? What sort of alternative to the dominant Civic Platform -- and to the political scene in general -- are we dreaming of? We have always been an anti-neoliberal party, but what it precisely means in 2010, seven years after our party's establishment?

After the conference, some are speaking of a "social turn" in our politics, while others claim we simply made our long-held principles more detailed. Anyway, there is a sense of breakthrough. At the conference we adopted four documents: on electoral law, on social policy, on public health, and on education. It is now much clearer what do we stand for in these domains, what sort of electoral reform do we propose in order to reopen Poland's political landscape, and what our vision of social justice is like.

In electoral law we stand for the opening of political scene for new parties and movements by lowering thresholds, as well as introducing restrictions on commercial electoral campaigns. We also support better representation of women in politics and lowering of the voting age in local elections to 16.

In social policy, public health & education we stand for the vision of public services strongly opposed to their commodification and privatisation. Especially health and education should be treated as human rights, and not commodities. We want better protection of women's rights in employment, health, and education policy. We support employment policy based on jobs creation, and not only on the "activation" of the unemployed. We want to foster better work-life balance in order to support public health and create better conditions for gender equality within family. We stand for policies that would diminish social and economic inequalities between people.

Sounds great, ain't it? What we still lack, however, is the power to translate it into binding laws and policies. But no worry, next local elections will be soon.

Dariusz Szwed and Małgorzata Tkacz-Janik, co-chairs

Ewa Charkiewicz and Paweł Fischer-Kotowski

Johann Bros

Adam Ostolski

Bartłomiej Kozek

Bartłomiej Kozek, Irena Kołodziej and Aleksandra Kretkowska

Hanna Gill-Piątek and Wojtek Kłosowski, voting

photo by: Maciej "Psych" Smykowski

NYT on Poland's young Left

2010-03-14T12:11:00.004+01:00

Twenty years after the fall of communism, an attempt to rejuvenate the left is in full swing in Poland, led by a circle of young idealists, who argue that the time has come to open up political discourse to ideas that have long been demonized because of the country’s communist past. - writes Dan Bilefsky in "The New York Times" (12th March, 2010).

More: Polish Left Gets Transfusion of Young Blood.

Gender policy or gender politics?

2010-02-19T17:29:00.001+01:00

Five years down the road of EU enlargement, the dominant mood is one of disappointment. Is this simply a crisis of leadership (some have even begun speaking of a backlash) in the European Union? Or are we perhaps dealing with a broader phenomenon sometimes referred to as "gender fatigue"? What may be at stake here is the exhaustion of a certain strategy of pushing for women’s rights – a strategy whose present embodiment is in the "gender mainstreaming" policy. We might also ask whether we are facing three separate challenges here, or three aspects of the same impasse – in European political institutions, in social attitudes, and inside women’s organization? If the backlash in the EU, gender fatigue in the workplace and disaffection with gender mainstreaming within the women’s movement are three separate independent phenomena, then the recipe for our problems would be to continue doing what we have done all along, only more effectively. If, however, we are dealing with various aspects of a single crisis, then we need to ask about its root causes.

In the article The European Union, Gender Politics and Social Change in a collection Gender in the EU (pp. 30-32) published by the Heinrich Bőll Stiftung, I am trying to trace the consequences of the replacing of feminist politics with "gender policy". What is the true meaning of the recent exchange of politics for policy? What happens, when we leave behind struggle for change, and try to negotiate the administration of change instead? Will we be able to restore the momentum of social movements, and their utopian power? These questions are pertinent not only for feminist struggle, but for the environmental and other struggles as well.

Of drugs and men

2009-09-07T23:32:00.006+02:00

Last Wednesday, we had a discussion panel in the Krytyka Polityczna on possible changes in Polish drug policy. With three MPs representing major political forces: Joanna Mucha (Civic Platform), Bolesław Piecha (Law and Justice), and Marek Balicki (independent left-wing MP, former Minister of Health) as well as our special guest, Ethan Nadelmann from the New York-based Drug Policy Alliance, we debated if it is desirable to change drug policy in Poland, and what sort of reform we actually need. Ethan pointed to two sorts of harm that good drug policy should aim to minimize: harm caused by the use of drugs and harm caused by drug policy itself. So, one good thing is that we broadened the scope of issues discussed, to the standard question of how drugs as a social problem should be addressed adding a fresh one: how drug policy as a source of social problems can be reformed.

But, frankly, is drug policy reform in Poland possible?

The climate on the political scene does not seem open for change. Earlier this year, the Sejm added BZP and 17 other substances used as recreational drugs to the list of prohibited drugs. Only 5 MPs voted against (another 2 abstained). The policy is widely popular. Both in the political elite and in the masses the dominant feeling is that we need more, not less, repression. The majority seems to desire not a departure from, but a continuation of the trend started in 2000, when Jerzy Buzek's government criminalized the possession of even smallest amounts of illegal drugs. At that time, repressive drug policy was part and parcel of general backlash in politics, but it provoked some resistance. Now, it is considered by many the only reasonable option.

On the other hand, the public discourse has been slowly changing. The consensus over the repressive status quo begins to weaken. In Spring, when we published our book Polityka narkotykowa (Drug Policy: A Reader), the climate of opinion was almost entirely hostile to drug reform, even among liberal journalists. Everyone seemed to be basically happy with the status quo. Critical voices focused on the need to make the repressive policy more strictly enforced. But something has changed since. Inspired and supported by Kasia Malinowska-Sempruch from Global Drug Policy Program, we published the book, we organized about 30 public discussion panels in towns and cities, we started to gain allies... Mainstream media began to be interested in the topic, and a few dozen of press articles appeared during last six months. Not all of them are in favour of drug reform, to be sure, but at least there is discussion.

How much effort will it take to convince the wider public? How long will it take to get with the idea of change into the Sejm? We cannot expect to have a progressive law passed soon, but I hope there will be, after next elections, a political force in the Sejm strong enough to make drug reform recognized as a reasonable idea. Even a small change in the climate of opinion would be a great achievement. Thus we would undo at least part of Buzek's heavy legacy.

Radical Democracy 101

2009-08-20T10:48:00.006+02:00

The previous week I spent at the seaside with Młodzi Socjaliści (Young Socialists). I had been invited to their summer camp to teach about social movements, ecology, gender, and other "New Left" topics. It fit well. The programme of the camp combined economic and cultural issues with lessons in the history of Socialist movement in Poland.

It was an important encounter, for me personally, especially because of the meetings with witnesses of Socialist tradition. It reminded me of my own experience in the late 1990s. It was sad times, with their overwhelming impression of "there is no alternative," and with the chronic shock therapy passing for "coming back to normalcy" (or even "to Europe"). In 1990s, I felt like Odysseus on the island of Lotus-Eaters: not remembering who I was, where did I come from, and unable to fix a direction.

And then, like Odysseus in a poet's song, I recognised myself in the history of the Polish Socialist Party (PPS), with its long and noble tradition of struggle for national independence, democracy, and socialism. Established in 1892, it is the oldest political party in Poland. Until 1948 it was a major party on the Polish scene. Although now it is marginal, its heritage still matters. PPS has never been enmeshed in undemocratic regimes of any sort, either capitalist (before 1939) or -- at least nominally -- socialist ones (after 1948). Its history is a story of failed efforts to build democratic socialism in Poland: after 1918, after 1945, after 1989... But it is not just about failure. Above all, it is a reminder that our past could have been quite different. And our future still can be.

That is why I felt deep intimacy at the camp. Młodzi Socjaliści are a Polish youth movement affiliated with the European Left; they also closely cooperate with PPS. As in the sad 1990s, it still requires a substantial dose of non-conformism to describe oneself as Socialist in today's Poland. I wonder what is more difficult: to come out as gay or lesbian or as Socialist. But, as Hannah Arendt taught us, politics is basically about courage -- or it is rubbish. In the courage of young people proud to be Socialists, there is some irresistible attraction. No wonder their ranks are growing. I am smiling to the thought that this is real politics, after all.

Soyez réalistes!

2009-08-07T18:20:00.012+02:00

Demo for civil unions,
14th July 2009
(photo by Magda Mosiewicz)

Yesterday, I took part in a meeting of Polish LGBT activists organized to discuss the question of same-sex unions. Some activists initiated the discussion in order to establish, which legal form of recognition of gay and lesbian relationships would be preferable. Not that we have a generous offer from any parliamentary party at the moment. The political context is not helpful, to say the least, but even in unfriendly conditions it may be worthwile to take some effort and fix the direction for future struggles. And it is especially valuable that we discuss a common strategy. Ii is a new quality in Polish LGBT movement. The important decisions are less and less the prerogative of a few organizers. Approximately a year ago we started to form an anchored public sphere of our own.

Obviously enough, the question of legal recognition is controversial in the eyes of general public. But it is also potentially divisive within LGBT community itself. For some, gay marriage would be a fulfillment of our emancipation, the symbol of equal dignity and recognition. For others, marriage as such is a survival of patriarchy with no real value, and gay marriage would be a depressive sign of cooptation of once radical movement into the System. For some, the French PaCS is a wonderful, flexible, and open institution -- not limited to gay or straight couples. For others, it is an unacceptable solution, since it is not a vehicle of public recognition, and is even open for non-sexual and non-intimate, purely contractual relationships. For some, separate civil partnerships for lesbian and gay couples is a second-best to marriage, or even a proud badge of difference. For others, it would be a form of "sexual apartheid," effectively creating second class citizens. So, whatever the result of our discussions, some will be happy with it, and some will be sad, disappointed, even hurt.

Unfortunately, there are no progressive forces in power that could create an inclusive system of institutions suitable for people with different dreams, needs and self-conceptions. The question is which solution would open the process of further social change in that direction. Perhaps this is the one that should be given priority. But who really knows which one it is?

What struck me at the meeting was readiness of many activists to subordinate to the notion of "being realistic." Being realistic means not demanding too much, but focusing on small steps that hopefully might be accepted by a majority. In particular, it means not speaking about adoption or marriage. And the acceptance of the Constitution with its apparent ban on gay marriage as the unsurpassable horizon of LGBT demands.

For many people the idea of demanding a change to the Constitution seems unthinkable. I can understand that. In Poland, projects of constitutional change are the domain of the right and especially of the extreme right. They want to change the Constitution in order better to protect foetuses, to end the system of proportional representation, to trim social entitlements to free health care and education, and so on and so forth. In recent years, progressive forces have been mainly focused on protecting the Constitution. Whereas the Right does not lack courage to revolt and demand a radical change, the Left is focused on the conservative task of defending the status quo. For many left-to-the-centre people, the attitude towards the Constitution constitutes a dividing line between decent and undecent politics.

But what if one should be somewhat less "decent" in order to gain anything?

The Constitution of 1997 says in Article 18 that "Marriage as a union of a man and a woman, as well as the family, motherhood and parenthood, shall be placed under the protection and care of the Republic of Poland." It is generaly undestood -- and was meant to -- "protect" marriage as a straight-only institution. But as some lawyers have pointed, it may be understood as protecting straight marriage not only against gay marriage, but also against other forms of legal recognition of straight couples. So even a law establishing civil unions as open for both gay and straight couples deems at the moment too radical. The Constitutional Tribunal may strike it down. That is why civil partnerships as an LGBT-only institution seem to be the most realistic from the legal point of view... of course, unless it is too similar to marriage.

It is a catch-22 situation, isn't it? Perhaps we should finally stop thinking about what is and what is not constitutional, and focus on what is actually desirable. We have a chance to learn to be truly realistic, and demand the impossible.

Between East and West

2009-08-04T09:02:00.001+02:00

Polish Shades of Green is a collection of articles edited by Przemysław Sadura. It is an attempt to situate the condition of Green politics in Poland in different contexts: historical, sociological, and political ones. It sheds some light on the potentials and barriers for greening the Polish political scene.

The book was originally written in Polish, but now there is also an English translation available on the website of the Heinrich Böll Stiftung. I am not going to summarize it here, since the texts speak best for themselves. But I think it worthwile to write a few words about what it means for me that this book is now being published in English. It is, from my point of view, first and foremost an exercise in cultural translation. Especially the legacy of social movements is different on both sides of the Iron Curtain, and I think it gives way to many misunderstandings.

I wrote for the book a text entitled "Between East and West." My purpose was to understand, how the meaning of 1968 was different on both sides of the Iron Curtain. Although the Eastern and Western protest movements of the 1960s had a lot in common, what emerged from them was rather different. In the 1970s, the communication between "new social movements" in the West and the "democratic opposition" in the East might have been quite intensive, but their ideologies and sensibilities were at the same time more and more distinct.

The true counterparts of Western grassroot movements emerged in Poland only in the mid 1980s. In her text, Ewa Charkiewicz writes about her participation in the environmental movement "Wolę Być" (I Prefer to Be). Her focus is on how the Wolę Być (and other social movements) experienced the fateful year 1989. In her narrative, personal memories combine with sharp analysis. Environmental, pacifist, feminist, and LGBT movements had already existed before 1989, and activists of those movements experienced the fall of ancien régime in their own way, different from apparatchiks, to be sure, but also different from leaders of Solidarność. Since the political scene since 1989 has been divided between Solidarność on the one hand, and the successors of Polish United Workers' Party on the other, a space for Green politics simply did not emerge. Step by step, protest movements became parts of the "civil society." They have become "professional," turned into "non-governmental organizations," and learned how to apply for grants.

The present condition of social movements turned into NGOs is analysed by Agnieszka Graff. Being professional is not only a stage of maturity, but also a political condition with serious implications for grassroot democracy, independence from state (or market) power, and ability to articulate social anger. In all these respects there is a setback. And that explains why the basis for Green politics is so weak.

I focused on the texts by Ewa Charkiewicz, Agnieszka Graff and myself, since I believe there can be no social or political change without thriving grassroot movements. I hope the publication of this book in English will help to understand the differences in the situation of Green movements in both parts of Europe.

Human Rights and Beaux Arts

2009-08-03T11:57:00.002+02:00

Friends from the Austrian city of Graz have published a book entitled Land of Human Rights: Artistic and Activist Strategies of Making Human Rights Visible (edited by Laila Huber, Judith Laister, Anton Lederer, Margarethe Makovec and Oliver Ressler). It is an international collection of essays dealing with one of the most salient problems of today's world: how to make human rights visible. There are chapters devoted to issues of migration, labour, exploitation, precarity, and so on. The editors of the book state their purpose on the cover: In a world of images, visibility has become a political necessity. Whoever wants to achieve changes in society, must not only make him or herself heard but also seen.

Obviously enough, we live in the midst of a "visual turn" in our culture, social communication, and theory. It goes far beyond the notion of the "society of the spectacle." Images are neither friends nor enemies by themselves. It is rather the visual culture that constitutes another field of struggle, wherein we encounter images as our possible, or impossible, allies. We not only find ourselves enslaved in, manipulated by, or alienated into images, but also empowered by them. Wherever there is alienation, there can also be intimacy. And even visionary politics is ultimately about vision, and its visibility.

No wonder it is so urgent to think about human rights and their visibility in this new context. We need art and artistic practices as a vehicle of social change we are striving for. And I would contend that in the realm of human rights artistic practice is not just a vehicle -- it is a site of strategic intervention. We need to make human rights visible not because we do not hear about them enough. Quite the opposite, we are all too often overflooded with corrupted "human rights" discourse.

How can images be a remedy for corrupted speech? We saw it a few years ago on the occasion of Abu Ghraib. The war in Iraq was thouroughly decorated in "human rights" concerns. In Poland, many liberal intellectuals such as Adam Michnik considered the invasion as a "war to end torture in Iraq." And there was no word, no speech capable of contradicting this conviction. Only after a dozen of months, when the photographs of Abu Ghraib saw the light, did the speech of warmongers become slightly less self-assured.

We need more visual interventions of this sort. We urgently need to scatter the smokescreen of "human rights" discourse clouding the European Union's border and migration policies, especially the activities of the Frontex agency. We need to countervail the newspeak of those "free to choose" with images of actually existing neoliberalism. So we need activist and artistic strategies, and we have to further our strategic reflection. The reader Land of Human Rights is an impressive contribution to this task.

PS. There is also a modest contribution by Joanna Erbel and myself: "The Artist-Citizen: New Directions in Political Art in Poland." We write about transformations in artistic practices accompanying the political and economic transition in Poland. We record a recent shift from a liberal and individualistic understanding of human rights to a broader vision of rights implicit in social and artistic struggles. Enjoy!

The Vestas occupation crucial for our climate struggle

2009-07-28T14:36:00.000+02:00

The occupation of the Vestas wind turbine factory in the Isle of Wight is now at the heart of the environmental struggle in Europe.

We often fight for numbers, such as emission targets and quotas. We support political leaders (not many) who understand the urgency of the climate crisis. And we fight against politicians incapable of taking (or unwilling to take) urgent measures to prevent the catastrophe -- against people like Bush or Klaus. This is very important. But finally, we will not be able to lower our carbon footprint without proper infrastructure. We need wind turbines, solar panels, efficiency technologies etc. We need more people employed in green economy. We need not only clean technologies, but also economic demand for clean technologies; and both should be created with government's support, if necessary.

It would be an immense waste to shut down the factory now, when the challenge of climate crisis calls for massive investment in renewable energy sector, and the challenge of economic crisis calls for an earnest effort to create -- not destroy, Mr. Miliband! -- millions of green collar jobs all over Europe.

The Vestas occupation is not only about one factory, or about one country. It is about the sector of green energy in Europe. And about the future of our planet.

Please, take your time to visit the protest's website or to write a few words of support at: savevestas[at]gmail.com.

Free to care

2009-07-25T11:37:00.001+02:00

I have just read my previous posts and I realized that I may sound a bit morose. Actually, I am not pessimistic at all. There are some signs of hope around, and especially within the Greens.

Oddly enough, the Green Party came out of these elections internally strengthened. The coalition was by no means a dream team, and especially the Liberals were dragging us all down most of the time. So we decided as Greens to go on with a campaign of our own. We campaigned against Barroso and for the "European dream." This helped us to take a more critical stance on European policies. When we were preparing for the campaign, we had to define for what sort of Europe we stand.

We found it is all about four basic liberties: freedom of expression, freedom of conscience, freedom from want, and freedom from fear. It was on behalf of those freedoms that the Allies combatted Fascism in World War II. Of course, we live in a different world now than we did 60 years ago. Nowadays, freedom of expression would be meaningless without the right to free internet, for example, and freedom from fear implies strong protection from social dumping and fighting against climate change, etc. etc. That is why we need Green politics, to redefine what all these freedoms actually mean today.

Next Autumn we are going to have municipal & presidential elections. We have been already thinking how do these freedoms translate into local policies.

*

On Friday, we had surprise guests in our Warsaw office: José Antonio Vergara from Chile and Mireille Grosjean form Switzerland, two Green comrades who came to Poland for the Universala Kongreso de Esperanto in Białystok. It is amazing how close is the relationship between Green ideals and Esperanto, as a language build aroud the idea of peace and equality of people regardless of their nationality. And on the principle of hope, essential to any progressive politics.

I am deeply honoured to get acquainted with José Antonio, who was an activist of the opposition under the Pinochet regime. I imagine how much personal courage it required. And I admire that he continues to struggle now for what he struggled then. It is another sort of courage, that we -- Greens, Socialists, Esperantists etc. -- need in our postpolitical era: the courage to care.

Everyone's ally

2009-07-24T21:22:00.002+02:00

The front page of today's "Fakt" (Axel Springer's tabloid) brings an interesting photograph: young, half-naked man, his hand stretched in Hitler salute. It is the Acting CEO of the Polish public television TVP Piotr Farfał. The photo was made a dozen years ago. Within the issue we find more photos of this sort: young Farfał among other skinheads, their hands stretched forward in the sinister gesture.

Farfał's neo-Nazi past is hardly a revelation. The photos give graphic evidence to what has been known from the very beginning of his public career. It was already disclosed by the "Gazeta Wyborcza" soon after Farfał's nomination to the Board of Public TV in May 2006. At the time, the far-right League of Polish Families (LPR) happened to be a highly uncomfortable, and yet indispensable ally in the ruling coalition led by Law and Justice (PiS). Scandals concerning the behaviour of All-Polish Youth (LPR's youth organization) emerged from time to time, and Hitler salute even came to be re-christened as "one more beer, please!" (People trying to play down the importance of All-Polish Youth's dangerous affinities claimed that the gesture was not actually Hitler salute, but a natural pose of young men ordering another pint of beer...) Law and Justice did not seem to be happy with its allies from League of Polish Families and Self-Defense, but they desperately needed allies anyway. It was within this context that LPR pushed Farfał as their candidate to the board of TVP. Even the revelations of his neo-Nazi past were not sufficient to challenge his position.

Law and Justice lost power in the wake of snap election in Autumn 2007. Civic Platform (PO) formed a new coalition government with Polish People's Party (PSL). But Farfał could feel safe as a member of the board. PO wanted to change the Board of the Public TV, to be sure, but there was no hurry. Their ambition was broader than just a personal purge. They wanted also to "reform" the institution itself. A new media law not only enabled the replacement of the enemy's team, but was also paving the way for the privatisation of public media. In April 2008, the law was passed through the Parliament, but it was vetoed by President Kaczyński. The President was opposed to the prospect of creeping privatisation of TVP, and probably also wanted to protect PiS' control over it (or vice versa). In order to overturn the veto, PO needed support from either Law and Justice or Democratic Left Alliance (SLD). And they proved unable -- or unwilling -- to gain it. Farfał and his colleagues could still feel secure in his post.

And this was not the end... In Autumn 2008 there was a conflict within the board of TVP between members connected with LPR and Self-Defense on the one hand, and members connected with PiS on the other. Both LPR and Self-Defense, now extraparliamentary, wanted more visibility in public media, hoping it will help them to prepare a comeback. And there was also a conflict around Piotr Farfał himself. In December 2008 a mutiny finally happened, the CEO Andrzej Urbański was suspended and Piotr Farfał became the Acting CEO in his place. PiS lost control over the public TV. And for the following five months Civic Platform seemed totally incapable of taking action to replace the board.

Was it really? Let's play with a perverse thought. What if Farfał as the CEO of the public TV was a tacit ally of the ruling party once again, Civic Platform this time? As the Acting CEO he took care to have views and activities of his far-right friends appropriately covered. Six months before the European elections it was invaluable. LPR joined forces with Declan Ganley's Libertas, so Libertas gained a tool to attract public attention. It helped. TVP was quite favourable towards Libertas, whereas liberal media were definitely hostile. But both were equally unfriendly towards Law and Justice. And both talked about Libertas incessantly, much more than about any other minor party. Was it turning the attention of eurosceptic voters away from Law and Justice, the Civic Platform's ultimate enemy other? It could have done it. And if the electoral achievements of far-right proved finally so miserable, it may well be because there are not so many eurosceptic voters in Poland after all.

To the end of May, some two weeks before the elections, a miracle happened. Civic Platform decided not to tolerate Farfał any more. A new media law was passed through the Parliament, almost effortlessly. The President does not seem happier with it than he had been with the previous incarnation, and he will almost certainly try to block it. The new law is, in essence, a double invitation: let's get rid of Farfał and -- at the same time -- let's open the door for privatisation by stealth. Diabolic offer, isn't it? It would probably have worked very well in January or February, still long before the elections, when the Law and Justice's need to replace Farfał was urgent. It will probably work even now, if the Social Democrats help PO to reject presidential veto. Will they? Is SLD ready to accept the prospect of privatisation of public media? I think so, but only if they get something in exchange. Not Farfał's head, to be sure, he is nothing but a token, but some real gains for the party. If they decide to support the PO's new media law, getting rid of Farfał will serve as a good excuse to accept the dismantling of public media at the same time.

More of the same, or Poland after the elections

2009-07-16T14:09:00.002+02:00

What is the result of recent European elections in Poland? The answer is not as obvious as it may seem. Each of four major parties may claim a success of its own. But the real victor is the Political Cartel itself, i.e. those same four parties considered as a whole. Though they constantly fight with each other, at the same time they have one interest in common: to prevent any political rival from beyond the Cartel from getting into the mainstream. And they proved perfectly capable of achieving this goal.

The result is a success for the Civic Platform (PO). They confirmed their position as the biggest party on the Polish scene. But it is also a success for the Law and Justice (PiS). They confirmed their position of the biggest opposition party and the only right-wing alternative for the Civic Platform. And it is also a success for the Democratic Left Alliance (SLD). They proved to be the only major left-wing party in Poland. And it is a success for the Polish People's Party (PSL). They confirmed that they do have an independent position, even though they are a minor partner in the ruling coalition.

The elections proved a disaster for all other parties. The populist parties (League of Polish Families and Self-Defence) proved unable to seriously challenge Law and Justice. Both the centre-left coalition of Social Democrats, Greens and Liberals, and the anti-capitalist Polish Labour Party (PPP) proved unable to articulate (or create) electorates of their own.

Is it Polish voters that do not need an alternative? Or is it the alternative that has not been delivered to its potential supporters? Anyway, the political scene in Poland seems to be carved in concrete. I know that even a small seed of a tree is sometimes able to subvert apparently solid concrete constructions. But how to translate a metaphor into a political strategy?

Hello

2009-07-15T23:13:00.000+02:00

Recently I spent some time reading Green blogs from across Europe. I realized how important it is to have an access to news and opinion from "insiders" in different countries. So I feel like joining in...

Yesterday, Jerzy Buzek was elected new President of the European Parliament. I remember quite well Buzek's record as Poland's PM (1997-2001). It was by far the worst government in Polish post-1989 history. His infamous "four reforms" (education, pensions, medical care and administration) proved a disaster for Poland's public services and deprived many people of basic social security. Buzek's government changed the labour code making workers more vulnerable in times of crisis. And he had notoriously misogynic and homophobic ministers in his cabinet - the Minister of Education Mirosław Handke and the government's Plenipotentiary for Family Kazimierz Kapera, among many others. It was Buzek's government that decided not to introduce sexual education in schools, being strongly against HIV-prevention education. And it withdrew public funding from shelters for battered women, because they were thought to "endanger the family life" (the shelters, not wife-tormentors, to be sure!).

And one more thing... It was Buzek's cabinet that was responsible for building the A-4 motorway that destroyed parts of the Góra Świętej Anny Landscape Park. It was, and is, illegal to build motorways in protected areas near nature reserves. But when environmental activists came to defend the mountain -- and the law -- they were very violently suppressed by private security assisted by the police.

With this record Jerzy Buzek is now becoming new President of the European Parliament. It means there won't be much space for progress on the European level in next years. And it is very sad news for all progressive forces in Poland, when such a person becomes the focus of national pride.