Transformations of Polish Society

Abstract

Transformations of Polish Society Mira Marody (bio) the successes and failures of the systemic transformation in Poland can be assessed from various points of view. The most frequently used is that of institutional transformation, and hence success or failure is measured by the degree to which the political and economic system of Poland is approaching the democratic-liberal model. From this perspective, Poland—once a leader when it came to systemic transformation—no longer has a glowing reputation. According to a recently published report by the Bertelsmann Foundation, which assessed the quality of democratic governance, in 2018 Poland ranked thirty-seventh among 41 EU and OECD countries, having dropped by as many as 29 places compared to an analogous study from 2014. The main reasons for this decline include a significant deterioration in the rule of law (including limiting the independence of the judiciary), politicizing government-controlled media, limiting the freedom of assembly, increasing police brutality, attempts to control nongovernmental organizations, and changes to electoral law.1 Concurrently, when it comes to the economy, there has been an intensification of activity that is shifting Poland away from a market economy, including the state buying up companies (dubbed "repolonization" of the banking and energy sectors, essentially their nationalization), antiliberal regulations, and using various instruments of economic policy to increase state control over the activities of nonstate actors. It could therefore be said, to paraphrase Ralph Dahrendorf (1990), that although institutional changes were those most quickly accomplished [End Page 57] in the course of transformation, they could be dismantled just as quickly. In this situation, changes in social consciousness—the third factor, along with economic changes of the transformation—appear to be more important in assessing the transformation's results. Although according to Dahrendorf they require the most time to occur, they are in fact more durable, and at the same time they define, to a large extent, the strength of the potential resistance in society to the institutional changes currently being introduced. This brings to the fore the question of what changes have occurred in the attitudes and opinions of Polish society over the past 30 years. Answers to this question are provided by data from the Polish edition of the European Values Study (EVS).2 THE PAST: CHANGES IN SOCIAL ATTITUDES AND VALUES When analyzing the potential impact of the transformation on social consciousness,3 one should above all look at those attitudes and values that can be linked with the overarching goal of the institutional changes, which was to build a democratic-liberal system. At the beginning of the 1990s, the political attitudes of Polish society had many authoritarian features. In 1990, 73 percent of respondents chose "greater respect for authority" as a desired goal for changes in the near future. It is true that even back then, support for a democratic political system was visible, but in 1999, 22 percent of respondents still accepted (very + rather) the idea that a good way of governing the country would be a political system with "a strong leader who does not have to bother with parliament and elections," and nearly 19 percent evaluated positively a political system in which "the army rules the country." As can be seen from table 1, over the past 30 years there has been a constant decline in authoritarian attitudes and a steady increase in prodemocracy attitudes. In 2017, in response to the question, "How important is it for you to live in a country that is governed democratically?"4 on a 10-point scale, 65.8 percent of respondents indicated the highest possible rating: "absolutely important" (10). This percentage increases to 88 percent when we add up answers 8–10 at the positive end of the scale. [End Page 58] Click for larger view View full resolution Table 1. Changes in political attitudes n.a.= not asked aLiberty aspirations are measured as a choice (the first and/or the second) of the items "protecting freedom of speech" and "giving people more say in important government decisions" from Inglehart's most widely used materialism-postmaterialism battery, which asks respondents to choose a first and second priority from four items (the other two items are "maintaining...