SINCE the imposition of martial law, Poland is a society that is sullen, pessimistic, rebellious, and divided. It is sullen because of the regime's termination of the country's brief experiment in democracy and the first genuinely popular social movement in postwar history. The sullenness is intensified by a near-universal pessimism that sees little hope for a return to the heady days of Solidarity's existence. Although the independent union has now been banned, it continues to exist in a truncated underground form, and support for it is periodically manifested through popular demonstrations. Support for Solidarity is not, however, either universal or unconditional. The overwhelming support that Solidarity enjoyed in its first six months began to diminish somewhat by the end of 1981. Some people viewed Solidarity, or its leaders, as being at least partially responsible for the political and economic crisis of 1981. Most of the population desired a return to economic and political stability. The regime, however, overestimated this dissatisfaction with Solidarity and miscalculated in its efforts to discredit that organization. Branding Solidarity and its leaders as counter-revolutionary, extremist and antisocialist was counter to the experience and opinions of most of the members of that organization, and of the population. Most people opposed martial law and wanted Solidarity to be reactivated. While there are an abundance of public opinion surveys on these issues, the regime has apparently not relied much on these indicators, and instead has hoped to build support for the regime through improving food supplies, maintaining order, discrediting Solidarity and the past party leaders, and repressing all opposition. Given Poland's history of rebellion, and its 16-month experience with Solidarity, however, it seems unlikely that this method can long succeed. Solidarity filled a vital need in Polish society in expressing to the authorities the interests and requirements of the population. This need continues, even under the present regime. This paper examines the extent to which Solidarity acted as a link between the population and the regime and as a representative of the interests of the workers. It looks first at the reasons for the emergence of Solidarity, and Solidarity's subsequent embodiment of the society's desire for a political and economic order more in line with the ideals of socialism, and more genuinely representative of the workers' interests. It concludes by assessing the charges against Solidarity made by the martial law authorities, the extent of current support for the union and the regime, and the possibilities for a resolution of the stalemate. All of these issues are examined in this article with the use of survey research material
Read full abstract