Search results

The aim of this text is to create a conceptual apparatus (a categorial grid) that would make it possible to explain all possible manifestations of oppositional culture in autocratic regimes. I distinguish two basic understandings of oppositional culture: social and domain-specific. The first is the totality of disapproval attitudes towards an autocratic political regime. The latter includes all manifestations of artistic creativity that are critical of the existing political regime. I distinguish three basic typologies of opposition cultures in the latter sense due to the following criteria: organizational shape, place of artistic expression and levels of negation of a given regime. The first typology concerning the organizational shape allows for the differentiation of opposition culture entities due to their numbers and the strength of social bonds created while performing this social role. The second typology makes it possible to define the space of freedom for the subjects of the opposition culture, and the third one – the level of refutation of a given political system.

The paper aims to construct a theoretical tool that allows for possible precise location of relations between the police and the ruling elite in a given country. Their relationship is between the ideal types of apoliticality and politicality. The five stages of the relationship between the ruling elite and the bureaucracy on a continuum between the ideal type of the apolitical Weberian bureaucracy and its antinomic ideal type of politicised system of patronage can be arranged as follows: self-regulation, personal independence, uncertainty, loyalty, and enhanced loyalty. The empirical usefulness test of these stages scheme consisting in the case study of one state characterised by a large range of autocratic and democratic regimes evolution (thus post-war Poland) was positive. Relations between the police, or more precisely: the Citizens' Militia, in the period of the Polish People's Republic can be defined as being at the stage of enhanced, double loyalty. In the period of the Third Polish Republic, relations between the police and the ruling elites can be placed at the fourth stage – loyalty. The few attempts to change this type of relationship and move to the stage of self-regulation or personal independence remained at the level of ineffective and temporary attempts at best.

The aim of the article is to find the similarities and differences between Poland and Cuba by comparing them totalitarian regimes. The research problem consisting in determining the importance of exogenous and endogenous factors favoring the regime or disintegrate it. In this case, the method of desk research is appropriate. The comparison was made using the same and operationalized criteria (hegemony or domination of the party-state apparatus, the intensity of political gnosis, and the scope and extent political mobilization) based on Juan Linz's modified concept of totalitarianism. At the beginning of the 1960s, in Cuba, the uncivil society had a hegemonic position. In the 21st century, its status changed from hegemonic to dominant, closely linked with the totalitarian party-state apparatus. The political regime slowly evolved from strong to weak totalitarianism. In post-war Poland, the political regime evolved from strong to weak totalitarianism, to become authoritarian after 1980 behind the façade of an inoperable party-state apparatus, and in 1989 it collapsed. In both cases, exogenous factors were of much less importance than endogenous ones.

Podmiotowość polityczna pierwszej Solidarności znacząco ewoluowała w okresie między strajkami lata 1980 roku ogłoszonym 13 grudnia 1981 roku stanem wojennym. Na poziomie artykulacyjnym nastąpiło przejście od fazy suplik poprzez zagregowane postulaty do dojrzałego narodowego programu politycznego. Strajki okupacyjne stały się podstawą trwałego potencjału samoorganizacyjnego narodu polskiego. Nie osiągnięto jednak poziomu wielowymiarowości organizacyjnej. Potencjał mobilizacyjny rósł od lipca 1980 roku aż do strajku generalnego, po czym zaczął systematycznie spadać. Podpisanie porozumień oznaczało pisemną akceptację istnienia odrębnego podmiotu społecznego przez dotychczasowego monopolistę (partię rządzącą). Było to świadectwem uzyskania statusowego awansu społecznego. To formalne uznanie nie było bezwarunkowe i zostało ostatecznie zanegowane poprzez wprowadzenie stanu wojennego. Znaczna część środowisk robotniczych, studenckich rolniczych osiągnęła trwałą podmiotowość polityczną na poziomie podstawowym.


Political subjectivity of first "Solidarity"

The political subjectivity of the first "Solidarity" evolved significantly in the period between the strikes in the summer of 1980 and the martial law announced on December 13, 1981. At the articulation level, there was transition from the supplication stage through aggregated postulates to the mature political program of nation. Occupation strikes became the basis for the Polish nation's lasting potential of the self-organization. However, the level of organizational multidimensionality was not achieved. The mobilization potential grew from July 1980 until the general warning strike, and then began to systematically decline. The signing of the agreements meant written acceptance of the existence of separate social entity by the former monopolist (ruling party). It was to obtain collective status benefits. This formal recognition was not unconditional and was finally denied by the imposition of martial law. Significant part of the working, student and agricultural circles achieved the level of political subjectivity at the basic level.

The breakdown of political structures is a process developing from the saddle point to the revolution or implosion of a political system. The decay process is determined on the one hand by the strength of the influence of stabilizing factors (attractors) and, on the other hand — by the repellers. In Poland, under Edward Gierek, the saddle point was achieved in 1974–1976, and then the process of disintegration began. The most important moments of revealing the repellers were: social protests against price increases in June 1976, "the winter of the century" in 1978/1979, the papal pilgrimage in 1979, parliamentary elections in March 1980, and the July 1980 strikes. The August and September 1980 agreements ended the process of disintegration of the monistic political system in Poland.

This article aims to place the views of Krzysztof Bosak, the Confederation's candidate in the 2020 presidential elections, in the multifaceted typological frameworks of political thought. The analyzes show that Bosak's political views are primarily fundamentalist. However, classifying non-heteronormative people as objective enemies is indicative of totalitarian political gnosis. Bosak's views cannot be classified as belonging to the epigonic fascism cultivating interwar patterns, regardless of the type of national variation. Nevertheless, it is possible to classify them as glamor fascism. This type of fascism is velvety on the outside, but in fact, belonging to an offensive rather than defensive fundamentalism with significant elements of totalitarian political gnosis. In addition, it most often uses the imaginary concept of the nation as a post-ethnic community unpolluted by foreign elements. The analysis of Krzysztof Bosak's views may be useful for subsequent analyzes of the specific manifestations of quasi-militant democracy in terms of targeting enemies in anti-democratic political thinking.

This article aims to place the views of Krzysztof Bosak, the Confederation's candidate in the 2020 presidential elections, in the multifaceted typological frameworks of political thought. The analyzes show that Bosak's political views are primarily fundamentalist. However, classifying non-heteronormative people as objective enemies is indicative of totalitarian political gnosis. Bosak's views cannot be classified as belonging to the epigonic fascism cultivating interwar patterns, regardless of the type of national variation. Nevertheless, it is possible to classify them as glamor fascism. This type of fascism is velvety on the outside, but in fact, belonging to an offensive rather than defensive fundamentalism with significant elements of totalitarian political gnosis. In addition, it most often uses the imaginary concept of the nation as a post-ethnic community unpolluted by foreign elements. The analysis of Krzysztof Bosak's views may be useful for subsequent analyzes of the specific manifestations of quasi-militant democracy in terms of targeting enemies in anti-democratic political thinking. ; Celem artykułu jest umieszczenie poglądów Krzysztofa Bosaka – kandydata Konfederacji w wyborach prezydenckich 2020 roku w wielopłaszczyznowych siatkach typologii myśli politycznej. Z przeprowadzonych analiz wynika, że poglądy polityczne Bosaka mają charakter przede wszystkim fundamentalistyczny. Natomiast widoczne są w przypadku stosunku do osób nieheteronormatywnych (klasyfikowanych jako wrogowie obiektywni) elementy totalitarnej gnozy politycznej. Poglądy Bosaka nie mogą być zakwalifikowane jako należące do epigońskiego faszyzmu kultywującego międzywojenne wzory i to niezależnie od rodzaju narodowej mutacji. Możliwe jest natomiast zaklasyfikowanie ich jako glamur faszyzm. Jest to faszyzm na zewnątrz aksamitny, w istocie swojej raczej należący do ofensywnego niż obronnego fundamentalizmu ze znaczącymi elementami totalitarnej gnozy politycznej. Ten rodzaj faszyzmu najczęściej posługuje się wyobrażonym pojęciem narodu jako niezanieczyszczonej obcymi elementami wspólnoty post-etnicznej. Badanie poglądów Krzysztofa Bosaka może być przydatne dla następnych analiz konkretnych przypadków przejawiania się quasi-demokracji opancerzonej szczególnie w zakresie typowania wrogów w antydemokratycznym myśleniu politycznym.

Tekst odpowiada na pytanie: jaki jest sens prowadzenia badań politologicznych? Wtedy, gdy ma się odpowiednią motywację i (co równie ważne) wie się, jak to można zrobić. W tym drugim przypadku musi się postępować w odpowiedniej kolejności. Po pierwsze, należy wyznaczyć granice pola badawczego, a po drugie, określić oryginalne, niebanalne problemy i hipotezy badawcze. Po trzecie, konieczny jest odpowiedni dobór i sposób selekcji źródeł pierwotnych i ewentualnie wtórnych. Czwartym etapem jest dobranie adekwatnych metod i technik badawczych, a następnie skonstruowanie narzędzia lub narzędzi badawczych. Po określeniu poziomu prawdziwości i stosowalności zebranych informacji możliwe jest dopiero przystąpienie do weryfikacji hipotez. Im bardziej ten ostatni proces będzie rzetelny, a badacz dociekliwy, tym ciekawsze uzyska się rezultaty badawcze.