"social & political instability in poland: a theoretical reconsideration" (pce 1, 1990) jan kubick

8/4/2019 "Social & Political Instability in Poland: A Theoretical Reconsideration" (PCE 1, 1990) Jan Kubick

1/64

Social and Political Instability in Poland:A Theoretical ReconsiderationBy Jan KubikCollege of Wooster

Program on Central and Eastern Europe Working Paper Series #1

Prepared as a chapter for From Repression to Roundtable: Instability and the Resurgence ofSolidarity in Poland, Trond Gilberg and Michael Bernhard. eds. The ftrst version was presented at theconference on "Instability in Poland: Its Sources and Ramifications," Pennsylvania State University,April 68, 1989. My gratitude goes ftrst of all to Michael Bernhard and Grzegorz Elden for theirincisive and thorough criticisms of earlier versions of this paper. I have also beneftted fromcomments by Michael Kennedy. Gale Stokes, and Ivan Volgyes. Special thanks to Robin Cordell,my research assistant. who tirelessly and creatively pursued all bibliographic clues that came ourway.


2/64


3/64

ABSTRACTBefore 1989, th e s o c i e t i e s and p o l i t i e s of Poland and othe r EastEuropean co u n t r i e s were descr ibed as u n s t ab l e by some au thors andas s t a b l e by o th e r s . I i n v es t i g a t e t h i s paradox with th e help ofan an a ly t i c a l appara tus developed by Jurgen Habermas. UsingHabermas"s two- t i e red an a ly s i s , in which s oc i e t i e s a re analyzeds imul taneous ly as soc ia l systems and l i f e - w o r ld s , I demons t ra tet h a t , a t l e a s t in th e Pol i sh case , p e r i o d s of s t a b i l i t y could befound only on th e l eve l of l i f e - w o r ld , whereas th e systemic l eve lremained i nhe ren t ly uns t ab le . I t r a c e th e r o o t s of t h i s systemici n s t a b i l i t y to th e i r r e co n c i l ab l e con t rad ic t ions between th efundamental p r i n c i p l e s of th e " a c t u ~ l l y ex i s t i n g soc ia l i sm." Ii d en t i f y t h e s e p r i n c i p l e s , ch a r ac t e r i ze t h e i r con t rad ic to ryn a t u r e , and b r i e f l y analyze th e impact of such con t rad ic t ions onth e funct ioning of p o l i t i c s , economy, and c u l t u re ( i t s sys temicdimension) . Using as an example John Paul I I " s v i s i t to Polandin 1989, I a l s o i n v es t i g a t e t h e con t rad ic t ion (or t ens ion)between th e systemic and l i f e -wor ld l e v e l s of Pol i sh s o c i o p o l i t i c a l r e a l i t y . F i n a l l y , I argue t h a t p e r i o d s of t r a n s i t i o n ,such as th e one Eas tern Europe i s presen t ly undergoing, a rep e r i o d s of permanent c r i s i s , no t p e r i o d s of i n s t a b i l i t y . Such aconceptua l d i s t i n c t i o n a l lows me to d is t ingu ish between twofundamenta l ly d i f f e r e n t types of " i n s t ~ b i l i t y . " The first typech a r ac t e r i ze s t he se s oc i e t i e s which, d es p i t e th e appearance ofs t a b i l i t y (mys t i f i ca t ion on th e l eve l of l i f e -w o r l d ) , a re r iddenby unreso lvab le con t rad ic t ions between p r i n c i p l e s a t th e systemicl e v e l . The second type i s to be found during pe r iods oft r a n s i t i o n , when c r i s e s which a r i s e from th e c o n t r a d i c t i o nbetween sys temic p r i n c i p l e s cu lminate in th e t ransfo rmat ion ofo ld pr inc ip les or th e emergence of new p r i n c i p l e s .


4/64


5/64

This essay c ons t i t u t e s my f i r s t a t tempt to r econc i le twocompeting v is ions of th e "ac tua l ly ex i s t ing soc ia l i sm" in EasternEurope, pa r t i c u l a r ly Poland. I t has been argued, t h a t t h i ssoc ia l format ion i s bas ica l ly s t a b l e , al though founded on asp e c i f i c type of soc io - log ic , in which longer pe r iods of growthand progre ss , or s t a b i l i t y , a l t e rna t e with br i e f e r pe r iods ofc r i s i s and/or rebe l l ion . An extreme a r t i c u l a t i on of t h i spos i t ion can be found in Jim Seroka ' s 1987 a r t i c l e , in which heargues t h a t East European i n s t a b i l i t y i s a "myth.u Accarding tohim: Many Western-based s t u d i e s of East European po l i t i ca lsystems have considered these p o l i t i c a l e n t i t i e s to befundamenta l ly uns tab le , and in accordance with t h i sviewpoin t , they have tended to place d isp ropor t iona teemphasis on evan t s and f a c t o r s sugges t ing d e s t a b i l i z a t i o nand po l i t i ca l unres t . Over t i me , t h i s assumption ofweakness has become accepted in many Wastern c i r c l e s , andthese s t u d i e s have crea ted a f a l s e impress ion t ha t th eCommunist co u n t r i e s od Eastern Europe a re perpe tua l ly a t th epoin t of p o l i t i c a l co l lapse


6/64

While shar ing Kolakowski 's diagnosi s I have been i nc rea s ing lyaware t h a t it must be supplemented with an explanat ion of th eparadox of th e prolonged per iods of soc ia l s t a b i l i t y of th esystem diagnosed as fundamenta l ly uns table . I t i s perhaps , th eu l t imate i n t e l l e c tua l cha l l enge in East European s tud ies toaccount fo r th e r e l a t i ve quiescence of th e populace during th epe r iods of soc ia l peace , of ten r e fe r red to as "normal iza t ion ."

This essay i s in tended as a pre l iminary exerc i se indeveloping an a b s t r a c t model, indebted to th e t heore t i ca lpe rspec t ive developed by Jurgen Habermas, which should f a c i l i t a t ea be t t e r unders tanding of th e paradoxica l na tu re of th e soc ia lsystem, diagnosed by some ana lys t s as bas ica l ly s t a b l e (withtemporary c r i s e s ) and by some o ther s as inherent ly uns tab le .Concre te , though b r i e f , ana lyses a re presen ted only in P a r t s VIIand VII I , where I examine John Paul II's f i r s t v i s i t to Polandand i nves t iga te an a ly t i c a l ga ins resu l t ing from the app l ica t ionof Victor Turne r ' s category of soc ia l drama to Pol i sh s i t u a t i o n .

Bie las iak , in a s imi la r ve in , observed , t h a t th e pa t t e rn ofcyc l i ca l c r i s e s can be const rued as a sy i ganer i s l e a rn ingprocess : a t each new s tage the Pa r ty - s t a t e and s o c i e ty face news i t ua t ion (determined by th e accumulat ion of e f f e c t s of p rev iousc r i s e s ) and employ new t echn iques of cr is is -management ( learnedfrom prev ious exper iences with c r i s i s - r e so l u t i on ) . Each newc r i s i s i s , t h e re fo re , d i f f e r e n t from prev ious ones , al thought he i r s t ruc tu r a l sources remain th e same (" regime 's claim toexc lus ive p o l i t i c a l power," see Bielas1ak 1984:23).2


7/64

I . Jurgen Habermas 's soc i a l - sc i en t i f i c concept of c r i s i s . Systemversus l i f e -wor ld .

One of th e most i n f lue n t i a l concept s of c r i s i s in the soc ia lsc iences has been developed by Jurgen Haber_as, pa r t i c u l a r ly inh is seminal Legi t imat ion Cr i s i s (1973; Engl i sh t r a ns l a t i on 1976)and more r ecan t ly in The Theory of Communicative Action (1981;Engl i sh t r a ns l a t i on 1984 [Vol .1 ] and 1987 [Vol .2 ] ) . He proposesto conduct an an a ly s i s of c r i s e s on two l eve l s : sys temic ands o c i a l ( l i f e -wor ld ) and develops th e concept s of systemi n t eg ra t ion and soc ia l i n t eg ra t ion . 2 In h is own . o rds :

The two e)Cpressions "soc ia l i n t eg ra t ion and "systemi n t eg r a t i o n " de r ive from d i f f e r e n t t h e o re t i c a l t r a d i t i o n s .We speak of soci 'a l in teg ra t ion in r e l a t i on to th e systems o,fi n s t i t u t i o n s in which speaking and ac t ing sub jec t s a res oc i a l l y r e l a t e d [v e rg e se l l s c h a f t e t ] . Socia l systems a reseen here as l i f e -wor lds t h a t a re symbol ical ly s t ruc tu red .We speak of system i n t eg ra t ion with a v i e . to th e sp e c i f i cs t ee r ing performances of se l f - r e g u l a t e d system. Socialsystems a re considered here from the po in t of view of t h e i rcapac i ty to main ta in t h e i r boundar ies and t h e i r cont inuede)Cistence by mastering th e comple)City of an incons tantenvironment . :s

2The ca tegor i es of system i n t eg ra t ion and s o c i a l i n t eg ra t ionwere a l so used by Davis Lockwood (1964). Frank Parkin appl iedt hose ca tegor i es in h is ana lys i s o f th e Sovie t type s o c i e t i e s in(1972). I sha re h is convic t ion t h a t a sys temat ic ana lys iS of th er e l a t i o n sh i p b e t. . .n t hose two t ypes of i n t eg ra t ion shouldproduce v . ry i n t e r e s t i ng t h e o re t i c a l r e s u l t s .:SIn (1987) Habermas defined t h e s e two concepts i n thefo l lowing . a y :Thus I have proposed t h a t we d i s t i n g u i s h between s o c i a li n t eg ra t ion and system i n t eg ra t ion : the former a t t a ch es toac t ion or i e n t a t i ons , whi le th e l a t t e r r each es r i g h t throughthem. In one case th e ac t ion system is in teg ra ted throughconsensus , whether normatively guaranteed o r communicat ivelyachieved; in th e other case it i s in teg ra ted through th enonnormative s t ee r ing 04 indiv idua l dec i s ions not

3


8/64

Having defined th e two l eve l of an a ly s i s , Habermas observes t h a taccording to e the l systems approach, c r i s e s a r i s e when th es t ruc tu r e of a soc ia l system a l lows fewer p o s s i b i l i t i e s fo rproblem solv ing than a re necessary to th e cont inuedex i s t ence of th e system. In t h i s sense , c r i s e s a re seen aspe r s i s t e n t [ s t r e s s - J . K . l dis turbances of systemi n t eg ra t ion . 1 1 Cri se s in soc ia l sys tems a re notproduced through acc identa l changes in th e environment , butthrough s t ruc tu r a l l y inherent system-imperat ives t h a t a reincompatible and cannot be h ie ra rch ica l ly [ s t r e s s - J . K . lin teg ra ted . 1 1 We speak of system i n t eg ra t ion with a viewto th e spec i f ic s t ee r ing performances of a se l f - r e g u l a t e dsystem (1976:3-4)

Systems t heory , which al lows a r t i c u l a t i on of such r e g u l a r i t i e shas , however , a fundamental shor tcoming: it does not allow fo r ac l e a r a r t i c u l a t i on of th e l im i t s of mal l eab i l i t y of th e sys tem,ergo it has no t oo l s t o determine when th e process of c r i s i s -r eso lu t ion v io l a t e s t he sys t em ' s pr inc ip le of i de n t i t x andt r i gge r s a t ransformat ion from an i n i t i a l c r i s i s - r i dde n systemi n to a new system.

HabRrmas di scusse s a t remendous d i f f i cu l t y involved in thet a sk of def in ing th e ident i ty pr inc ip le of a s o c i a l system. Hei s aware of a bas ic shortcoming of th e c l a s s i c a l func t iona l i sm,which did not o f fe r a c l e a r conceptua l iza t ion of t h e d i f f e r en cebetween soc ia l sys tems and b io log ica l sys tems (organisms) . As heobserves , it i s very d i f f i c u l t to determine whethRr an o ldp r i n c i p l e of i de n t i t y has been rep laced by a new one s ince

th e s a. . system modif icat ion can be conceived of equa l lywel l as a l ea rning process and change or a . a d i sso lu t ionprocess and co l lapse of th e system. I t cannot be

s u b j ec t i v e ly coordinatad (19B7:150) . 4


9/64

unambiguously determined whether a new system has beenformed or th e old system has merely regenera ted i t s e l f


10/64

l i f e -wor ld . As Habermas puts i t :Dis tu rbances of system in teg ra t ion endanger cont inuedex i s t ence only to the extent t h a t soc ia l in teg ra t ion i.s a ts t ake , t h a t i s w h . n t h . consensual founda t ions of normat ives t ru c t u re s a re so much impaired t h a t the soc ie ty becomesanomic. 1 1 Iden t i ty c r i s e s a re conn.cted [ s t r e s s J . K . l with s t ee r ing problems. Although the sub jec t s a re no tgenera l ly conscious of them, these s t ee r ing problems c re a t es .condary problems t ha t do a f f e c t consc iousn.ss in asp . c i f i c way - pr . c i s e ly in such a May as to endanger soc ia lin teg ra t ion (1976:3-4) .

Si g n i f i c a n t l y , in opposi t ion to most or thodox ve rs ions ofMarxism, Habermas does not pr . judge th e primacy of th e sys temicdimension over th e l i f e -Mprd . - He cor rec t ly assumes t h a t it i san empir ical no t an an a ly t i c a l ques t ion .

I t i s impor tan t to remember t h a t not a l l c r i s e s of l i f e -world o r i g i n a t e a t c r i s e s of th e systemic l . v e l . There a reendogenous and @xogenous c r i s e . on both l e v e l s . Habermas 'sobserva t ion t h a t h iden t i ty c r i s . s a re connected wi th [ thus notalways determined by - J .K . l s t ee r ing problems" se. .s to suppor tmy po in t . I would l i ke a l so to emphasize Habermas 's conclusiont ha t c r i s e s a r i s e from th e c onf l i c t of " s t ruc tu r a l l y i nhe ren ts y s t e m ~ i m p e r a t i v e s t ha t a re incompat ib le and cannot beh i e ra rc h i c a l l y [ s t r e s s - J .K . l i n t eg r a t ed . a The not ion ofhie ra rchy is cruc ia l here ; I .ill s h a . l a t e r , on th e systemicl eve l each socio-economic format ion has its own h i e r a ~ c h y of th et h ree major i n s t i t u t i o n a l domains, t ha t i s economy, p o l i t i c s , andc u l t u r . , and accordingly uproduces N and so lves c r i s e s in a

-As Arato p u t it: "Habermas does no t dogmat ical ly aff i rmth e absolute pr imacy of syst .m i n t . g r a t i on . . . . . (1982:201) In amore common Marxis t language, Habermas does no t assume th eprimacy of th e ba s . o v . r t h e su p . r s t ru c t u re .
http:///reader/full/consciousn.sshttp:///reader/full/consciousn.ss


11/64

spec i f i c way.

I I . Probl .m, c r i s i s , and i n s t a b i l i t y .

In order to de f ine c l . a r l y th e re l a t ionsh ip b . tw.en th e conc .p tof c r i s i s and th e concept of i n s t ab i l i t y Hab.rmass d . f i n i t i o n smust b . par t i a l l y rawork.d . All s o c i . t i . s und.rgo changes anda re plagu.d by d i s tu r b an c . s , i , d.v . lop . probl .ms , which can bedef in .d as breaches of the rou t ine s t a t . of a f f a i r s in a givendomain of soc ia l r . a l i t y . Cr i s . s occur when such probl .ms cannotb . r . s o lv .d through the rou t ine soc ia l mechanisms of problem solv ing o r , in Hab.rmass l anguag. , when .. t h . s t r u c t u r . of asoc ia l syst .m a l lows f . w . r p o s s i b i l i t i . s fo r probl .m solv ing thana re n . c . s s a ry to th e cont inued . x i s t e nc e of th e s y s t . . . . (1976:2) .

In o r d . r to r . s o l v . a c r i s i s , s o c i . t i . s ( t h . i r p a r t s ,gov . rnm.n t s , p o l i t i c a l p a r t i . s , i n s t i t u t i o n s , .lit.s, .tc.) mustd . v i s . m.chanisms of c r i s i s - s o lv ing and apply th.m to th ec r i s i s a t hand. This p r o c . s s of c r i s i s - s o lv ing has , how.v . r , itsl i m i t a t i o n s : in . ve ry soc ia l syst .m th.r. wi l l be a s t rongt .nd .ncy to so lve c r i s . s withou t changing th e p r i n c i p l . ofi d . n t i t y of th e system. Wh.n new m.chanisms of c r i s i s - s o lv inga re not d.v ised and app l i .d o r wh.n t h .y f a i l to so lve th e c r i s i sa t hand, ev . ry n.w c r i s i s adds to th e old o n . s producing acumulat ivf f . c t , which can b . c a l l . d i n s t a b i l i t y . In o t h . rwords, wh.n c r i s . s occur with a high f requ .ncy and lo r a re highlyunpr .d i c t a b l . o n . can su sp . c t t h a ~ th e soc i . t y i s uns t a b l . . To

7
http:///reader/full/probl.mshttp:///reader/full/probl.mshttp:///reader/full/probl.mshttp:///reader/full/probl.ms


12/64

be more prec i se , one can assume t ha t a soc ie ty i s uns tab le when(a) th e f requency andlor (b) u n p r ed i c t ab i l i t y of c r i s e s within itsu rp asses a norm which i s r e l a t i ve to a l i f e -wor ld o r an e x t r a -systemic s t andard .

Such an empir ica l procedure o f iden t i fy ing problems, c r i s e s ,and i n s t ab i l i t y i s obviously founded on a pre l iminary dec i s ion a sto what c o n s t i t u t e s th e c r i t e r i a according to which a s o c i a lphenomenon can be qua l i f i ed as a problem, c r i s i s , o r i n s t ab i l i ty_To def ine such c r i t e r i a i s as d i f f i c u l t as to de f ine th epr inc ip le of i de n t i t y of a so c i o -p o l i t i c a l system (bothdef in i t iona l problems a re , of course , c lose ly i n t e r re l a t ed ) .

In order to avoid t h i s t ed ious induc t ive-empir ica ldef in i t iona l pa th , I would sugges t a hypothe t ica l -deduc t ives t r a t e g y , which can begin wi th a format ion of a (s impl i f ied)model, which in turn wil l be t e s t ed aga ins t empir ical evidenceand amended or d i scarded ( f a l s i f i e d ) accord ing ly . Such ahypothe t ica l -deduc t ive s t ra t egy can be app l ied to th e problematiCof t h i s essay in the fo l lowing way. The ca tegor ies of c r i s i s andi n s t ab i l i t y can be defined as belonging to th e domain ofs t ru c t u ra l pr inCip le s of a given SOCiety, net its empi r ica l" su r face . " Such a def in i t iona l s t ra t egy concurs with a commonobserva t ion t h a t th e phenomena denoted by these concepts of tenoccur beyond th e consc iousness of th e ac to rs . In pa r t i c u l a r th econcepts of c r i s i s and i n s t ab i l i t y r e f e r to the con t rad ic t ions

- I am fu l l y aware t ha t the t ask of def in ing of a norm t h a tcould be used in th e determinat ion o f i n s t ab i l i t y i s complex andone can always be accused of a rb i t r a r ine s s .8


13/64

between s t ru c t u ra l pr inc ip les on th e systemic and /or l i f e -wor ldl e v e l s . ~ I s h a l l employ th e concept of c r i s i s to s in g l eoccurrences of such con t rad ic t ions whereas th e concept ofi n s t a b i l i t y wil l be reserved fo r a s e r i e s of c r i s e s which occurp e r s i s t e n t l y , r e s u l t i n g from t he ch ron ica l ly unresolvedcon t rad ic t ions . Socia l unres t , d i s t u rb an ces of soc ia l o rde r ,c onf l i c t s between soc ia l groups , e t c . a re emp i r i ca lman i fe s t a t i o n s of th e systemic and /or l i f e -wor ld c r i s i s and /ori n s t a b i l i t y . S t a b i l i t y charac te r izes a soc ie ty whose systemicp r i n c i p l e s (1) do n o t co n t r ad i c t each o t h e r o r (2) a re e a s i l yt r ansformed i n to new p r in c ip l e s o r ( 3 ) , a t l e a s t , a re f l e x i b l eenough to so lve emerging c r i s e s , wi t h b u t , however, v io l a t i n g th ei d e n t i t y p r i n c i p l e of th e sys tem.

For example, on th e l ev e l of l i f e -wor ld " the I t a l i a n c r i s i s -consc iousness , a consc iousness t h a t spans th e p o l i t i c a l spect rum,r e v e a l s a dramat ic sense of always being on th e verge of co l l apseand fragmentat ion" (Wagner-Paci f ic i 1986:22) . The ques t iona r i s e s , t h e r e f o r e , whether th e I t a l i a n soc ia l system is r idden bycon t rad ic t ions between th e p r in c ip l e s of th e system and /or l i f e -world and its f r eq u en t p o l i t i c a l c r i s i s a re symptomatic ofi n s t a b i l i t y or , r a t h e r , an i nhe ren t ly s t a b l e sys tem hasdeve loped , on th e sys temic l eve l , ' a p r i n c i p l e a l lowing fo rf requen t co l l ap s e s of government as rou t ine phenomena. I am

~ H a b e r m a s d e f i n e s such i ncompa t ib i l i t y of sys temicp r i n c i p l e s as c r i s i s ; I would su g g es t to de f ine it as a source ofi n s t a b i l i t y .


14/64

inc l ined to accep t th e second i n t e rp re t a t i on . - By c o n t r a s t , onecan argue t h a t in the Pol i sh People ' s Republic i n s t ab i l i t y wasendemic s ince incompat ib i l i t i e s (cont radic t ions) be t .een var iousp r in c ip l e s on both l e v e l s , cont inued to be p l e n t i fu l andenduring.

I I I . Mechanisms o f c r i se s and sources of i n s t a b i l i t y .

There are t h ree major idea l ( in th e Weberian sense) types ofmechanisms of soc ia l c r i s e s and, r e s p ec t i v e ly , t h r e e majorsources of soc ia l i n s t a b i l i t y . They inc lude : (1) con t rad ic t ionsof th e systemic l e ve l , (2) in te rna l con t rad ic t ions of l i f e - . o r l d ,and (3) con t rad ic t ions occurr ing be t .een the system and l i f e . o r l d . Of course , t he re a re sources of t ens ion and c r i s e s insoc ia l systems othe r than the con t rad ic t ion between sys temic

-For a s imi l a r conclUSion, though phrased in a d i f f e r e n tlanguage see Tar ro . (1980). The Economist ' s ana lys t s concludet ha t : "There is nothing more s t a b l a than I t a l i an i n s t a b i l i t y .But po l i t i ca l s t a b i l i t y is not th e same as government s t a b i l i t y ,. h i ch i s . h a t I t a ly n o . needs" ("Tha I t a l i an Economy," 1988:34).Within th e model proposed he re , po l i t i ca l s t a b i l i t y ch a r ac t e r i ze sth e systemic l a v e l , . h e re a s government i n s t a b i l i t y i s observedwithin the l i f e -wor ld .

The concept of con t rad ic t ion belongs proper ly to l og ic andr e f e r s to propos i t i ona l con ten t s of s ta tements . Here it isapp l ied t o tha l og ic of soc ia l sys te. . and due to th e complexi tyand fuzz iness of such sys t e . s lo ses some of its c l a r i t y . In myin ten t ion it r e f e r s to th e i ncompat ib i l i t i e s of r u l e s ,p r i n c i p l e s , premises , e t c . of both th e systemic and l i f e - . a r dl eve l s of soc ie ty . Such co n t r ad i c t i o n s mani fes t themselves inac t ions of soc ia l groups , espec ia l ly c l asses . However, some(usua l ly systemic) con t rad ic t ions a re of ten masked throughv a ~ i o u s mechanisms of ideologica l mys t i f i ca t ion and do not reachth e consc iousness o f soc ia l ( indiv idua l o r co l l ec t ive ) ac to rs .

10


15/64

p r i n c i p l e s , but th e l a t t e r seem to be respons ib le fo r most of thesevere c r i s e s and are , the re fo re , the fundamental source ofsoc ia l i n s t a b i l i t y . I t should be a primary t a sk of soc ia lsc iences to i den t i fy such con t rad ic t ions and r econs t ruc t themechanisms of c r i s i s and i n s t a b i l i t y spr inging from them.

Since th e systemic l eve l of each soc ia l format ion i scomposed of th ree bas ic i n s t i t u t i o n a l do .a ins : (1) economy, (2)p o l i t i c s , and (3) cu l tu re ( i t s i n s t i t u t i ona l dimension) ,in t rasys temic con t rad ic t ions ( t ens ions) have two bas ic types :(1) those occur r ing in s ide of one of th e t h ree subsystems ( i . e . ,i n s t i t u t i o n a l domains l i s t ed above), and (2) those occurr ingbetween t he se th ree SUbsystems. I have at tempted to i den t i fy th efundamental con t rad ic t ions of each domain i n the i dea l model ofth e communist system descr ibed in sec t ion V. Contradic t ionsoccurr ing between d i f f e r e n t subsystems, fo r example betweeneconomy and p o l i t i c s , a re c ha ra c t e r i s t i c of a l l complex soc ia lsystems and are extens ive ly discussed in the soc ia l sc i ences .Merle King observes t ha t "chronic p o l i t i c a l i n s t a b i l i t y i s afunct ion of th e con t rad ic t ion between th e r e a l i t i e s of a co lon ia leconomy and th e po l i t i ca l reqUirements of l ega l sovere ignty amongth e Lat in American s t a t e s " (1976:138). In ac tua l ly ex i s t ingsoc ia l i sm the con t rad ic t ion between th e l og ic of (communist)p o l i t i c s and th e log ic of economy is pa r t i c u l a r ly pronounced. AsRothschi ld put it:

throughout th e Sovie t Union ' s East Central Europeanempire , we witness th e exqu i s i t e i rony of a c l a s s i c Marxiancon t rad ic t ion between a see th ing socioeconomic subs t ruc tu reand an oss i fy ing po l i t i ca l super s t ruc tu re . I t i s d i f f i c u l t11


16/64

to e ~ a g g e r a t e th e po ten t ia l c r i t i c a l nature of t h i scon t rad ic t ion (1989:220) .

In h is 1982 essay , Andrew Arato app l ied a "Marxis t c r i t i c a lsoc io logy to those s oc i e t i e s t ha t u se a vers ion of H a r ~ i s m ast he i r "ideologyU of l eg i t ima t ion" (1982:196). He t ransposedSta rnberg ' s , Habermas 's , and Offe ' s ana lys i s of th e r e l a t i o n sh i p sbetween th e major i n s t i t u t i ona l domains -- economy, p o l i t i c s , andcu l tu re -- as found in advanced cap i ta l i sm, to h is inves t iga t ionof th e ac tua l ly ex i s t ing soc ia l i sm. he put it:

Given th e pos s ib i l i t y of th e func t iona l primacy of t he th reesoc ia l spheres , exchange (economy), coerc ive r e l a t i o n sh i p s(bureaucracy) and p o l i t i c a l choice (normat ive s t r u c t u r e s ) ,Offe def ines cap i ta l i sm as th e primacy of exchange economyover bureaucracy and th e normat ive sphere; presumably hewould n ot objec t i f one defined s t a t e soc ia l i sm as th eprimacy of an admin i s t ra t ive ly o r bureaucra t i ca l ly conceivedp o l i t i c a l domain over both th e economy and th e normat ivecu l tu ra l sphere . (201-2)The enr ichment of t h i s p ic tu re of th e two a n t i t h e t i c a lformat ions, capi ta l i sm and s t a t e soc ia l i sm, by th e i n t roduc t ionof th e two subtypes of cap i ta l i sm, l i be r a l and advanced, r ev ea l sth e homology


17/64

Economy

Pol i t i c s Cul tu re

Advanced cap i ta l i sm, in which a l l th ree domains seem to achievean unprecedented , though not p e r fe c t , pa r i t y (a conclusion sharedby such dive rse th inker s as Habermas and Daniel B e l l ) , in t u rn ,can be presented l i ke t h i s : 10

Pol i t i c s ...........- ..... Economy ....~ - .......Cul ture

And f i na l l y , communism (or ac tua l ly ex i s t ing soc ia l i sm) in itscanonical vers ion can be port rayed as :

P o l i t i c s

Economy

1.000aniei Bell summarizes h is book in th e fol lowing way: "Theargument e labora ted in t h i s book i s t h a t th e t h re e rea lms -- th eeconomy, th e p o l i t y , and th e c u l t u re -- a re ru l ed by con t ra ryax ia l p r i n c i p l e s (1976:xxx) . This not ion of th e d is junc t ionof rea lms i s a gene ra l , t h e o re t i c a l approach t o th e an a ly s i s ofmodern soc ie ty" (1976:14). Runciman goes even fu r the r , cla imingt h a t in a l l s o c i e t i e s - the re a r e a s . any dimensions of soc ia ls t ruc tu r e as t ha re are d i s t i nc t i ve forms of power and th esanc t ions on which it r e s t s - th e economic, th e i deo log ica l andth e coerc ive . The th ree are always mutual ly in te rdependent , butthey a re never wholly reduc ib le to one another" (1985:3) . EvenMiliband, working within a Marxis t framework, emphasizes th ean a ly t i c a l neces s i ty of keeping t he th ree dimensions separa te .Discuss ing th e cons t i tu t ion of a dominant c l a s s in "any c l a s sSOCiety," he d is t ingu ishes ..th e means of produc t ion ," " the means

. of s t a t e adminst ra t ion and coerc ion, and .. th e means offcommunication and consent"


18/64

There e x i s t s , however , y e t another model of s t a t e soc ia l i sm,proposed, fo r example by th e Pol i sh maverick Marxis t , LeszekNowak. In h is model the th ree sys temic domains a re very c lose lyin te r twined o r , r a t h e r , meshed t oge the r . Actual ly ex i s t ingsoc ia l i sm, ca l led by NONak ..th e one-momentum soc ie ty , " i s ,according to him, based on

th e combinat ion of th e exp lo i t a t ion , oppress ion and mentaldominat ion over th e same major i ty of people by th e sameminor i ty o f them. The th ree forms of domination of one manover ano ther one -- the ,economic , p o l i t i c a l , and s p i r i t u a l ,a re n ot sepa ra t ed , b ut jo ined . The c l a s s ty ranny reachesits apogee in such a s o c i e ty , whatever its i deo log ica l s e l f i de n t i f i c a t i on Nould be (1983:183) .

Nowak's model can b e , perhaps , i l l u s t r a t ed by th e fo l lowingequat ion :

Pol i t ics=EconomyeCul ture

Leszek Nowak's model of th e merged pol i t i c a l -economic c u l t u ra l publ i c domain, t hus pos tu la t ing th e emergence of a newtype of soc ia l r e a l i t y , seems to approximate b e t t e r the "ac tua l lyex i s t ing soc ia l i sm" then does th e model Nhich por t r ays t h i sformat ion as a s o r t of a mirror image of cap i ta l i sm, as sugges tedby Arato&& and (Ni th in a l imi t ed f i e l d of comparison) by Stark.&Z

&&Habermas seems to agree Nith t h i s conclus ion . He observest h a t : lOIn bureauc ra t i c soc ia l i sm c r i s i s t en d en c i e s a r i s e from th eplanning admins t ra t ion , as they do in cap i ta l i sm from th e marketeconomy, as soon as th e admin is t r a t ive , o r th e economic,r a t i o n a l i t y of ac t ion o r i e n t a t i o n s comes i n to con t rad ic t ion withi t s e l f through unintended systemic e f f e c t s " (1982:282).14


19/64

One can plaus ib ly argue t h a t a f t e r th e r i s e of Communism bothsystems moved along diverging paths of development: capi ta l i smtowards increased separa t ion of and growing competi t ion betweeneconomy, p o l i t i c s , and cu l tu r e ; Communism (or ac tua l ly ex i s t ingsoc ia l i sm) towards an a lmost p e r fe c t merger of the th ree domains-- a t o t a l i t a r i a n order envisioned by Leszek Nowak as th eu l t imate fa te of humanity. In th e second phase , in Polandroughly between 1956 and th e beginning of th e 1980 's , th etendency to merge i n s t i t u t i ona l domains in Communism was hal tedo r slowed down y et not reversed .

The merger of p o l i t i c s , economy, and c u l tu r e , suggested byNowak's model i s , however, never per fec t . Let me, t h e re fo re ,examine in some de ta i l th e an a ly t i c a l p o s s i b i l i t i e s offe red by amodel which does separa te ( a t l e a s t i n i t i a l l y ) p o l i t i c s , economy,and cu l tu re .

~ 2 S t a r k summarizes th e methodology employed in h is work inth e fo l lowing way: liThe purpose of th e he ur i s t i c model ofmirrored oppos i t ion ( s t r e s s - J .K . ) presen ted he re h as been tograsp , in a s i n g l e framework, th e d i s t i n c t i v e fea tu res of th ec a p i t a l i s t and s o c i a l i s t i n t e rna l l abor market" (1986:503) .The most dec i s ive re j ec t ion of a p o s s i b i l i t y of comparat iveana lyses of democrat ic capi ta l i sm and ac tua l ly eMist ing soc ia l i smcan be found in Jadwiga Sta n i s z k i s ' s Ontology of Socia l i sm, inwhich she s e t s o ut to prove t h a t th e "conceptual ca t eg o r i e sdeveloped fo r th e c iv i l i z a t i ona l and p o l i t i c a l r e a l i t y of theWest" a re not app l i cab le to soc ia l i sm due th e "ontologica ls pe c i f i c i t y of soc ia l i sm as a formation" (1989:1) .

15


20/64

v. Pr inc ip les and con t rad ic t ions of th e th ree i n s t i t u t i ona ldomains of th e communist system ( including Poland).

In addi t ion to var ious con t rad ic t ions and t ens ions ar i s ingbetween the th ree major i n s t i t u t i ona l domains, t ha t i s economy,p o l i t i c s , and cu l tu re ( i t s i n s t i t u t i ona l dimension) , each i sf raught with i n t e r n a l con t rad ic t ions . The systemic p r i n c i p l e sand fundamental systemic con t rad ic t ions within th e th ree majori n s t i t u t i o n a l domains of th e communist system can berecons t ruc ted as fa l lows.1.Economy.In h is 1982 a r t i c l e , Arata promises to " s ing le au t one essen t i a laspec t" of " the system con t rad ic t ion behind th e economicd i f f i c u l t i e s " plaguing th e s o c i a l i s t s t a t e s , y et he ends upanalyzing twa con t rad ic t ions . F i r s t , he observes , th efundamental con t rad ic t ion of th e economy i s one 'of th e plan withi t s e l f , as t he se l f -con t rad ic t ion of planning r a t i ona l i t y"(1982:206) He desc r ibes t h i s con t rad ic t ion in th e fa l lowing way:

The mare it (a t o t a l ly cen t r a l i z ed command system - J .K. )a t tempts to br ing under its con t ro l soc ia l and economicdysfunc t ions due to a b i z a r r e combination of absence y e tsuperabundance of in fo rmat ion , th e l e s s its ab i l i t y todiscover th e ac tua l needs of th e papu la t ion and to processth e inc reas ing , uncr i t i c i zed volume of informat ion from itsextended subs id iary organs (1982:206).Then he conc ludes t h a t the probl em i s n a t anI y t h a t ofinformation/collMlunication U s ince l i the plan i s unavoidablyaf fec ted by var ious p r i o r i t i e s adopted fo r th e r e s o lu t i o n ofc o n f l i ~ + s , " i.e., by po l i t i ca l fac to rs .

16


21/64

I t should be, t he re fo re , ~ n ~ l y t i c ~ l l y produc t ive to

do. .in a f s a c i a l i . t econo.y . The f i r s t i s between th e Pr inc ip leof Centra l ized B u r e ~ u c r ~ t i c Control ~ n d the Pr inc ip le ofD e c e n t r ~ l i z e d " ~ r k e t . The second i s between t he P r inc ip le ofP o l i t i c ~ l Control and t he P r inc ip le of Econo. ic Autonomy. Ani d e ~ l c ~ p i t a l i s t economy i s b ~ s e d on th e second pr inCiples ine ~ c h p ~ i r ; i d e ~ l communist economy i s founded on th e f i r s tpr inCiples . The cr i s s -c ross ing of these two s e t s of pr inc ip lesy ie lds th e fol lowing t ~ b l e :

TABLE 1

, IAUTONOMOUS I CONTROLLED IBY POLITICS II II II1 I 2 ,I I3 4, III,IMODEIOF COORDINATIONI IIDECENTRALIZEDI,CENTRALIZED

Dis t inguishing between two c o n t r ~ d i c t i o n s , oppo.ed to th ecommonly noted con t rad ic t ion betw. .n th e planned/coMaand economyand th e m ~ r k . t econa .y , op.n.t h . w ~ y fo r more prec i . et y p o l 0 9 i z ~ t i o n of . ad . rn .conomic .y.t.... Although t h . r e i. noeconomy in t o d a y ' . world t ha t would per fec t ly ~ p p r o x i . a t e one ofth e four i dea l typ i d .n t i f i ed in the t a b l . , it . . . . . t ha t th eA"'lIf"'ican l tCana.y can b . placed somewhere in f i e ld 1 , th e J ~ p ~ n e s e and South Kor.an economies in f i e l d 3 , and th e e c ona . i e . of th eac tua l ly e ~ i s t i n 9 s o c i ~ l i s m in f i e l d 4.

Th. t ~ b l e a l low. ~ l s o fo r a s y s t e m a t i z ~ t i o n of d i f f e r e n t17
http:///reader/full/Econo.ichttp:///reader/full/econa.iehttp:///reader/full/Econo.ichttp:///reader/full/econa.ie


22/64

types of reforms at tempted in th e s o c i a l i s t coun t r ies . Therewere reform programs t ha t pos tu la ted a move from 4 (economy basedon th e P r in c ip l e of Cent ra l i zed Bureaucra t i c Control and th ePr inc ip le of Pol i t i c a l Control) to 3 (economy based on th epr inc ip le of Centra l ized Bureaucrat ic Control and the pr inc ip leof Economic Autonomy). Such a model would involve a cen t r a lplanning i n s t i t u t i o n , coord ina t ing a l l (or a lmost a l l ) economica c t i v i t i e s , but such cont ro l would be based exc lus ive ly oneconomic ra t iona l i ty_ Arato desc r ibes t h i s type of reformideology as the one t h a t "banks on th e fu l l . s c i en t i za t i on of th eex i s t ing i n s t i t u t i o n a l network of planning" (1982:207) .

There were reform programs emphasizing th e neces s i ty of as h i f t from 4 to 2 (economy based on th e Pr inc ip le of P o l i t i c a lControl and th e P r in c ip l e of Decentral ized Market>. WlodzimierzBrus, in h is works from th e 1970 ' s , propagated such a so lu t ion .This reform ideology was founded on an assumption t h a t th eeconomy should be con t ro l led by p o l i t i c s , but by democrat ic ,p l u r a l i s t i c p o l i t i c s , not cen t r a l i z ed ; it pos tu la t ed th e"democrat izat ion of p o l i t i c s " r a t h e r than th e "depo l i t i za t ion ofeconomy" (Dabrowski 1989:104).&3

Vet most reform programs and i deo log ie s were based on anassumption t h a t it i s poss ib le to i n s t i t u t e re fo rms t h a t wouldbegin to t ransform th e economy from 4 to 1 (economy based on th eP r in c ip l e of Decen t ra l i zed Market and th e Pr inc ip le of Economic

&3Recently Brus came up with s e l f - c r i t i c i s m , acknowledgingt ha t th e democrat izat ion of p o l i t i c s cannot s u f f i c e t o reforms o c i a l i s t economy (1989, pa r t i c u l a r ly page 269).18


23/64

Autonomy) without , however, ar r iv ing the re . Such so lu t ionsre t a ined some (unspeci f ied) degree of cen t ra l i za t ion of economyand some (a l so unspeci f ied) degree of p o l i t i c a l co n t ro l overeconomy. 14

Economic r a t i o n a l i t y based on t h e P r in c ip l e of Centra l izedBureaucra t ic Control does no t al low fo r th e a r t i c u l a t i o n , l e ta lone r e s o lu t i o n , of i n ev i t ab l e c onf l i c t s between va r ious u n i t spa r t i c ipa t ing in th e economic process . In order to deal wi thsuch c o n f l i c t s p o l i t ic a l r a t i o n a l i t y is invoked. I t c a l l s fo rco n s t an t ad jus tments of economic r a t i o n a l i t y , no t only due to th epo l i t i ca l r a t i o n a l i t y ' s ro l e as a l og ic used to re so lve s o c i a lc o n f l i c t s , but a l so due to its ro l e as the log ic main ta in ing andj u s t i fy ing th e p o l i t i c a l s t a t u s guo. The s i n g l e cen t r a lbureaucracy must the re fo re opera te according to a mixed log icfounded on two separa te r a t i o n a l i t i e s ; a small wonder t h a t itsplans co n s i s t en t l y f a i l to work.

The su r roga te so lu t ion of a l l t he se con t rad ic t ions(pa r t i cu la r ly th e con t rad ic t ion be tween 'po l i t i ca l and economicr a t i ona l i t y ) i s th e ex i s t ence of th e second economy and blackmarke t .1 . I de f ine su r roga te s o lu t i o n s of c r i s e s as suchs o lu t i o n s t h a t do no t remove one of the con t rad ic t ing p r i n c i p l e sof th e system or land t h e l i f e - w g r ld , nor do they t ransform th e

141n China , fo r example, nthe e l i t e s most committed topromoting economic reform have . .emingly concluded t h a t t h i sr eq u i r e s cons t ruc t ion of a more ra t iona l i zed and l i b e r a l b u tstill undemocrat ic p o l i t i c a l system" (Halpern 1989:152) .

1BFor a comprehens ive d e f i n i t i o n of second economy see Stark1989:137.

19


24/64

ex is t ing pr inc ip les in to new ones in such a way as to make th ereemergence of c r i s i s in th e same s t ru c t u ra l loca t ion imposs ib le .

P a r t i a l and i l l - d e f i n e d economic reforms do not remove th ebas ic systemic con t rad ic t ions of th e s o c i a l i s t economy, t hus theydo not remove one of th e pr imary sources of soc ia l and p o l i t i c a li n s t a b i l i t y of th e whole systems. They Merely o f fe r su r roga tes o lu t i o n s , which of ten preven t t h i s i n s t a b i l i t y from beingpermanent ly f e l t and ar t i cu la t ed on th e l eve l of l i f e - w o r ld , t husperpe tua t ing an i l l u s ion of s t a b i l i t y (o r to be more prec i se : ani l l u s ion of th e lack of i n s t a b i l i t y ) .

The above ana lys i s revea l s t h a t a t l e a s t one of th efundamental con t rad ic t ions of th e economic domain does no t r e s u l tfrom a c lash of two (or more) economic p r i n c i p l e s , but from th ein t rus ion of a po l i t i ca l pr inc ip le ( the P r in c ip l e o f P o l i t i c a lControl) i n t o t h i s domain. The r e s u l t can be i n t e rp re ted as acor robora t ion of both Nowak's model ( in which p o l i t i c s andeconomy i n t e rpene t ra t e each other ) and t he se t heor i es whicheMphasize th e primacy of p o l i t i c s over economy.

Another mani fes ta t ion of th e po l i t i z a t i on of economy is th enon-exclusive (it'is n ot c l e a r who is th e owner) , non t r a n s fe ra b l e , and non- inhe r i t ab le cha rac te r of proper ty underac tua l ly ex i s t ing soc ia l i sm. Stan i szk i s , who analyzed t h i sproblem in d e t a i l , p e rce i v es it as a major source of economicf a i l u r e s of soc ia l i sm (1987, 1989) .2 . P o l i t i c s .This domain is r idden by two homogenous co n t r ad i c t i o n s . One

20


25/64

a r i s e s between th e Pr inc ip le of Author i ta r ian ism and th ePr inc ip le of Democracy and the o t h e r between th e P r in c ip l e ofTota l i t a r i an Penet ra t ion and th e Pr inc ip le of Civ i l Libe r ty .These con t rad ic t ions are l og ica l ly sepa ra t e though s o c io lo g i ca l l yi n t e r tw ined . The former r e f e r s to th e def in i t ion of th esovere ign sub jec t of p o l i t i c a l dec is ions ( i . e . , who r .u les) ; th el a t t e r to th e scope of pene t ra t ion of th e p o l i t i c a l domain i n toth e c i v i l and p r iv a t e domains ( i . e . , where a re th e l i m i t s to th es ta ta ) . a . ..

Actual ly ex i s t ing soc ia l i sm is based on th e Monopoly ofpo l i t i ca l power by a s ing le cen te r . a.? The crea t ion of more thanone cen te r of power (p o l i t i c a l plura l i sm) s i g n i f i e s th e change ofth e sys temic pr inc ip le and th e end of t h i s format ion . The r e c e n tin t roduc t ibn of p o l i t i c a l plura l i sm (summer-winter of 1989) inPoland, Hungary, GOR, and Czechoslovakia must be i n t e rp re ted asth e end of th e format ion of "ac tua l ly ex i s t ing soc ia l i sm," " s t a t esoc ia l i sm," "communism," Dr however we c a l l it. Themonopol iza t ion of power in communismlsocial ism was well analyzedwithin th e t o t a l i t a r i a n paradigm which, desp i te its obvioususefulness in prov id ing us with a c l e a r model of th e communistpo l i t i ca l domain in its S t a l i n i s t phase , was r a t h e r poor ly

a."This d i s t i nc t ion of fundamental an a ly t i c a l s i g n i f i c an ce isof ten neg lec ted in th e ana lys iS of po l i t i ca l sys tems . For aseminal discuss ion of t h i s problem see Hayek (1960:103-17) .Kraus and Vanne.an , working from a s imi l a r i n tUi t ion , claim t ha t :" I t i s e s se n t i a l to di s t ingu iSh th e power of th e s t a t e (scope inmy language) from th e power of th e o f f i c i a l s who s t a f f it (who inmy language)" (1985:11) .

&?See St rze leck i (1981a; 1981b) .21
http:///reader/full/Vanne.anhttp:///reader/full/Vanne.an


26/64

equipped to grasp th e d y n a m i ~ s of th e s t a t e - s oc i e tyre l a t ionsh ips . The P a r t y - s t a t e ' s monopoly of power was neverp e r f ec t . Moreover, it i s prec i se ly such imper fec t ions whichc o n s t i t u t e th e necessary ( though n ot s u f f i c i e n t ) cond i t ion ofsoc ia l dynamism i n the communist system. Among th e sev e ra l newparadi"gms of ana lys i s which deal wi th t h i s dynamism, th e mostproduct ive prove to be those which con ta in a conceptua l iza t ionand ana lys i s of th e mechanisms of co-op ta t ion , corpora t i sm, andp a t r o n - c l i en t r e l a t i o n sh i p s , i.e., th e mechanisms which prov idesu r roga te s o lu t i o n s to economic, p o l i t i c a l , b u t a l so c u l t u ra lcrises . :a . 3 .Cul tu re ( i n s t i t u t i ona l aspec t ) .The fundamental con t rad ic t ion in t h i s domain e x i s t s between th eP r in c ip l e of Total Monopoly of th e media , der ived from th epo l i t i ca l r a t i ona l i t y of th e sys tem, and th e P r in c ip l e of th eFreedom of In format ion , p a r t i a l l y d ic ta t ed by economicr a t i o n a l i t y bu t a l so re f l ec ted in th e P.olish l i f e -wor ld as one ofth e most cher i shed soc ia l i d e a l s .

I t i s within th e domain of c u l t u re t h a t t h e co n t r ad i c ti o n sbetween th e pr inCip le s of th e system and th e p r i n c i p l e s of th el i f e -wor ld a r i s e . This i s a r e s u l t of th e double cha rac te r oft h i s domain, whose i n s t i t u t i p n a l dimension belongs to th e

:a.-The l i t e r a t u r e i s r ap id ly growing. See , fo r example ,Sampson (19S5-S6) fo r an overview, Hanki (19SS), S tan i s zk i s(19a4) , Chi ro t (19aO) and r ecen t l y Ost (19a9) . For a very u se fu ly e t b r i e f discuss ion of th e concept of corporat i sm see Cohen andPavoncel lo (19S7) . The new i n s t i t u t i o n a l i sm , a paradigm r ecen t l y" i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d " by Nee and Stark ( l9S9) , exp l i c i t l y andc re a t i v e l y concen t ra t e s on such i s s u e s .

22


27/64

systemic l e v e l , whereas its symbolic dimension belongs to th el eve l of l i f e -wor ld . For example, in Poland, due to a highdegree of monopolizat ion of th e media and preven t ive censorsh ip(a t l e a s t un t i l 1976) , th e communist regime was able to con t ro lwhich con t rad ic t ions and c onf l i c t s of th e systemic l eve l could bea r t i c u l a t e d within th e publ ic domain of th e l i f e - w o r ld . Theimperfect ion of Par t y - s t a t e ' s con t ro l stemmed from th e f a c t , t h a tth e pr iva te domain with its family t r a d i t i o n s , fo re ign r ad iobroadcas t s , and occas iona l ly Sunday mass sermons had a d i f f e r e n tdynamism, con t r ibu t ing to th e Pol i sh p u b l i c - p r iv a t esch izophren ia .& One may argue, however, t h a t many momentoussoc ia l and p o l i t i c a l i s sues had not been a r t i c u l a t e d a t a l l orwere a r t icu la ted in ways advancing th e P a r t y - s t a t e i n t e r e s t sprec i se ly because they were banned from th e publ ic domain and th efami ly d inner t a b l e was an inadequate p lat form to debate them.Moreover, th e regime 's s t ra t egy was n ot simply pass ive , i.e,based on a se lec t ion and e l imina t ion oT the i s sues debatab lewi th in th e publ ic domain. I t was a l so ac t ive in the sense t h a tth e regime committed cons iderable resources to th e reshaping ofth e di scourse of publ ic d e b a ~ e , concern ing , fo r example, suchi s sues as na t iona l i de n t i t y o r th e grounds of p o l i t i c a ll eg i t imacy . The r e s u l t s of my ana lys i s presen ted so fa r a re

& ~ e e , fo r example, Stefan Nowak (1981), Wnuk-Lipinski(1982) , Marody (1988) . According to Marody, th e s i t ua t ion i schanging r ecen t ly (before 1989 - J.K.> s ince no longer " theax io log ica l s epa ra t ion of publ ic and p r i v a t e ro l e s i s ac tu a l l y i d e n t i f i a b l e with the d iv i s ion in to p r i v a t . and publ i cdomains in l i f e . To the con t ra ry , recen t y ea r s have seen th e twosp h e res of s o c i a l l i f e in te rmingle a t a growing r a t e lt (1988:109) .

23


28/64

summarized in Table 2.TABLE 2

FUNDAMENTAL CONTRADICTIONS AND THEIR SURROGATE SOLUTIONS IN THE THREE DOMAINS OF POLISH SOCIAL SYSTEM I I FUNDAMENTAL I SURROGATE II I CONTRADICTION I SOLUTION I I tI I P r in c ip l e of Second economy,I I Cent ra l i zed black marketI I Bureaucra t ic Contro lI I versusI P r in c ip l e of

IECONOMY Decent ra l ized MarketII P r in c ip l e ofI Pol i t i c a l Contro lI versusI P r in c ip l e ofI Economic Autonomy

S I I IU I P r in c ip l e o fB I Author i t a r i an S t a t e corpora t i sm,S I Control soc ia l corpora t i sm,V I versua p a t r o n - c l i en tST P r in c ip l e ofDemocracy r e l a t i o n sh i p s ,av e r t y e t i l l e g a lE IPOLITICS appos i t i on ,M I P r in c ip l e of humanizat ionS I Tota l i t a r i anI Penet ra t ion versusPr inCip le ofI Civ i l L iber tyI

III CULTUREIII

IP r inc ip l e of MonopolyI of th e Means o fI CommunicationI versusIP r inc ip l e of Freedo .I of So c ia lI COlllmunication::lO,

I II Independent I publ i she ra ,c l andes t ine and III Church-sponsored l e c t u re s , a r t sh o "s , II thea te r p r o d u c t i o n s , 'I e t c . I

::IOFor a d e t a i l ed examinat ion of th e ques t ion o f c u l t u ra lfreedom aee Goldfarb (1982) , "ho by and l a rge subsc r ibes to th emodel of "mir ro r images" of ac tu a l l y ex i s t i n g soc ia l i sm anddemocrati .c c.api tal ism. In th e farmer c u l t u re is co n s t r a i n ed byp o l i t i c s , in th e l a t t e r by economy (market demands).

24


29/64

An impor tan t conclusion of t he ana lys i s summarized in th e abovet a b l e i s t h a t both in economy and in cu l tu r e th e f i r s t p r in c ip l e si n the i d e n t i f i e d p a i r s of p r in c ip l e s ( re spec t ive ly ,cen t r a l i z a t i o n and monopoly of communication) o r ig in a t e with inth e realm of p o l i t I c s . This i n d i ca t e s t h a t th e boundar iesbetween th e th ree i n s t i t u t i ona l subsys tems in th e ac tu a l l yex i s t ing soc ia l i sm a re ill def ined . This , in t u r n , l e ads to ahigh degree of in te rpene t ra t ion of th e subdomains ( thussuppor t ing N o ..ak ' s model> but , s ince it i s t he log ic of p o l i t i c st h a t i n t e r f e r e s with t h e l o g i c s of economy and c u l t u re , th e"mirror" model of Arato , S t a rk , and Goldfarb i s a l so p a r t i a l l yconf irmed.

I t must be a l so remembered t h a t u n t i l 1989, th e r eg i me ' sperformance was guided predominant ly by th e f i r s t p r i n c i p l e s ineach p a i r (such as th e Pr inc ip le of Cent ra l i zed Bureaucra t i cContro l or th e P r in c ip l e of To t a l i t a r i a n P e n e t r a t i o n ) . Thesecond p r in c ip l e s (such as th e P r in c ip l e of Economic Autonomy o rth e P r in c ip l e of Democracy) can be cons t rued a s t he idea l (andpermanent ly unrea l i zed) parameters of th e new system i n t o whichth e o ld system would have been t ransformed had it not been fo rthe ex i s t ence of th e first p r i n c i p l e s in each pa i r . The secondp r in c ip l e s were a l so a r t i c u l a t e d i n the l i f e -wor ld a sa sp i r a t i o n s , th e guiding i d e a l s of th e populace (D r itss u b s t an t i a l p a r t s ) . The ex i s t ence of th e "second" p r i n c i p l e swith in th e s o c i a l f i e ld of th e sys tem, which was predominant lyguided by th e " f i r s t " p r i n c i p l e s -- co n s t i t u t i n g c o l l e c t i v e l y th e

2S


30/64

sy s t em ' s i den t i ty p r in c ip l e -- and th e unresolved con t rad ic t ions between them led to th e emergence of th e vas t a rea o f s o c i a l l i f e b u i l t on su r roga te s o lu t i o n s , such as th e black market , p a t ro n - c l i e n t ( co rpora t i s t ) p o l i t i c a l arrangements o r c landes t ine publ ishing houses .

VI.Li fe-wor ld : sources of c r i s i s and i n s t a b i l it y .

The complexi ty of l i f e -wor ld in a l a rge modern soc ie ty i s overwhelming; it comprises mul t i tudes of subdomains d i f f e r i n g from each othe r along sev e ra l dimensions . For example , t h e subdomains may d i f f e r from each othe r according to t h e i r degree of a r t i c u l a t i on (everyday knowledge versus phi losophy) ; o r t h e i r sub jec t -ma t t e r (household economy v e r su s r e l i g i o n ) . 2 ~ There i s no room here to engage in a fu l l inves t iga t ion of t h i s complexi ty . A s imple typology was suggested by Habermas in h i s 1982 discuss ion with h is c r i t i c s , in which he div ides l i f e -wor ld i n to t h r ee subdomains: (1) c u l t u re , (2) SOCiety, and (3) persona l i ty (Habermas 1982:278-81; a l so 1987:119-52) . 1 .Cul tu re (symbolic aspec t ) . The fundamental prob lemat ic of c u l t u re i s t h e i s s u e of coherence. Incoherence o f t h e cu l t u r a l dimension of l i f e -wor ld is

21Berger and Luckmann, fo r example, d i s t i n g u i s h four l e v e l sin th e l i f e - w o r ld , inc lud ing (1) language and vocabulary , (2)pro to -sc i ence of "proverbs, moral maxims, and ""ise aayings ," (3)e x p l i c i t t h e o r i e s , and (4) symbol ic universes ""hich "a re bodiesof t h e o re t i c a l t r a d i t i o n t h a t i n t e g ra t e d i f f e r e n t prov inces o fmeaning and encompass th e i n s t i t u t i o n a l order in a symbolict o t a l i t y "


31/64

experienced by people as something undes i rab le i f notunbearab le . 22 Therefore , a soc ie ty whose l i f e -wor ld i s permeatedby incoherence i s in c r i s i s ; and i f such a cond i t ion p e r s i s t itbecomes a source of i n s t a b i l i t y .2.Soc ie ty .The fundamental prob lemat ic o f soc ie ty i s the i s sue o f soc ia lorde r . The s h o r t - or long-term lack of soc ia l order i s of t endefined in th e s o c i a l sc iences as synonymous with c r i s i s ori n s t a b i l i t y . Within th e model I develop here th e lack of ordercan be one of th e symptoms of c r i s i s o r i n s t a b i l i t y . Thediscuss ion of va r ious mechanisms maintain ing soc ia l orde r underth e Uactual ly ex i s t ing soc ia l i sm" is badly neglec ted . In myr ecen t ly completed study of po l i t i ca l l e g i t i m ~ c y in Poland of th el a t e 1970 ' s I argue t h a t l eg i t imacy i s only one of manymechanisms sus ta in ing soc ia l order o r simply th e ex i s t ence ofsoc ie ty (w e must admit t h a t some d iso rder ly s o c i e t i e s p e r s i s t dueto a complex combination of coerc ion , f e a r , apathy and perhapsmany othe r fac to rs ) .23 3 .Per sona l i ty .There i s a growing r e a l i z a t i on a.ong soc ia l psycho log i s t s ,

22See , fo r example, Fernandez (1987:67) on inchoa teness ,Wnuk-Lipinski (1982) and Marody (1988) on s o c i a l schizophrenia ,o r Haber_as (1982 and 1987) on anomie.2 ~ A m o n g severa l noteworthy a t t empts to deal wi th t h i scomplex i s sue I would s ing le out th e works of Krzysztof Nowak'son no - a l t e r n a t i v i t y (1988) , Sta n i s z k i s ' s on r ep res s ive to le rance(1984) , Liehm's on soc ia l contract" (1983), Paku l sk i ' s oncondi t iona l t o l e ~ a n c e (1986) and Grzegorz E k i e r t ' s (1988) , John

H o f f m a ~ ' s (1984) , and Mira Marody's (1987) essays conta in ingsyn the t ic ana lyses of th e problem.27
http:///reader/full/factors).23http:///reader/full/factors).23


32/64

ps yc h ia t r i s t s , and psycho- and soc io - the rap i s t s t h a t manypersona l i ty di so rde rs (or t he i r aspec t s) have t h e i r roo t s incu l tu ra l incoherence andlor soc ia l d iso rder . Due to th el imi t a t ions of space l e t me j u s t emphasize th e s ig n i f i c an ce oft h i s problem and its almost t o t a l neglec t in Eastern Europeans tud ies . 34

VII . System versus l i f e -wor ld : a des tab i l i z ing re l a t ionsh ip .

The i n t e r r e l a t i o n sh i p between th e systemic and- l i fe -wprld l e v e l sof soc ia l r ea l i t y has been thoroughly s tud ied by s o c i a ls c i e n t i s t s . as Among th e impress ive a r ray of people and i d ea s ,would l i ke to s ing le ou t th e work of Murray Edelman on th emys t i f i ca t ions of American p o l i t i c s and th e manufactur ing ofpo l i t i ca l quiescence and Steven Lukes ' t h ree dimensional view of

Z 4 Habermas recogn izes th e i s sue in (1982:279) . I have merelysketched severa l problems of th i s . domain in my two presen ta t ionsa t th e 44th and 46th Annual Heetings of th e Pol i sh I n s t i t u t e ofArts and Sciences of America. A paper presen ted by twopsychologis t s a t th e se s s ion co-organized by me during th e 1988Meeting, confirmed my i n t u i t i o n s and theor iz ing t h a t many mentalhea l th problems of Pol i sh immigrants in th e United Sta t e s( espec ia l ly paranoid d i s o r d e r s ' r e s u l t from t h e i r e a r l i e re ~ p e r i e n c e s under th e U a c t u a l ~ y e ~ i s t i n g soc ia l i sm" in Poland(Kawecki and Salus 1988) .

3 -c l a s s i c a l s t u d i e s and grea t s tuden ts in t h i s f i e l d i nc lude ,fo r example, H a r ~ on ideology, f e t i s h i z a t ion and f a l s econsc iousness in l i be r a l cap i ta l i sm; Weber an th e P r o t e s t an te th ic and th e r i s e of cap i t a l i sm; Durkheim on soc ia l func t ions ofr e l i g i o u s ideas and th e i n t e r r e l a t i ons h ip between organ ic andmechanical s o l i d a r i t y ; Mannheim on ideology and utop ia ;Malinowski or. i n t e g ra t i v e func t ions of m a g i ~ and r e l i g i o n ; Pare toon r es idues and d e r iv a t i o n s , Gramsci an c u l t u ra l hegemony, andHabermas on sys temat ica l ly d i s t o r t e d communication.

28

I


33/64

power. 36 Both i den t i f i ed and analyzed a range of s t r a t eg i e s ofmanipulat ion used by th e powerful to prevent systemiccon t rad ic t ions from emerging as symbols , id e , o r i s sues in th el i f e -wor ld .

Eastern Europe and th e Sovie t Union provide t h e p e r f ec tl abora tory s e t t i ng fo r th e ver i f ica t ion of t h e i r i d . a s .Communist regimes committed enormous r e .ources to achievecu l tu ra l hegemony in the coun t r ies they con t ro l . Symbolicmanipulat ion was perhaps th e most iMportant . ech .n ism used byt he se regimes in t h e i r e f f o r t s to . ch ieve soc ia l s t a b i l i t y

,

through c u l t u ra l hegemony. Implementat ion of t h i s mechanismresu l t ed however in counte rac t ions by a t l e a s t . o . e segments ofth e popula t ions which led to Sta te -soc ie ty conf ron ta t ions on manyl e v e l s of l i f e -wor ld . The case of Poland i s perhaps th e mostconspicuous s in ce fo r many yea rs ( espec ia l ly in th e l a t e 1970's)th e s t rugg le between th e s t a t e and the ,popu lace was fought i n thehighly v i s i b l e domain of u l t imate na t iona l symbols . A completeana lys i s of t h i s symbolic conf ron ta t ion would have to inc lude anassessment of th e key dimensions of th e p o l i t i c a l f i e l d , such asth e power b of th e a c t r r s , i.e., t he i r po ten t i a l power. Dueto t h e c o n s t r a i n t s of s p ac . a br i e f p i c t u r . of th e s i t u . t i o n int h i s r espec t must s u f f i c e . In coun t r ies ru led by Communists, th e

265ee Edelman (1971; 1988) and Lukes (1974) ; but a l so Gaventa(1980) fo r an . x c e l l e n t app l ica t ion of Lukes ' s framework in h iss tudy of th e Appalachia .29


34/64

means of produc t ion , th e means of communicationZ?, and th e meansof coerc ion are t i gh t ly contro l led by a s ing le p o l i t i c a l e l i t e .Due to the scope and depth of t h i s cont ro l th e r u l e s of th ep o l i t i c a l game in these coun t r i e s a r e qua l i t a t i ve ly d i f f e r en tfrom th e p o l i t i c a l r u l e s of th e Western democracies . Even inPoland, where the s i t ua t i on was e ~ c e p t i o n a l due to th e dominantpr iva t e ownership of land by peasants and th e i n s t i t u t i o n a lindependence of th e Cathol ic Church,28 th e powar poten t i a l of th es t a t e remained vas t ly super io r t o t ha t of th e o ther ac tors in thepubl ic domain. But was such an e ~ t e n s i v e power d i f f e ren t i a lt r ans l a t ed i n to th e acqui s i t i on and maintenance of l eg i t imacy byth e regime? O r, using Gramsci ' s te rminology, was t he Pa r ty-s t a t e ' s p o l i t i c a l dominat ion tu rned i n to or complemented byc u l t u r a l hegemony?

A br i e f e ~ a . i n a t i o n of John Paul II's v i s i t to Poland must

27In Poland of th e 1970 '5 , th e Church did not have access toTV or r ad io . In 1974 th e of f i c i a l press had 3005 pe r i od i c a l s anda t o t a l c i r cu l a t i on of 41 mil l ion copies , inc luding 10 mil l iond a i l i e s . The Cathol ic press ( re l a t ed to though no t alwayscon t ro l l ed by th e Church hierarchy) had t h r e e weekl ies and 23o ther per iod ica l s with a t o t a l c i r cu l a t i on of 300,000 (1 copy fo revery 120 Catho l i c s ) . The Cathol ic press no t r e l a t ed to th eChurch hierarchy (and of ten c lose ly fol lowing th e o f f i c i a l l i neof th e p a r t y - s t a t e ) , had one da i ly and f i ve weekl ies and t o t a lc i r cu l a t i on of 270,000 (Spotkania , No.2, January 1978).

28The s i tua t ion as fa r a s th e means of produc t ion a reconcerned can be descr ibed as an a lmost t o t a l monopoly, for themajor i ty of land in Poland i s con t ro l l ed by pr iva t e fa rmers .They do however depend on th e s t a t e in a l l aspec t s of th eproduc t ion proces s , inc luding supp l ie s of f e r t i l i z e r s andfodder , funds ( a l l banks a re n a t i ~ n a l i z e d ) and s a l e s(d i s t r ibu t ion is con t ro l l ed by th e s t a t e ) .ZOn th e d i s t i nc t i on between p o l i t i c a l dominat ion andc u l t u r a l hegemony see , fo r example, Gramsci (1971:55, f . n .5 ) .

30


35/64

s u f f i c e in place of a more thorough ana lys i s of hegemonics t r a t eg i e s of mys t i f i ca t ion employed by th e reg ime and th ecounterhegemonic s t r a t e g i e s of demyst i f ica t ion used by th eCathol ic Church and th e organized opposi t ion in th e 1 9 7 0 ' s . ~ o

In th e 1970 's , th e publ ic d i scourse of th e Pol i sh Peoples 'Republ ic propagated th e ex i s t ing po l i t i ca l order , b ut th e shapeof t h i s order was ambiguously por t rayed . The ambigui ty wasach.ieved by cons tan t ly swi tch ing ( through t ime and space) th eemphasis between th e elements in such pa i r s of values ascent ra l i sm - democracy, hie ra rchy - eg a l i t a r i an i s m,patr io t ism/nat ional ism - in te rna t iona l i sm. Such ambigu i ty ,sus ta ined . in ceremonies and r i t u a l s , i s a p o l i t i c a l a s se t . Anau tocra t i c r u l e r of t en needs , espec ia l ly a t t imes o f c r i s i s , topresen t himself as a champion of democracy. When such a needa r i s e s , an appropr i a t e aspec t of th e symbolic system i st emporar i ly s t r e s se d . However, when th e ru l e r needs to a s s e r th is power, th e p r i n c i p l e of cent ra l i sm i s symbol ica l ly invoked.Such t ac t i ca l symbolic ope ra t ions a re e a s i e r t o r e a l i z e when th ecaremonial system is ambiguous. Thus th e ambigui ty permeat ingPol i sh publ ic l i f e in th e l a t e 1970 's (and see . ing ly a l soea r l i e r ) did not r e s u l t merely from a discrepancy betweeno f f i c i a l and opera t ive values and p r i n c i p l e s o f th e reg ime, i.e.,from a discrepancy between theory and p ra c t i c e . I t i s a l so .aproduct of th e incoheren t charac te r of th e o f f i c i a l d iscourse ,

~ O I presen t a fu l l - l e n g t h an a ly s i s o f these s t r a t e g i e s inKubik (1989a). For my ana lys i s o f th e Pope ' s f i r s t v i s i t toPoland see Kubik (19B9b).
http:///reader/full/sustained.inhttp:///reader/full/sustained.in


36/64

which was based on two syndromes of values: communist ands o c i a l i s t . ~ I am not sure i f t h i s ambiguity was de l ibe ra te lyproduced and sus ta ined by th e mass media propagandist and pageantmasters . I t was, though, po l i t i ca l l y exped ien t . The major i ty ofth e populat ion bel ieved in some s o c i a l i s t i de a l s , hence throught h i s symbol ical ly invoked ambigui ty , which blu r red th ed i s t i nc t ion between socia l ism and Communism, th e a u thor i t i e smanaged to cons t ruc t some aura of s o c i a l i s t l eg i t imacy fo r t h e i rcommunist prac t i ces .

Whereas th e main hidden func t ion of th e o f f i c i a l ceremonia lwas to produce and maintain its own ambiguity(Communism/social ism), th e main func t ion of th e Church 's and th eoppos i t ion ' s ceremonies and demonstra t ions (such as th e Pope ' sv i s i t ) appears to have been th e uncoupl ing or des t ruc t ion oft he se p o l i t i c a l l y expedien t hybr ids . Through its ceremonies th e

~ J a n St rze leck i recons t ruc ted th e main fea tu res ofcommunism, through a de ta i l ed ar.a lysis of th e o f f i c i a lj u s t i f i ca t i ons fo r th e cen t ra l i za t ion of power in Poland. Thepower of th e cen te r (omnicenter - as St rze leck i ca l l ed i t ) waspresented in these t e x t s as s e l f - exp lana to ry fo r f i v e reasons .The cente r was (1) th e only guardian of th e communis t / soc ia l i s tidea , (2) th e p e r f ec t and th e most r e l i a b l e t oo l of itsr e a l i z a t i on , thus a l so (3) th e most p e r fe c t and consc ien t iouscustodian of th e publ ic ggod. Moreover , s in ce th e cen te r wasab le to iden t i fy in th e most comprehens ive


37/64

s t a t e t r i ed to publ i c ly demonst ra te and t hus r e in f o r ce suchp r in c ip l e s as democrat ic cen t ra l i sm, s o c i a l i s t p a t r i o t i s m , orpa t r i o t i c i n t e rna t iona l i sm. The independent demons t ra t ions andth e Church ' s ceremonies undermined th e s t a t e ' s monopoly of th eceremonial use of publ ic spaces and chal lenged t hose hybr ids .

John Paul II's v i s i t to Poland in 1979, was th e s ing le mostimpor tan t f ac to r undermining th e o f f i c i a l e f f o r t s to r edef ine th ena t ion ' s l i f e - w o r ld . The Pope re inv igora t ed in massive publ icceremonies th e symbols of th e Pol i sh na t ion , Catho l ic i sm, andc i v i l soc ie ty which were accepted as genuine foci ofi de n t i f i c a t i on fo r a l l s t r a t a and c l a s se s of th e SOCiety,including th e workers . Poles r ea l i z ed t h a t t h e i r nat iona lcommunity can be def ined out s ide of th e communist s t a t e . Underth e impact of th e Pope ' s v i s i t Pol i sh workers (o r a t l e a s ts i g n i f i c a n t segments of t h i s c l a s s ) achieved a considerab ledegree of se l f - i den t i f i ca t i on a s members of a wider "imaginedcommunity" organized around such read i ly acceptable symbols asth e Pope , th e Black Madonna, th e Catho l ic Church, and a commonna t iona l h e r i t ag e Cas def ined by th e Church and th e oppos i t ion) .This r e a l i z a t i on cons t i tu ted a s i g n i f i c a n t s tep toward afo rmula t ion o f programs of reforms developed by S o l i d a r i t y in1980-81.

Another outcome of th e Pope ' s homecoming was th e end of th eP a r t y - s t a t e ' s monopoly over publ ic d i scourse in Poland. ManyPoles r ea l i z ed o r were reminded t h a t non-Marxis t di scourse s dide x i s t and could be used e f f e c t i v e l y to a r t i c u l a t e and analyze

33


38/64

p o l i t i c a l , s oc i a l , and even economic problems. Since 1945, th eregime appropr ia ted Marxism and soc ia l i sm, turning th e l a t t e ri n to a hybr id of Communism/socialism. Members of th e opposi t ionopt ing fo r unambiguous forms of socia l ism were f ind ing itd i f f i c u l t to express workers ' gr ievances and problems withoutusing th e "new-speak" of th e o f f i c i a l d o m . ~ z The Pope, in h isspeeches and sermons, put fo r th conceptual and symbolic t o o l st h a t f ac i l i t a t ed th e dismant l ing of th e o f f i c i a l hybrid ofCommunism/socialism. Once t h i s happened, th e P a r t y - s t a t e ' sc la ims to l eg i t imacy and au thor i ty l o s t any remainingc red i b i l i t y . The values and p r i n c i p l e s which thus fa r wereusua l ly l abe l led "soc i a l i s t , " the re fo re assoc ia ted in th e popula rmind, even i f vaguely , with th e "soc i a l i s t s t a t e , " were nowplaced in the con tex t of Catho l ic soc ia l doc t r ine . For example ,th e newly r esu r rec ted Pol i sh S o c i a l i s t P a r t y , ~ ~ s t a t ed in th eprogrammatic dec la ra t ion of November 1987:

Ninety-f ive years ago th e Pol i sh S o c i a l i s t Par ty (P .P .S . )was formed, organizing Poles in th e s t rugg le fo rindependence and soc ia l j u s t i ce Forty years ago, th eCommunists destroyed th e d e . a c ra t i c s o c i a l i s t movement.Many s o c i a l i s t a c t i v i s t s died in Pol i sh and Russian j a i l s Today, on th e anniversary of th e Pa r i s Convent ion, we a re

~ Z S e e , fo r example , th e interview with Robotn ik ' s e d i to r s inTygodnik Sol idarnosc , no. 2 , Apri l 10, 1981. By making humanwork one of th e priDe sub jec t s of h is sermons (he developed t h i stheme in h is encyc l ica l Laborem Exercens (On Human Work) fromSeptember 14, 1981), th e Pope showed t h a t t h e re was a non-Harxis tdiscourse in which important soc ia l and p o l i t i c a l problems couldbe a r t i c u l a t e d in what was widely perce ived as moral lyunambiguous te rms.~ ~ P . P . S . , by f a r th e s t r a n g e s t par ty of th e Pol i sh l e f t , wasde jure incorpora ted i n to th e (pro-Moscow, Communist) Pal i shUnited Norkers ' Par ty and de f ac to des t royed in December 1948.

34


39/64

r es to r ing th e P .P .S . , being fu l ly aware of th e t r a d i t i on wein tend to c a r r y o n . We r e a l i z e t ha t th e word "soc ia l i sm,"which has been co-opted by th e communists , i s cu r r en t l yunpopular in Pol i sh soc ie ty .Our program wil l be sub jec t to modif icat ion over t imeand responding to th e r e a l i t i e s of our s i t ua t ion . We d o n ' twant to base it on an i n f l e x ib l e doc t r ine . We don ' t want tot i e ourse lves to any spec i f i c philosophy, al though we admitt ha t we fee l more a f f i n i t y with th e soc ia l t eachings of th eChurch, more spec i f ica l ly with those of John Paul I I , thanwith M a r x i s m . ~ 4 The Pope ' s v i s i t to Poland i l l u s t r a t e d with an unprecedented

c l a r i t y th e major dilemma faced by Gie rek ' s pageant maste rs andmedia expe r t s : no matter how hard they t r i e d t o cons t ruc t theimage of a secu la r , s o c i a l i s t Second Poland, th e a l t e rna t iveimage, founded on an a l toge ther d i f f e r e n t s e t of values andsymbols , kept re-emerglng in the publ ic domain. Was t h i sa l t e rna t ive image invented anew by some people or was it are f lec t ion of a sub ter ranean c u l t u ra l r e a l i t y scarce ly touched bycommunist so c i a l i z a t i o n ? Turne r ' s concepts of soc ia l c r i s i s ,r o o t paradigms, and soc ia l drama help to deal wi th such aques t ion .

VII I . Victor Turner ' s concepts of soc ia l c r i s i s ! roo t paradigm,and soc ia l drama and its app l ica t ion to th e Pol i sh s i t u a t i o n .

Key symbols and dominant values or core be l i e f sys tems - as R.Lane c a l l s them (1972:164), which c ons t i t u t e th e most sacreddomain of a given c u l tu r e , can be di s t ingu i shed from othe rsymbols, Signs , and values in two ways. They e i the r permeate a l l

~ 4 T y g o d n i k Mazowsze no.228, November 18, 1987.35


40/64

o r most domains of soc ia l l i f e (Lane 1972:164, Lasswell 1952:14)andlor become ac tua l i zed in moments of ind iv idua l or soc ia lc r i s e s . 3D In cu l tu ra l anthropology th e idea of c e n t r a l i t y ofcer t a in symbols in a given c u l t u re has been e labora ted by SherryOrtner (1972) and Victor Turner , who focu .ed on - what he ca l l ed

ro o t paradigms, which:a r e t h e c u l t u ra l t r ans l i t e ra t i ons of gene t ic co d e . -- theyrep re sen t t ha t in the human ind iv idua l as a c u l t u ra l e n t i t y ,which th e DNA and RNA codes rep re sen t in him as a bio log ica le n t i t y (1974:67) .

Sui tab le cond i t ions (or ext raordinary occas ions - as Gerth andMi l l s have ca l led them), under which t he se roo t paradigms canemerge i n to th e su r face of soc ia l l i f e , a re c rea ted by indiv idua l(Berger 1974:18) or soc ia l c r i s e s (V.Turner 1974:64) . Analyzingva r ious soc ia l c r i s e s , Victor Turner came up with a model ofl imina l phases of soc ia l l i f e , ' in which everyday, normal ru l e s ofsoc ia l s t ru c t u re a re suspended. In such a n t i - s t r uc tu r a l pe r iodsnew or a l t e rna t ive models o f soc ia l arrangements a re t e s t e d orgenera ted . 3 Moreover, per iods of l imina l i ty of t en enab le peopleto l ea rn and specu la t e about what t h e i r c u l t u re s consider to be

3SSe rth and H i l l s , for example c la im, t h a t : "Cer ta in emblemsand modes of language not only recur in given soc ia l con tex t s ,but seem to be more impor tan t to th e maintenance of c e r t a i ni n s t i tu t i o n s , t o th e i r cha ins of a u t h o r i t y . I 1 These symbolscan be repea ted every day by everyone, or they may be used onlyon ex t raord ina ry occas ions and by spec ia l ly au thor ized persons"(1953:276>.3 The f a c t o r s of c u l t u re a re i so l a t e d , in so fa r as it isposs ib le to do t h i s with mult ivocal symbols and thenrecombined in numerous, of t en grotesque ways, gro tesque becausethey a re ar rayed in terms of poss ib le and f an tas ied r a t h e r thanexperimental combinat ions" (1982:27>.

36
http:///reader/full/crises.3Dhttp:///reader/full/crises.3Dhttp:///reader/full/crises.3D


41/64

the "ul t imate th ings" (Turner 1974:2S9).The concept of soc ia l drama helps to unders tand ' t he c rea t ive

cha rac te r of symbolic ac t ion and its ro l e in th e reso lu t ion ofsoc ia l c r i s i s . Socia l drama occurs when a l a t e n t soc ia l c onf l i c tmani fes t s i t s e l f publ ic ly in a dramatic farm; when l i the peacefu lt enor of r eg u l a r , norm-governed soc ia l l i f e i s in te r rup ted"(Turner 1982:93) .37 The soc ia l drama has t yp i c a l ly four mainphases: Breach , C r i s i s , Redress , and Solu t ion . The l a s t phasecan t ake twa a l t e rna t ive farms: reconc i l i a t ion or "consensualrecogni t ion of i r remediab le breach" (Turner 1982:92) . As "al imi t ed area of t ransparency in the otherwise opaque su r face ofregu la r , uneventful soc ia l l i f e " (Turner 19S7:93>, th e soc ia ldrama enab les th e observer to perce ive th e ru l e s of i n t e rac t ioncode o r the pr inc ip les of soc ia l s t ruc tu r e . Moreover, th e soc ia ldrama has soc ia l ef fec t iveness , i.e., it t ransfo rms th e ru l e s ofth e soc io -cu l tu ra l game. This may be achieved through var iousr ed res s ive mechanisms, fo r example informal media t ion anda rb i t r a t i on or l ega l ac t ion . The r ed res s ive ac t ion , however,of t en invo lves r i t ua l i za t i on and of ten takes the farm o f publ icceremonies and r i t u a l s , s ince in such publ ic " spec tac l e s" bath

a 7 Victo r Turner developed th e concept of s o c i a l drama whenhe rea l i zed t ha t c l a s s i c s t ruc tu ra l - func t iona l ana lys i s would n atal low him to account fo r th e complexi ty and r i chness of th eNdembu soc ia l l i f e , espec ia l ly fo r one of its "most a r r e s t i n gproper t i e s" , t h a t i s th e propensi ty toward c o n f l i c t " (Turner1974:33) . Moreover, h is subsequant research has convinced himt h a t social dramas , with much the ' same temporal and processuals t ruc tu r e as [he l de tec ted in the Ndembu case , can be i so la t edfo r study in s o c i e t ie s a t a l l l e v e l s of sc a l e and complexi ty"(1974:33) . The concept of s o c i a l drama i s obviously modelled upona cu l tu ra l farm of the s tage drama (Turner 1974:32).

37
http:///reader/full/1982:93).37http:///reader/full/1982:93).37


42/64

th e ru l e s of soc ia l game and t h e i r t ransformat ions can be c lea r lydemonstrated to l a rge audiences.

The h i s t o ry of th e Pol i sh l i f e -wor ld in th e l a s t tNO decadescan be eas i ly i n t e rp re ted as a s e r i e s of Turnerian s o c i a l dramasor soc ia l c r i s e s Nith enormously e labora ted l imina l phases . Themost impressive soc ia l dramas Nere John Paul II's f i r s t v i s i t toh is na t ive land in 1979 and th e Nhole S o l i d a r i t y pe r iod . On bothoccas ions , soc ie ty rehearsed an a l t e rna t ive s o c i a l order andr ec rea ted a symbolic universe Nhich s t r ipped th ecommunis t / soc ia l i s t d i scourse of a l l c red i b i l i t y and v a l i d i t y . ~ Up un t i l th e l a t e 1970 's , th e a u thor i t i e s succeeded in makingsome i n roads i n to th e domains of na t iona l i de n t i t y ( fo r e ~ a m p l e , by endoNing th e not ion of s o c i a l i s t pa t r io t i sm Nith somec r e d i b i l i t y , a t l e a s t fo r some segments of th e soc ie ty ) andp o l i t i c a l l eg i t imacy ( fo r e ~ a m p l e , through por t ray ing themselvesas champions of s t rong s t a t ehood) . Yet a f t e r th e Pope ' s f i r s tv i s i t and th e subsequent Sol ida r i ty per iod - th i s pa ins t ak ing lyerec ted mythological i l l u s i on co l l apsed .

The concept of soc ia l drama makes it e a s i e r to pinpoint tNO

~ I n soc io log ica l t e rms, th e Pope ' s v i s i t resu l t ed in th ereneNal of Nhat Simmel ca l l ed s o c i a b i l i t y , i.e., a mode of soc ia lex i s tence in Nhich people " fee l t h a t th e format ion of a s o c i e tya s such is a value" (1950:42-3) . Mil l ions of peop le , organizednot by th e s t a t e agenc ies , but by volun tee rs d i r ec t ed by Cathol ica c t i v i s t s , came toge ther in an order ly fash ion to c e l e b ra t e" t h e i r " Pope. They rea l i zed t h a t c i v i l organ iza t ion of th es o c i e ty ou ts ide of th e s t a t e Nas poss ib le . This led to acons ide rab le IONering of th e b a r r i e r o f f ea r v i s -a -v i s th e s t a t eand thi! development of th e consc iousness of "N e lf c rys t a l l i z e d inth e tONering persona l i ty of th e Pope, popular ly perceived as th eonly genuine moral , r e l i g ious , and even p o l i t i c a l au thor i ty .

38


43/64

s ign i f i c a n t aspec t s of t h i s t ransfo rmat ion . F i r s t , ite s t a b l i sh e s a t heore t i ca l f'ramework which conf i rms t h a t th esymbols and values 50 p e r s i s t e n t l y upheld by th e Church and th eopposi t ion were indeed th e l a t e n t ro o t paradigms of Pol i shc u l t u re o r , a s Stefan Nowak put it (echoing Victor Turner>, theycons t i tu ted "behav iora l r eces s ive values" which a re :

worthy of study because , as with l a t e n t genes under s u i t a b l ec o n d i t i o n s , l a t e n t values can become powerful fac to rs inhuman behav ior , ac t ing on th e sc a l e of th e ind iv idua l o r th es o c i e ty . Contemporary Poland (1980-1981 - J .K.> seems top resen t i t s e l f as a case in poin t (1981:47>.Second, th e concept of soc ia l drama enab les u s to c l e a r l y

a r t i c u l a t e the d i f f e rence between th e r ea l i z ed and th e unrea l izedoutcomes of the soc ia l t ransfo rmat ion t r iggered by th e Pope ' sv i s i t in 1979 and th e s t r i k e s in 1980. Out of two poss ib le typesof Redress : pragmat ic and symbol ic , th e cons te l l a t ion of i n s id eand ou ts ide f a c t o r s f a c i l i t a t e d th e r e a l i z t i on of th e l a t t e r ; anoutcome with momentous consequences .

In th e ear ly 19705, t h e d ec i s iv e major i ty of th e Polesfo l lowed th e course of t h e i r everyday ' I i f e according to th e ru l e sof ex t e r n a l l y enforced ad jus tment . Or, in ano ther fo rmula t ion ,th e s t a b i l i t y of the l i f e -wor ld was guaranteed by th e mechanismsof cover t rep re s s iveness , an ap t phrase employed by KrzysztofNowak (1988>. At th e same t i me , th e e ~ p e n s i v e and e ~ t r a v a g a n t ceremonies , through which th e regime at tempted t o g r a f t in th epubl ic mind an image of a powerful and successful Pol i sh Peo p l e s 'Republ ic , complete ly dominated publ ic spaces throughout th ecoun t ry . Only a f t e r 1976, pa r t i c u l a r ly dur ing th e Pope ' s v i s i t

39


44/64

and on severa l occas ions during th e Sol ida r i ty pe r iod , didsoc ie ty ( represen ted by th e Cathol ic Church, organizedopposi t iona l groups , and Sol idar i ty ) come up with equa l lypowerful ceremonies , propagat ing counter-hegemonic v is ions ofPol i sh po l i ty and s o c i e ty . Thus, in the per iod 1979-1981, as i g n i f i c a n t p a r t of th e c onf l i c t between th e Pa r ty - s t a t e and th esoc ie ty , revolved around th e u l t imate symbolic i s su e s , such asnat iona l i de n t i t y and the grounds o f po l i t i ca l l eg i t imacy .

The s i t ua t ion in th e per iod 1981-1989 was d iamet r ica l lyd i f f e r e n t . The con te s t over th e u l t imate symbolic i s sues ended;th e Pa r ty - s t a t e l o s t . The more pragmat ic , "down- to -ear th" i s sues(such as the nego t ia t ion of th e ru l e s of everyday l i f e and th eregu la t ions of s o c i a l compact) re turned to th e fo re of th eco,- , f l ic t between th e s t a t e and s o c i e ty . The two poss ib l e modesof coexis tence l e f t to both s i d e s of th e c o n f l i c t were e i t h e rmutual r e j e c t i o n or th e gradual bui ld ing of a soc ia l c o n t r a c t ,even though th e regime was widely perceived as i l l e g i t i m a t e . Thef i r s t mode o f coexis tence was dominant in Poland from December13, 1981 through th e f a l l of 1988/spring 1989); th e second hasbeen c ha ra c t e r i s t i c of th e "round t ab le" per iod , beginning in th ef a l l of 1988 and con t inu ing un t i l th e presen t . In th e l a s t p a r to f t h i s essay I wil l br i e f ly and t e n t a t i ve ly t r y to examine howt h e t h e o re t i c a l model presen ted in t h i s essay can help us to dealwith the r ap id changes Poland and th e r e s t of Eastern Europe a reundergoing in r ecen t months (Apri l 1989 - January 1990) .

40


45/64

IX.Conclusions: a summary of major f indings and th e t e n t a t i veana lys i s of th e c r i s i s and i n s t a b i l i t y in th e period oft r a n s i t i o n .

Given th e pace of change in Eastern Europe i n recen t months(Summer-Fall-Winter 1989), one must exerc i se extreme cau t ion int ry ing to conceptua l ize , i n t e r p r e t , and expla in t h i s change. Yetth e t heore t i ca l exe rc i se developed in t h i s essay would be u s e l e s si f it could no t fu rn i sh us with some c lues as to how to analyzet h i s t r a ns i t o ry p e r i o d .

The major po in t s of my ana lys i s can be r ecap i t u l a t ed in th efo l lowing way.1 . I n t h e ac tua l ly ex is t ing soc ia l i sm th e re l a t ionsh ip betweenp o l i t i c s , economy, and cu l tu re (on th e systemic l eve l ) can bedef ined in two ways:

8/4/2019 "Social & Political Instability in Poland: A Theoretical Reconsideration" (PCE 1,

"social & political instability in poland: a theoretical reconsideration" (pce 1, 1990) jan kubick

Documents