Lech Kaczyński was a divisive president, but his death unified a shocked nation. For a while. Until the decision to bury him in the Wawel Castle* was announced. Then things kicked off.
Depending on your point of view, burying Lech Kaczyński in Wawel is akin to placing James Callaghan (a decent but ultimately mediocre premier) alongside Elizabeth I, Charles Darwin and Charles Dickens in Westminster Abbey - or giving Poland's greatest post-independence president his rightful resting place in the pantheon of the Polish nation.
The fault lines are clearly defined. To generalise, to peddle stereotypes: on the one hand, TVN-watching, Gazeta Wyborcza-reading, cosmopolitan, secular, modern, tolerant, young, urban Poles; on the other, TVP-watching, Rzeczpospolita-reading, patriotic, Catholic, traditionalist, older, rural Poles.
I confess to tend towards the first group. Yet I must say that the Kaczyński twins left Poland two great legacies.
The first was knocking corruption on the head. From 1996, when Poland was first included in Transparency International's global Corruption Perception Index (CPI), to 2005, each successive government was perceived as being more crooked than the last. Post communist, post-Solidarity, post communist - things got worse and worse, reaching an apogee with the government of Leszek Millllllller and his SLD ('Stalin-Lenin-Dno' to quote graffiti of the era) cronies. The Kaczyński twins were swept to power on a mandate to stop corruption large and small. They succeeded, in that since PiS (Law and Justice) took office, Poland has been consistently moving in the right direction in the CPI. (The downside of the Kaczyńskis' 'trust no one' approach is that today, Polish bureaucrats would rather do nothing than take a decision that could remotely be construed as resulting from a backhander.)
The second was in sucking the venom out of the populist left and populist right wing tendencies in Polish society. Poland today is one of the very few EU member states not to have any nutty nationalists or wacko communists in the European Parliament. The UK has more UKIP and BNP MEPs than ones from the ruling Labour party. By bringing into a government coalition members from Samoobrona (Self Defence) and the LPR (League of Polish Families Oi!) and then letting them destroy themselves, by accident or design the Kaczynskis brought on the total destruction of the embarrassing element of Polish politics. By marrying social conservatism with economic soft-socialism, they took the wind right out of the sails of the post-communists. My hope now is that the garbage element of the political extremes does not come crawling out of the sewers to fill the vacuum left by the decimation of PiS's senior ranks.
Say what you like about Law and Justice, but they are (as individuals) decent, principled, intelligent, well-mannered. Quite a different breed of people from the boorish, self-interested, old Moscow-educated meatheads from SLD or the boorish potato-chucking nest-feathering philanderers of Samoobrona. And as for the ultranationalist element of the LPR/Radio Has-a-Snout/Gnash Dziennik crowd... I was in Powązki cemetary with my good friend and Poland's best political blogger Krzysztof (of Toyah fame) last August to commemorate the 65th anniversary of the outbreak of the Warsaw uprising. Leaving Powązki, we saw a sad-looking band of pamphleteers peddling some twaddle about the Lisbon Treaty being the work of the Anti-Christ. Krzysztof said - and quite rightly - that we have the Kaczyńskis to thank for these people being pushed out to the very margins of Polish political life.
As a counter-weight to PO (Civic Platform), PiS is the optimal opposition. The fault line is longer 'post-communist' vs 'post-Solidarity' - the post-communists have (I hope) been knocked out of contention for good as a governing party, largely through the skilful politics of Jarosław and Lech Kaczynski. I hope that PiS can re-group after this tragedy and return to being a conservative counterbalance and conscience to PO.
* He should be buried there. Lech Kaczyński himself is not worthy of Wawel. But I go along with Jarosław Gowin in that we're not just burying President Kaczyński - we are burying along with him the legacy of Katyń. In his death, he will symbolise to the ages the continuity between the massacre and today's independent Poland. Also, logistically, Powązki cemetery is, well, too narrow. I can't really see the world's leaders tip-toeing their way through the narrow corridors between the graves of Warsaw's fallen insurgents. Wawel will focus the world on Poland, volcanic ash permitting. For these reasons, I opt for - Wawel. To quote Lech Wałęsa: "The Holy Spirit hath spoken. Debate not."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
21 comments:
I can't see much sense in discussing who's worthy of Wawel and who's not. If you think about it, the only figure that does not stir controversy here might perhaps be Kosciuszko. Everyone else has been loved as well as hated by many.
The place has been designed for the legends. And I am sure Lech Kaczynski, like it or not, will remain one forever.
I have to say I find it difficult to agree. Yes, Kaczynski has been loved and hated by many, but there is no public consensus as to whether he should be buried at Wawel, a place that belongs to the nation. I'm heartened by my 80+ year old mum who, for the first time since martial law was declared in 1981, has felt strongly enough to go out and demonstrate against this ridiculous decision. If Kaczynski were to be buried at Wawel after a national debate, fair enough. But we've been told it's his family's decision. This whole shambles smacks of political point scoring and the days of meekly accepting the decisions handed down to us from on high are over.
The explanation that President Kaczyński is to be buried in Wawel was his family's decision is one of the oddest things this week. Bielan says it wasn't Jaroslaw's idea and Archbishop Dziwisz disowns it as well. The decision is not bad, in my opinion, and I don't understand why nobody wants to take responsibility for it.
As for the appropriateness of some buried in Wawel: Michał Korybut Wiśniowiecki was a crowned idiot, and August II Wettin the first to push the Polish Commonwealth into dependence on Russia.
Lech Kaczynski has yet to be evaluated by history. The fact that he was supported by less than 20% of society, and that I wouldn't vote for him doesn't mean much. Effects of certain political acts need time to be evaluated. The question whether a politician was right or wrong cannot be decided democratically.
Maja!
Public consensus? National debate? I am very sorry to be saying that, but - you must be joking. Here you've got nearly a million people having seen Lech Kaczynski on his way home; 50 thousand queueing day and night just to take a bow, and you ask for a consensus? What is that supposed to be? An OBOP survey? Or a voting on TVN24 on a Sunday morning.
Please!!!
Toyah!
Marry in haste, repent at leisure, as the przysłowie goes.
How many do you think would turn up to watch Kaczynski be buried at Wawel if it were to be held in 50 years, like Sikorski? A lot fewer, I'd imagine.
The nation's in shock and this is a purely emotional reaction to a massive national tragedy. Hell, I'm planning to go watch the funeral here in Krakow myself as it's a historic occasion after all, but that doesn't mean it's the right decision. I'll bet you could find 1 million Poles who think he should be beatified, but even that wouldn't make it right.
Poland and its people once again must live through a new chapter in their history filled with pain and sorrow. The circumstances in which the Polish political and military elite died, is unprecedented and therefore justifiable is the final resting place of the Presidential couple. I SO wished I could be part of this incredible unfolding history of Poland. So feel it, understand it, embrace it and if you are fortunate enough to live a long life, you’ll tell your grandchildren all what you saw.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/16/opinion/16tokarczuk.html
The point is that all we can do is - as you rightly say - imagine. You would imagine. That's what you'd do. And what you imagine is based on nothing but your personal feelings here and now.
And in such case, I can as well say that the emotions the millions feel - and that you look down on so strongly - are in no way worse than those that you display in your opinions.
Please, try to understand. What is happening around these days is something absolutlely unique. This is not opinion. This is fact. How can you expect that decisions so critical shoud be taken with respect to notion so weak as "divisive president"? Who wasn't? Kwaśniewski? Walesa? Jaruzelski???
Who in today's Poland is not divisive? Andrzej Wajda? Wladyslaw Bartoszewski? Was Milosz special?
Give me one name. Just one name.
And then tell me. What do we do with Wawel and other symbolic places, like Skalka, Powoazki, and some more important cathedrals? Close them down in fear of demonstrations?
Michael, I love your blog, but you're misinforming your readers. It might not be proper to argue about mr Kaczynski's merits today, but I feel you're just repeating stereotypes that are spoiling public life in this country and therefore need to be corrected on any occasion, even today.
It is DEFINITELY NOT TRUE that PiS (L&J) rule had much to do with curbing corruption. First, most anti-corruption legislation was enacted unanimously by parliament in SLD's (postcommunists') times. Second, the CBA ("Central Anti-corruption Authority"), PiS's pet project, is, statistically, hopeless in fighting corruption compared to regular police. It also proved to be extremely expensive - recent row over bonuses for CBA's officers reaching tens of thousands of pounds (average salary in Poland being about 700 pounds, before tax) is just a tip of an iceberg. Third, there's no proof whatsoever that any corruption has actually been curbed. World bank's and TI's are corruption PERCEPTION surveys, and they are as informative of corruption itself as surveys about existence of god would be about existence of god. Police and court statistics do not corroborate the view that much progress has been achieved, either.
And, which is only a side comment, but equally important, i think the Gazeta Wyborcza/TVN versus Nasz Dziennik/Trwam divide is plain wrong. Didn't you notice the cross on TVN 24's information bar ? It's been there for a week now. Modern, secular and non-engaged vision of information indeed.
If it is the legacy of Katyń, why don't we build there a collective, symbolic grave commemorating victims of Soviet murder and last week's plane crash? It could be supplemented with a special board dedicated to president Kaczynski.
I came to terms with the fact Mr Kaczynski will be buried on Wawel, I am now appalled by one thing which Stefan already mentioned - family and arcibishop Dziwisz deny putting forth the burial place. That we do not know who took this decision on behalf of Poles is, to put it mildly, unfair.
You can say PiS can be credited with eliminating populist Samoobrona and LPR from Polish political scene and I will put my oar in it and tell you from my point of view they did it instrumentally. PiS entered into coalition with both parties to pursue their plan to reshape Poland. End justified the means. During one of the debates before election in 2007 Ludwik Dorn told PiS treated LPR and SO as a tool.
And CBA is partly a political police. The most apparent example was the flawed provocation against Mr Kwasniewski and his wife. But they had their contribution to the prestiguous failure of PiS in 2007 - the case of Beata Sawicka warned many Poles that they might have been in danger. In her case the graft was less than 100,000 PLN. Some "resourceful" Poles received it as a warning sign.
Stalin, Lenin, Dno - grafitti guys didn't display much ingeniousness then. Sojusz Lewych Dochodów fits the party better.
I wouldn't identify politicians of SLD with Moscow-linked meatheads. Much of them are epigones of PZPR, but from my perspective they joined the party because they were opportunists, wanted to make careers, not because they believed in communist. They wanted to set themselves up, get the access to privileges. 20 or 30 years later they could join PiS or PO.
I believe privately many deputies of PiS were mild-mannered and clever people. But let's look at one example:
Deputy speaker Putra was survived by a wife and eight children and media report they are now destitute. Why? As it turns out the "exemplary father and husband" kept the whole money on his own bank account and his wife and nor any of his children had any access to this money. He didn't even leave any instruction in case of death.
In my much less conservative family my parents have a common bank account and I have a power of attorney to their money and they have it to mine. But we base it on trust - we know any of us will make use of it in case of emergency only - I don't mean death, but in case of accident - to pool money for a surgery quickly. Mr Putra seemed to have incapacitated his wife. This is left as a symbol of mistrust.
Toyah, I don't think any of the living and recently deceased Poles deserves a burial on Wawel. There is no such distinguished person in our country now. Mr Kaczynski died on service and was fighting for truth, but did not die defending the truth but in an accident. At least this is how young, urban, vile blogger sees it.
PiS has been successful because many Poles are conservative and have leftist economic views - but look at SLD, PiS was closer to ordinary people than tycoons from SLD.
The fault-line as drawn by PiS is Solidarność i ZOMO. I know I am biased but this is what I remember best from one of the best two years of my life.
Jan - "misinforming" = not presenting a point of view that you ascribe to.
PiS were swept to power on a wave of anti-corruption sentiment. Corruption was the number one public issue of the day in 2004/5; it has ceased to be so.
I agree that Marek Belka had begun to clean out the Augean Stables left by Milllller and his disgusting cronies (anyone remember Nauman and Łapiński?), and I agree that CBA is not the most effective use of tax-payers' money in pursuing its aims of tackling public corruption.
I disagree with your assessment of TI's surveys. Of course they are perception surveys! They do not pretend to be otherwise! Do look at TI's methodology. As I mentioned in the BPCC blog last year when the 2009 CPI came out, Her Majesty's Ambassador to Poland no longer needs to mention the 'C' word when addressing British investors. He most certainly did in 2004. In other words, it's no longer an issue; the Kaczynski twins were instrumental in that.
As to the divide, people are toning it down right now. Which is good. What I find remarkable in Poland is where that divide lies. It is far more to do with social mores than with economics.
Like in Ireland - 'whose side was your grandfather on in 1921' is more important than your stance on fiscal policy, the euro or public infrastructure.
Thanks for correcting my English. My language might be lame, but it happens that I do know what I'm talking about - research on corruption is a part of my professional life right now. TI's methodology is much criticised, in Poland and elsewhere, precisely for attempting to measure real phenomena by opinion polls. More adequate information about practices of corruption in Poland is provided by polls by Batory Foundation and CBOS - they are imperfect, too, but at least they measure actual involvement of respondents in corruption. The results did change over last years, but they are uncorrelated to political change (and uncorrelated to TI's indices).
BTW, you are incorrect when you say that corruption measurements improved during PiS rule. TI's ranks for Poland from 1998 to 2009 are as follows: 39, 44, 43, 44, 45, 64, 67, 70, 61, 61, 58, 49 (the lower the better) while CPI values are 4.6, 4.2, 4.1, 4.1, 4, 3.6, 3.5, 3.4, 3.7, 4.2, 4.6, 5 (the higher the better, scale 0-10). There's a dip in the ranking from 70 in 2006 to 61 in 2007, then to 58 in 2008 and then to 49 in 2009, but that's after PO took the power. And in 2009 Poland is still ranked 10 places lower than in 1998 (which is nonsensical in itself). When it comes to TI's index, the scores were at their lowest under PiS - 3.4 in 2005, 3.7 in 2006 (meaning most preceived corruption), and at their highest under PO 5.0 in 2009 (least perceived corruption) but still the change is insiginificant.
Could it be HM's ambassador is/was spreading false information ? There are some nice Polish idioms that describe such practices, and you could include them in your list of expressions hard to translate - "robienie wody z mógu", "dorabianie gęby"...
Jan - ignore the ranking. The number of countries surveyed has risen from 64 in 1996 - it was 85 in 1998, btw, to 180 in 2009.
The CPI values you quote demonstrate consistently worsening corruption until the 2006 survey, the first sign of improvement. Since then, the CPIs have been consistently improving.
Sir Michael Pakenham was not spreading false information! Corruption was THE NUMBER ONE issue among British investors in Poland in the early 2000s.
Returning to the question, I agree. Despite the systematic slyness of Poland's best-known campaigning newspaper and its myriad lean-tos [dobudowki] over the years, Wawel is fitting and proper - for the reasons you cite, as well as those rehearsed over the last few days in Rzeczpospolita and, for instance, on TV by Prof. Staniszkis.
That is my view, which is a view.
But I find it interesting and sad how the Wajdas and the extremely virulent demonstrators outside the Cracow curia do not admit even the potential legitimacy of viewpoints other than their own.
This divide is not going to go away in a hurry - but I do think that the metropolitan "jelity" around the Selective Newspaper are wilfully failing to see or failing to admit into debate some
important things.
Kaczyński was our democratically elected head of state. A critical counterweight in the balances of our Democratic Republic. If he were my brother I'd rather not be burying him at all but would have no qualms in exalting his good deeds to the highest, especially given the tragic and 'historic' nature of the event. I bet the thought of being buried 'na Wawelu' never occurred to either of them and if it had they would have had an embarrassed laugh about it.
studentSGH - Oh dear - quite a few comments you make are compeletely wide of the mark. I can't go over Beata Sawicka et al right now, only look forward to convincing you of some of your misapprehensions some time in the future.
However, step one is easy. The fault-line as drawn by PiS is not Solidarność i ZOMO. It's between those who don't want to forget about who and what the Zomo represented and those who want to sweep it under the table, pretend it wasn't really that bad, that they didn't have any choice, and that anyway there are other more important things to be getting on with. Think of all the teczki and evidence, much of which the latter destroyed so no one now (except those with copies in the former USSR)could find out about their actions? Oh, that sort of leads us 'nicely' back to Katyń again.
I agree, the very idea of producing a ranking based on polls is more than silly (why does TI do that ?). And as I said, change in CPI is minimal since it only grew from 3,5 to 5 on a 0-10 scale and it cannot be attributed to PiS.
My comment on ambassador is just a consequence of your remark that he changed his rhetoric as a result of PiS's alledged successes in curbing corruption. If in reality PiS was not successful in doing that, it follows that sadly mr ambassador was misinformed. (I've learned a word today).
@ Adthelad:
I will appreciate if you take trouble to put me straight at your earliest convenience :)
But you did the first steps, I hasten to respond:
1/ Beata Sawicka - what Poles wanted from PiS was to curb the corruption, theivery and other scams, but those large-scale scandals where millions were at stake, not their small sins in pile-making. This is what many pointed out in October 2007 as they diagnosed the election results. For me this reasoning is slightly angled - it implies having small sins, like taking a backhander in the amount of 500 PLN is natural and nothing wrong in the course of pile-making. I have to tell you I disagree with this view. There are many honest ways of growing rich quickly, such as stock market, but the fact probably remains.
2/ ZOMO vs Solidarność - the purport of J. Kaczynski's speech in Gdansk shipyard in September 2006 (at the height of PiS rule) was that PiS is the only party to have the right to the heritage of Solidarity movement. "If your vision of Poland is different than ours, then you are a descendant of worst symbols of communism" - he meant I guess. And the ZOMO turned out to be not even the PO politicians, but: Lech Walesa, Wladyslaw Bartoszewski and Tadeusz Mazowiecki.
I don't think the divide lies where you draw it. I think Poles agree ZOMO was not a peaceful organisation (here a word meatheads really fits). We shouldn't think what it did, it is not about sweeping their crimes (though in the light of PRL law many of their misdeeds weren't crimes despite being morally reprehensible) under the carpet, but whether we decide to make it a focal point of our identity or just a part of our history and change our approach towards forward-looking.
I could now go on about PRL, I promise to do it on my blog by the end of next week. Adthelad, you quote people who say they had no choice. Believe me, millions of people lived in PRL silently, didn't mess nor collaborate with communist party and could feel safely, cause they did their bit as good as conditions permitted and kept their mouths shut. They can't be credited with courage, but also we must not accuse them of supporting the system.
I just like winding people up - forgive me. it's perhaps not one of my most attractive attributes :))
1)That's the trouble with regard to corruption - it's not only the large and minor scale political and corporate machinations but also the day to day mentality of 'it's who you know that matters'. A hang over from PRL times, when the only way to get anything sorted was by either means of 'presents' (the scale of which varied and which in many ways were a means of expressing social solidarity and establishing a conduit of trust or mutual respect) or by contacts i.e. knowing someone, who knew someone, etc, Now it can't be said that these does not continue to exist (in countries like Germany also), and as your remark highlights, Poles were perhaps anti those who wanted to be whiter than white. Jak Kali bierze lub daje łapówkę to O.K. ..itd. Not really a very convincing stance regarding 'Polish' judgement on PiS given that the 'free' press did much to whip up this type of logic (though given Ziobro's style, they can be partly forgiven).
2. Certainly the speech in Gdańsk carries a great deal of emotional baggage, idealistic rhetoric, as well as a great deal of implicit truth. The night when Olszewski's government was overthrown probably plays a great part in how one side perceives the other and visa versa. Which of the parties is guilty of the divide you describe I'll leave up to you. (Zomo was, I thought, your synonym for 'the old system' so to go into their particulars is not entirely the point).
I know many people in PRL got on with their lives as best they could and accusing them of supporting it couldn't be further from my mind. You know the Russian saying - someone who keeps going on about the past is blind in one eye, someone who forgets about it entirely is blind in both. It's as if Poles are puting the cart before the horse by deliberately sidelining, besmirching, belittling, begrudging and disenfranchising those who are blind in one eye.
I am just malicious, I can't help it. You are forgiven Adthelad, it's a fascinating pastime activity ;-)
What you wrote about układy in PRL and "Kali's morality" plus relativism is very apt. PiS heightened the term and created a mythical UKŁAD - a network fo tie-ups between secret services, post-communist politicians, businesspeople and mob. And "Kali's morality" is a part of every party's image. But those populist are the closest to it - the biggest thing is that those who represent poor voters wallow in luxuries.
And the speech coul be interpreted in many different eyes. Past is necessary bo build identity on it, only the perception is always subjective. Thanks for the proverb, frankly speaking I haven't heard it until now.
Jan said:
it follows that sadly mr ambassador was misinformed.
Since Sir Michael Pakenham's speech about 'the C word' (it was his farewell speech to British business people in Poland before returning to the UK), there have been two more British ambassadors. Charles Crawford (today one of the UK's most accomplished bloggers) succeeded Sir Michael and was in turn succeeded by Ric Todd. I can assure you that corruption in Poland is not the same priority issue for Ric Todd that it was for Sir Michael.
As promised, despite difficulties I managed - post on PRL published - A white hole in Polis history.
Best regards!
Post a Comment