Transformation – Poland (1980, 1989, 2004)

In Poland the biggest, most influencing changes that can be referred to are the years 1980 and 1989. Ever since the communists stole parliamentary elections in 1946 in Poland, the struggle, however non-violent, has started against the authoritarian communist government. There were three decades of civil resistance, but Polish society has started to organize and consolidate itself in a broad coalition of social forces that led to the establishment of Solidarity (Solidarność) movement in August 1980. The events directly preceding this establishment was the successful strike wave which swept Poland in the summer of 1980¹⁰. Solidarity was rooted in trade unionism and it delegitimized the communist regime by exposing its ideological claims as false. By the end of 1988, the number of strikes and protests was rising and a poor economic situation has forced communist government to re-engage with Solidarity. As a result of the discussions between the opposition and the government, an agreement was reached to hold free elections to a packed parliament in June 1989. The elections brought a decisive victory for Solidarity with the first non-communist prime minister Tadeusz

10 On Tuesday, July 1, strikes broke out in factories throughout Poland: Ursus [tractors] and Huta Warszawa [steel] near Warsaw, at Poznan (metallurgy], at Tczew (transmissions], at Mielec (aviation], at Swidnica [aviation], near Lublin (source: 1980: Poland mass strikes - Henri Simon from: http://libcom.org/history/1980-poland-mass-strikes)

Mazowiecki, heading a new government, with Lech Wałęsa who was elected president in December 1990 with a broad popular mandate to implement wide ranging economic and social reforms to stabilize the country (Bartkowski, M, 2009). That was a crucial time of significant social events, which have had essential impact on institutions of higher education. They also had a big impact on the functioning of an individual in a broader context of society but also in educational situations. As Marek Szczepanski points out this transformation process has its winners and losers. What he means by this statement is that the people who benefited from the transformation Poland went through, are all those well-educated ones, who represent younger generations, coming from bigger cities and legitimize higher competence of civilization. (Szczepanski, M, Sliz, A, 2010) Those are citizens called by Bauman ‘the tourist generation’ He writes about the dimensions of the present uncertainty:

The universal deregulation- the unquestionable and unqualified priority awarded to the irrationality and moral blindness of market competition, the unbound freedom granted to capital and finance at the expense of all other freedoms, the tearing up of the socially woven and societally maintained safety nets, and the disavowal of all but economic reasons, gave a new push to the relentless of polarization, once halted (only temporarily, as it now transpires) by the legal frameworks of the welfare state, trade union bargaining rights. Labour legislation, and – on a global scale (though in this case much less convincingly) – by the initial effects of world agencies charged with the redistribution of capital (Bauman, 1994, p. 23).

The transformations of the year 1980 were mostly related to societal transformation, introducing the ethical dimension in public and political activity and visible in the sphere of values, based on cooperation and trust to others, on the category and hierarchy of social actors. What has been achieved in Poland since 1989 centres mostly on provisions for a political democracy, the smooth expansion of small business and visibly efficient privatisation methods in the field of commerce. The changes from 1989 were more visible and to some extend shaded 1980 transitions.

Economic transformations connected with such categories as ownership, work, financial resources, etc. caused new divisions in the society which resulted from

“economic” value of an individual or a group and not from their cultural belonging (Nizińska, Kurantowicz&Ligus, 2006).

However there are two sides to the story. There are people from the older generations, with poorer education and coming from smaller towns and villages, who still seem to be deeply rooted in the socialist era. Szczepański continues to assert that those individuals can be characterised by the fear of change and a withdrawal attitude. The globalisation

and metropolisation processes that modernity offers makes them only fear the future, which becomes unpredictable, and for which they are not prepared as active participants in a new emerging Poland. However Szczepański adopts the terms of winners and losers, which has been known in sociological world, since the process of globalisation had situated itself within the social context of modern life. Castells speaks of winners and losers in the globalising process (Castells, 1998), which seems to pose grave threats to individuality and learning with its impact of vastly accelerated communication and transport networks on globally organised economic system (Evans, R, Kurantowicz, E, 2009). Those may be populations unable to access the electronic networks and education, which can be perceived as instruments of power or even simple existence in today’s world. Bauman in his Wasted Lives, speaks of the ‘forces of globalisation’

which ‘reshuffle people and play havoc with their social identities’ (Bauman 2004, p.128).

No jobs are guaranteed, no positions are foolproof, no skills are of lasting utility, experience and know how turn into liability as soon as they become assets, seductive careers all too often prove to be suicide tracks. In their present rendering, human rights do not entail the acquisition of the right to job, however well performed, or – more generally- the right to care and consideration for the sake of past merits. Livelihood, social position, acknowledgment of usefulness and the entitlement to self-dignity may all vanish together, overnight and without notice (Bauman, 1994, p. 23).

There is another phenomena associated with those transitions. It is gain and loss associated with crossing the borders, physical, cultural, emotional and the fragmentation of identity, and life inevitably connected with it. Evan and Kurantowicz put it thus:

Elsewhere in the name of globalisation and global networks, local, regional and national identities are ‘reshuffled’ and their traditions and idiosyncracies of long-standing are ‘brushed aside as irrelevant’, as language reform, language imposition, and language destruction together unfold their effects on populations and individuals. Each time an individual changes language or dialect in order to obtain a job, to qualify for a position, to enter a school; each individual who crosses physical and language borders to survive or start afresh; each and all of these aspects of translation and transformation entail – next to net gains

‘employability’, the possibilities of integration or assimilation, the incalculable cultural gains – a loss of memory, of self-expression and all that is contained in that particular voice and its lived particularity. The irony here is that learning and learning opportunities are so frequently predicated on mono-lingualism and the relinquishment of language diversity.

The above was a brief summary of the recent history of both countries, which showed that both of them share some similar historical threads, and were not free from the periods of constrains and limiting factors for the individual development. However, Ireland developed intensely much earlier and has never faced socialism or communism.

Although, whatever the barriers for individual freedom are, whether poverty or British policies imposed on the country, the wave of new neo liberal and globalising tendencies have brought new freedom as well as new challenges. Today’s Europe is not creating the idyllic island and contemporary reality is not free of challenges and dangers, which are caused by technical progress and civilizational development. Because of this as Pilch states there is a special role inscribed to education and the system of values chosen as its foundation. There is a need to formulate norms and rules, which are sufficiently general to be universally accepted. Identification and universality are the primary characteristics of a system of values for the modern individual (Pilch in Budakowska, 2005, p.34-48).

The new generation faced a wave of uncertainty, insecurity and dissatisfaction, negative feelings and disappointment. What could cause these emotions? I would like to refer back to the work of Erich Fromm and Zygmunt Bauman. However Fromm was not writing about the present situation and his writing was dealing mostly with the capitalist system in the west. His work is useful to critique all authoritarian systems. Fromm mapped the ways in which those systems were able to ‘get at’ the inner world, psyche, identity and even the unconscious. By being able to get at the unconscious, the system has strongly influenced two things. First of all, the desires of people became socially constructed and secondly the creativity, needed to initiate freedom and emancipation was also undermined

Zygmunt Bauman, David Harvey, Anthony Giddens and many other sociologists outline the historical meaning for the systemic changes introduced in Europe. Most of them, especially Bauman also deal with the psychological impact of those changes and transformations onto the human condition. Bauman discusses the lack of freedom in the communist system which oddly enough was connected with a sense of security to secure future prospects. The individual has been stripped of freedom in our understanding of this word, but the totalitarian state was also the welfare state, securing citizens their jobs, houses and retirement. No one had to worry about their qualifications, career prospects and upskilling, no one lived with the uncertainty of tomorrow or of losing a job. Even his identity and social position has been somehow granted in advance, imposed on him. There was reduced liberty and freedom, no place for individuality but on the other hand the sense of responsibility was also too much to a lesser extent. However, all the authors mentioned above have focused mostly on the

condition of the individual in the contemporary system. There is a shift in the consciously and unconsciously acquired skills. As Fromm states:

Capitalism freed the individual. It freed man from the regimentation of the corporative system; it allowed him to stand on his own feet and to try his luck. He became the master of his fate, his was the risk, his the gain. Individual effort could lead him to success and economic independence. Money became the great equalizer of man and proved to be more powerful than birth and caste (Fromm, 1942, p.52).

Being a student in HE is an important biographical turn in the course of one’s life. If an individual finds himself in a supportive environment, this sometimes may be a trigger to change, to transform (Nizińska, May 2009).