Andrzej Lepper has for years been portrayed primarily as a populist, radical, folk stand or antisystem politician. However, the conversation given “Wprost (State pays, Tygodnik Wprost, Issue: 16/2006) reveals a much more structured image of its economical views. The self-defence leader himself defined himself straight as a social liberal, a supporter of the marketplace economy, but 1 in which the state actively combats excessive inequalities and supports economical development.
"Yes, I am a social liberal, I accept marketplace economy rules," Lepper declared. However, he immediately added a fundamental reservation: "I do not agree with the views of utmost liberals who accept the planet with a fistful of rich and a large group of very poor." This conviction summarized his full way of reasoning about the economy. Lepper did not question private ownership or marketplace mechanisms. On the another hand, he rejected the model in which the state remained passive against the increasing social differences. "I don't want to break off the rich, but they gotta share more reasonably than before with the remainder of society," he said.
Nor did he consider himself a communist or socialist policy. erstwhile the interviewers reminded him that Brazilian president Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva was from the left, Lepper said, "The Socialist was erstwhile he fought for power. Now it's the Social Liberal”. A minute later, he applied the same description to himself. At another point of the interview he even said, “I am a social liberal.” In an interview, he besides powerfully cut off about the idealized leftist and far-left dead president Venezuela Hugo Chávez.
The State cannot stand aside
In Lepper's vision, the state was to be an active associate in the economy. However, it was not about the elimination of the market, but about correcting its mechanisms and utilizing public institutions to stimulate growth. He peculiarly critically assessed the then model of functioning of the National Bank of Poland and the position of Leszek Balcerowicz. “In our case, president Leszek Balcerowicz has placed himself in an highly convenient position and claims that he is only curious in inflationary purpose,” he said. He accused the president of the NBP that he had “found himself behind the walls of his bank fortress” and behaved “as a state in the state”.
Lepper argued The central bank should share work not only for the stableness of money but besides for growth and jobs. He cited abroad examples, especially the American national Reserve. As he said, he meant "that the central bank should respond with the government for economical policy". He did not intend to destruct the independency of the NBP. Rather, he argued that it should be defined differently. "It is not actual that we want to limit the independency of the NBP," he stressed.
Money to work
One of the most characteristic elements of its programme was the belief that the state's financial reserves should be utilized more actively for economical development. In the interview, Lepper pointed out, among others, the NBP's revaluation reserve. "Why, if you can not use, for example, PLN 16 billion for the economical improvement of the country?" he asked. He besides talked about abroad exchange reserves. "I always thought they were needed, but they must be deposited with our banks, not abroad. They must besides service our economy," he said. At the same time, he reserved: “I will never let them to be squandered.”
His prescription was beautiful specific. The measures were intended to go to Bank Gospodarstwa Krajowego and to launch cheaper loans for young entrepreneurs, local governments and companies participating in investments co-financed by EU funds. "We must give people more money, revive interior demand," he said.
Keynesism in Lepperovian
Lepper did not hide inspiration from solutions that could be described as Keynesian. erstwhile journalists accused him of “artificial revival of demand”, he replied: “This is what dogmatic liberals say. Others call it social liberalism." In his opinion, the increase in request was to stimulate production, investment and employment. "My economical experts can give many examples, specified as Brazil, where the recovery of request has turned the economy and generated profits," he argued.
At the same time, he stated that the state should act with moderation: "Money must be done with moderation". So it was a imagination far from either classical economical liberalism or the central economy. Lepper saw the function of the state as an investor, regulator and request wizard. Stronger social policy
The second pillar of his programme was an extended social policy. The Leader of Self-defense pointed to poorness and argued that the state had a work to limit its scale. "We in terms of the size of poorness are at the grey end of the Union," he said, which was actual in the realities of the first decade of the 20th century. In his program there was clear economical protectionism, but not in the form of full rejection of abroad capital. The criterion was to be taxation integrity. erstwhile asked if the taxation would be a tool to combat abroad trade, he replied: “With him who is deceiving our country. With an honest one, no.”
Neither liberalism nor socialism
The interview cited shows that Lepper himself tried to sit between classical ideological divisions. The marketplace accepted, but demanded a stronger state. He defended private property, but criticized large inequality. He wanted to reduce any taxes and contributions, while expanding social spending and public investment. Therefore, the word "socialist" was not a random slogan in his case. He repeated them respective times in a conversation and gave him rather circumstantial content.
The marketplace is. But not the marketplace left to itself. Private property – yes. But with greater social responsibility, the richest. Independent central bank – yes. But 1 that is besides liable for economical development. Social assistance – yes. But connected to professional activation. In this sense, Lepper tried to build his own version of the 3rd way. The short word was taken by himself: "I accept the principles of marketplace economy", but at the same time opposed the planet "with a fistful of rich and a large group of very poor."
The barren criticism of Prime Minister Miller
The authentic left accuses Prime Minister Leszek Miller of accepting liberalism. In my opinion, Leszek Miller is not a neoliberal and a social liberal, and the acceptance of today's face of capitalism is due to realism. Leszek Miller is not present an uncritical supporter of the invisible hand of the market. In this view, erstwhile Prime Minister Leszek Miller is akin to the leader of the peasant self-defense of Andrzej Lepper. It is unusual and incomprehensible that the criticism of "Liberal Miller" emerges from environments that hang the late leader of the self-defense of Andrzej Lepper. It must not be that we bear the acceptance of Miller's "liberalism", while at the same time this kind of "liberalism" we accept this with Andrzej Lepper.
Łukasz Jastrzeżski
