Kaja Puto: In its erstwhile studies You predicted that the president of Poland in 2025 would become an anti-system candidate and elude the conventional division of PO-PiS. This time, too, you look forward to the future. You're speculating that we're going to have a fresh double. I quote: "Confederation will be in power and Together will fight for the function of 1 of the main opposition parties".
Sławomir Sierakowski: This is of course a risky thesis, due to the fact that in the coming years many things can happen in Polish politics. But the trends we see are tectonic alternatively than casual, which is due to a better or worse campaign. Parliamentary elections in 2023 were a red card for the PiS, this year's presidential election for the KO. The force, which is on the rising wave, has a rip and feels well antisystemic social trends, is the Confederation. And on the another hand, we see a organization together, which besides fits well into this trend.
For the time being, however, Karol Nawrocki, a candidate supported by the Law and Justice, became president of Poland.
Przemysław Sadura: Karol Nawrocki became president due to the fact that he was voted not only by PiS voters but besides by Sławomir Mentzen and Grzegorz Braun. They share the conviction that they inactive have the same elites, we request a strong, assertive leader for the European Union, who, if necessary, will be willing to bend the rules, and aversion to fundamental democratic values. They share their approach to the economy – the PiS electorate is more pro-social, the Confederate electorate – partially libertarian, but besides divided. However, this is not essential and does not hinder the consolidation of right-wing narratives. In our opinion, they will dominate Polish politics in the coming years, and the centre and left will stay in the defensive.
So the coalition of the PiS and the Confederacy is simply a certainty after the 2027 election?
S.S.: Not necessarily. If the speedy elections are not reached, the Confederacy will most likely enter the Sejm with 20 percent of the support. He can act in 2 ways. Either he enters into an alliance with the PiS, or he leaves the PiS on fire, and he thinks, "There are 3 blocks, there's the PiS, there's the anti-PiS, there's besides much life, there's us." Let's let 1 or the another form a weak government and bleed out. And in a year or two, we will go to elections as the only alternate to an old rotten order and form a government, possibly even with the PiS, but already handing out cards. On the another hand, the democratic side, the only organization that can stand up as anti-systemists who have not ruled, will be Together.
However, for now, Together is fighting to cross the electoral threshold.
S.S.: It is about tendencies. So far in the crumpled region was everything that was between the PO and the PiS, and now it was the PO and the PiS that were in the crumpled zone. Of the duopol, which collected 60 percent of the voters, 30-40 percent remain, and it will be less. Of course, it takes 1 or 2 more turnovers.
P.S.: fewer people present remember that the PO-PiS duo unexpectedly swept the erstwhile division from the board into post-communists and anti-communists. But the second had solid grounds.
At moments like this, erstwhile the strategy is going to fall, fresh possibilities arise. The increase in support for Together after the presidential election – even if trace – proves it. In order to get it, Together it had to enter the way of anti-system radicalism.
Radicalism? After all, the programme together, if compared to the European left, is not extremist at all.
P.S.: That's not the point. Together it set itself in a clear contour to the duopol and the subjects heated by it. It departed from the publication on the buildings of the NRPM of the unprinted judgement of the Constitutional Court, and gave voters the knowing that the constitution or order which is governed by this constitution did not like as much as the rightists, only for another reasons. That they will not die for this constitution – they are willing to change it.
At the same time, during the campaign, Together did not focus on previously crucial topics – LGBT+ rights or refugees. The organization did not make any volts on this issue, but changed the point of gravity. She focused on economical issues, large modernisation projects.
Poland from atom, silicon and steel.
P.S.: Our erstwhile reports, but besides the investigation we do all day, show that this communicative actually responds to the needs of Poles and Poles. More and more voters, not necessarily right-wing, have the conviction that we are already a large and strong country to not only pursuit the West, but to make ourselves, set goals for ourselves. An active function of the state and major infrastructure projects is needed. The ruling coalition has no own communicative in this matter.
Together, therefore, to become an crucial opposition force, it must stay anti-systemic and align itself with the government. But at the same time, as you compose in the report, he must learn pragmatism. How to marry radicalism and pragmatism?
S.S.: This is precisely what the Confederate is presently practicing. Her electorate is dissimilar in terms of economical issues, for example, but the organization is able to convince him that any things request to be overlooked if you want to let crucial growth. For now, together, it needs to consolidate by identity. In any next step she will search coalition ability, that is, going beyond her electorate, hitting on cynical voters – those who do not vote due to values. The right can draw them together, we – the left – can't.
P.S."There must be any kind of unification on the left, due to the fact that the presidential election has shown that the electorate of the left is about 10 percent – not much, but besides a lot. In addition, part of the disillusioned voters of the Civic Coalition stay to be developed. The consequence of the elections and our investigation shows that this unification must take place on the terms of the Together. Either fresh Left talks to Together, or this unification won't happen. Of course, the desire for specified talks must show both sides.
S.S.And even if it does, together it will face another large challenge: how to last the period in which the utmost right will rule, how to prevent the PiS from closing the strategy with the Confederate, that is to avoid a script in which democracy will no longer exist. For now, the message together is: if Kaczyński comes to power, it will be your fault, the "libs". Okay, but what's next?
P.S.: And there's no answer to that question tonight.
This future, the duo of the Confederate-To-To-To-To-Be, is more clearly left-wing and right-wing – the PO and the Law and Justice have grown out of common, centre-right and post-solidarity ground.
S.S.: Political life in Poland after 1989 was a deal no right and leftbut right and wrong. It entered into a centuries-old Polish conflict between the people and elites, in which elites did not do besides much to fill these emotional divisions. Today, in the age of social media, the people co-create a media and so political message. Anti-elite narratives – primarily right-wing, but besides left-wing – are in the growth trend.
And that's what became a coffin nail for the po-pis duo? What was the drop that drowned him?
P.S.: First of all, demography. Electorate 60+ is increasingly voting for Law and Justice, the Civic Coalition has voters in the same age bracket and a small younger. And if we look at the generation of twenty-three-year-olds, depending on the gender, the Confederate or left-wing parties reign there. If the president had only chosen an electorate from the 18-29 age group, they would have gone to the second round. Sławomir Mentzen And Adrian Zandberg. This shows that an expanding group of society cannot be found in this platformiano-Pistist division.
Some explain these results with youthful radicalism.
P.S.: Voters aged 18-29 are a field goal for the fresh duopol. He tests his mobilization ability on this field before expanding to older vintages. The Confederacy has already begun this expansion – in these elections it besides convinced voters in their 30s. In a sense, it is the success of Janusz Korwin-Mikke, who has consistently walked across all divisions over the years. Together he does something akin – he sows fresh ideas. It might take a while to become mainstream.
What is the connection between this young, gaining a much larger electorate, in addition to getting bored with the fight of the PO-PiS?
P.S.: These are voters who reject status quoThey're very anti-establishment. They do not find themselves in Poland ruled not by the generation of their parents, but by their grandparents. Parents can be rebelled against, and grandparents are treated with lenient disregard. And the attitude of young people to the establishment is simply a mixture of rebellion and disregard. Young people want clear solutions, and politicians anticipate authenticity. They are besides better educated than older voters, although they besides learn from social media.
They besides share the fact that they treat Poland's membership of the Western planet as a certainty – due to the fact that they were either born in specified Poland or politically socialized. There is no unconditional love for the European Union, but it is simply a different kind of protest than the 1 in the elder electorate of PiS. Among the PiS voters, the view of the EU as a threat to Polishness and conventional household model dominates. Young people are more likely to put our economical interests first and uncompromisingly negociate our conditions with the EU. Young people do not compare the EU to the PRL, which is for them a government from the ancient past, alternatively than a mention point. They have no fear that without the EU, we are going back to the past. They feel safe and want more, they have advanced aspirations about Poland's function in the world.
Both Confederate voters and Together are well educated, alternatively surviving in cities. The opposition, which you show in the report, rules Poland – the opposition of the town-town. What is the focus of this fresh polarization?
S.S.: It depends on whether we can escape the trap in which the Polish left has always been. PPS is simply a legendary organization that never exceeded 12 percent in the election. Today, this ceiling is estimated to be 15 percent. Together – and more broadly, the left – wants to have a folk electorate and has a large-town, voters choose it for cultural reasons. If this trend continues, together it will not become an equivalent competitor to the Confederation.
P.S.I look at it differently. For this generation, freedom is simply a fundamental value. This connects them independently of sex and political views, although it is simply a freedom that is otherwise understood. For the electors of the Confederation, i.e. men above all, it is simply a "freedom from" – from external interference, the dictatorship of Europe, the oppressive state that makes you pay taxes, political correctness, etc. For voters of the left, or alternatively women, it is simply a "freedom to" – access to public services, self-fulfillment, surviving on its own terms, etc.
So this fresh dual will actually be a sex conflict?
P.S.It doesn't should be like this. The left has a more female electorate, and the male Confederation, but you can see that Zandberg reaches young men more and more efficiently, and Mentzen, as long as he does not talk about abortion and women's rights, is able to win the female electorate.
Since we are waiting for years of far right domination – what does this mean for women's rights in Poland?
P.S.: In my opinion, there is no clear answer. There are various segments in the Confederacy – this national-traditional attracts the electorate of young boys, frustrated by the fall of the patriarchate and male privileges in the conventional household model. This is little crucial for this Darwinist, or dominant section that focuses on economical issues. The Confederacy's over-expression of women's rights has always led to a decline in support. So I'm assuming he can walk distant from radicalism in this area.
Furthermore, the political emancipation of women occurred in all parties. For any time now, we have been observing the increase in sex voting strategies, i.e. "I vote for the first or youngest female on the list that suits me." This phrase did not miss the Confederacy. For a young electorate equality is in many ways a natural matter.
Your study lacked an crucial factor. How will the political scene be influenced by migrants who slow start receiving Polish citizenship? They are besides young people.
S.S.: Migrants in the first instinct usually vote for the left, in the second – they break out in the system, in the 3rd – may already be different. Remember, Donald Trump was chosen by Hispanics, among others. It can so be assumed that the first step in obtaining electoral rights from migrants is to give voters progressive powers.
P.S.: This will most likely be the case, but this will supply extra fuel for the right-wing forces. Right-wing publicists like to emphasize that the right-wing vote for the military and against it – prisoners. It is not hard to imagine that the sympathy of people with migration backgrounds for progressive forces will mobilize right-wing voters against them.
The main conclusion of your investigation is rather worrying: in Polish politics we are waiting for utmost right-wing years. How should the broad left respond to this?
S.S.: He has long faced a dilemma: to defend democracy, which means joining 1 of the sides of the PiS-KO duopol or building something of his own, but that means the governments of the PiS and the far right. I have so far judged that in Polish politics it is essential to accept that the defence of democracy with all its drawbacks makes more sense, due to the fact that its strong camp, which could gain power and self-defence democracy, will not build the left in Poland much longer. And I inactive think so.
P.S.: The Left must be united somehow. So far we have Together, which is in opposition – we have already said a lot about their future – and the fresh Left, which is in the government. In the long run, this is an insurmountable arrangement. The fresh Left should increasingly distance itself from the government, ask itself whether to leave this toxic coalition. After losing the election, it turned out that KO had no plan b and was waiting for a miracle. If fresh Left decides to stay in it, it should increasingly request that its key demands be implemented.
And going beyond the organization position – the left should make a convincing communicative about a welfare state to the degree of the 21st century. plan a young Poland in which they will be able to self-realise, which will remove problems specified as inaccessibility of housing or loans, and at the same time 1 with which they will be proud. The Left must besides perceive more to the concerns that its constituents feel – including those that pose a challenge to its values. If the electorate becomes migrantosceptic, there is no request to copy far right narratives on this issue. Unpopular demands can be silenced for any time, while at the same time strengthening e.g. migrant rights organisations. This is how I realize the pragmatism we lacked on the left so far.
**
Przemysław Sadura — habilitated doctor, prof. of the University of Warsaw. Lectures at the Faculty of Sociology of the University of Warsaw. Founder of the Field of dialog Foundation. It examines relations between the state and society in the fields of functioning of different public policies. Author of books, among others State, school, class and co-author (with Sławomir Sierakowski) of investigation Political cynicism of Poles and End of hegemony 500 plus and books A populist society.
Sławomir Sierakowski – co-founder of Political Criticism. president of Stanisław Brzozowski Association. Sociologist, publicist. He graduated from MISH at the University of Warsaw. He worked under Ulrich Beck at Munich University. He was a fellow of the German Marshall Fund, the Vienna Institute for Human Sciences, Yale, Princeton and Harvard universities, and Robert Bosch Academy in Berlin. He is simply a associate of the “Politics” team, a regular columnist of “Project Syndicate” and author of “New York Times”, “Foreign Policy” and “Die Zeit”. Together with Prof. Przemysław Sadura he wrote a book Population of populists.