💾 Archived View for library.inu.red › file › various-authors-two-articles-on-poland.gmi captured on 2023-01-29 at 14:34:24. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content

-=-=-=-=-=-=-

Title: Two articles on Poland
Author: Various Authors
Date: September 13, 1980
Language: en
Topics: 1980s, Poland
Source: Freedom, vol. 41 no. 18, September 13, 1980, page 1 and 4

Various Authors

Two articles on Poland

1. Gdansk: an eye-witness account Howard Besser and Terry Downs

This article is an attempt to discuss what we saw in several days at the

Lenin Shipyards in Gdansk.

Regular newspapers can provide the ‘factual’ account of what happened,

but certain important elements are just not discussed in them. Therefore

we don’t want to go through a day by day history of the strike, but

rather we want to write about what we, coming from a libertarian

perspective, discovered from general observations and discussions with

the workers.

According to workers’ accounts, the main (13 August) strike in the Lenin

Shipyards started quite spontaneously. Price rises had touched off

numerous strikes in other areas of the country, several of which had

been settled quickly, including previous strikes at the Lenin Shipyards.

As one worker put it, “I got up to work one morning and discovered that

the trams and buses were not working. (I later found out that this was

due to a strike). When I arrived at the shipyards, people were standing

around in small groups, talking about the latest price rises. As time

went on, the groups got larger and larger. Finally we all went to the

head of the shipyard and delegated one man to talk to the boss. The boss

asked him who he was to be talking with. He replied, ‘I represent the

free workers’ union’. When the boss said he could do nothing, we decided

to occupy the factory, and began formulating our list of demands”.

In making the list of demands, the strikers were painfully aware of

their history, one of their first demands being a memorial to those

killed in the riots following the strikes of 1970–71. They did not want

1980 to be a repeat of 1970, when the government told the rest of Poland

that the Gdansk workers were ‘hooligans, anarchists and atheists’. They

avoided any actions of violence or sabotage that might give the state

ammunition against them. The entire strike was incredibly peaceful, and

the only aggressive actions the strikers used were simply withholding

their labour and occupying factories.

As over 80 per cent of Poland is Catholic, another early demand was for

freedom of religion. “In the beginning we didn’t know who would’ support

us”, one worker told us. ‘We wanted the people of Poland to know that we

were as moral as they were, that we cared about our country and believed

in God as much as they”. Whether it was for moral or political reasons,

the people of Poland certainly did not regard the Gdansk strikers as

hooligans, but rather as heroes. In the Gdansk region, virtually

everyone, even Party members, supported the strike wholeheartedly. And

support for the strike seemed to be very strong throughout the rest of

Poland as well. As much as we have a personal disdain for religion

(particularly Catholicism) we believe that this religious feeling did

play a major unifying role in the strikes. From our point of view, the

sight of thousands of strikers saying mass together every day was not

particularly appealing, but it obviously was a major force, keeping the

strikers together and maintaining the support of the general populace.

Among other demands voiced by the strikers were those for freedom of

speech and freedom of the press. The fact that the strikers were

demanding not only changes in working conditions, but social and

political changes that affect the rest of the population was very

important. As a Warsaw journalist and Party member put it, “This is the

first strike in Poland, maybe in any Socialist country, where the

workers are demanding large-scale freedoms for others, not just

themselves”.

But by far the most important demand voiced by the strikers was for

‘free unions’. Virtually every striker we talked to told us that though

they might be willing to compromise on a number of other demands, the

demand for free unions was absolutely the most important, and-

uncompromisable. When the government negotiator proposed free elections

within the existing Party-controlled unions he was nearly booed out of

the shipyards. The workers were adamant — they would accept nothing less

than free unions. But as to what exactly a ‘free union’ would be — well,

there were varying opinions. Many workers said that it remained to be

seen. Some thought that what the western countries had were ‘free

unions’, while others felt they wanted something totally new. Most were

united in the view that they would work out exactly what a free union

would be when the time came. And they know they have the power to strike

if something goes wrong.

We have a lot of faith in how they will organise these unions. The way

they have already organised themselves (at least in theory) into the

strike committee is (we feel) very close to an ideal model upon which to

build ‘free unions’. The strike committee (set up spontaneously and

relying on no previous organisation) was composed of representatives

from over 400 enterprises on strike in the greater Gdansk region. Many

of these enterprises rotated their delegates every few days. And the

delegates were supposed to be in constant contact with the workers.

Attempts were made to keep as many people as possible informed as to

what was going on in the strike committee. Radio broadcasts were not

possible as the radio stations were under government control for most of

the strike. But the workers did rig up a loudspeaker system which

brought the strike committee deliberations to a good deal of the 16,000

workers occupying the Lenin Shipyards. At the same time, this system

served to unify the strikers with the rest of the people, because there

was no other way to find out what was happening except to go to the

shipyards and listen to the loudspeaker. Thousands came every day (and

many at night) both to show their support and to obtain information.

Strike bulletins were printed every few days. When these were thrown

over the fence of the occupied shipyard, the people waiting outside

grabbed madly for them. And when someone got one, they would read it

aloud to those around them. Later, they would be posted in numerous

places along the fence and people could be seen copying down all the

major points to take back to their factories and towns. Though the

government had cut off all telephone, telegraph, mail and radio

communication with the Gdansk region, people spontaneously found new

non-hierarchical ways of communication.

Other new relationships were also built. There was no money exchanged

within the shipyard. Farmers brought their produce to the strikers

instead of selling it to the state stores. In fact, despite government

claims of food shortages in the Gdansk region, we found food more

plentiful there than in other regions of Poland. The food lines that

were commonplace in Warsaw were non-existent in the Gdansk area.

However strong the revolutionary fervour of the Polish people, one

important practical consideration was in the back of their heads — the

knowledge that if their demands went beyond a certain limit, they would

find the Russian tanks on their doorstep. And being surrounded by Soviet

bloc countries, they would be totally cut off from the rest of the

world. The intense hatred for the Soviet Union amongst the Poles is

almost unimaginable, and the very last thing they want is to be directly

(physically) dominated by the USSR. They did seem very confident that

their demands did not go too far as to cause Soviet intervention. All

the strike committee members we talked to were careful to point out to

us that their movement was not ‘political’. ‘We only want control over

the things that affect our day-to-day lives. Politics is the business of

the Party”, they told us. They knew that if the Party didn’t maintain

some kind of control (possibly predominantly in foreign relations) the

Russians would move in to assert control. Most people’s vision of the

immediate future seemed to be that the free unions might control most of

the Polish economy while the Party would be recognised to have some kind

of nominal power. Though everyone seemed to hate the Party almost as

much as the Russians, most seemed to feel that it would be another

decade before they could do away with the party itself.

And just as the people hate and fear the Russians, they seem to look

hopefully towards the West, particularly the USA, for support. There are

two basic reasons for this: firstly, Poles listening to Eastern Europe

Radio know that they’re hearing lies about their own country. When they

listen to Radio Free Europe, Voice of America or the BBC, they know that

the criticisms they hear of the Russian or Polish leaders are

well-founded, so, by extension, many begin to believe the positive

things they hear about western countries. Secondly, they know that they

are not strong enough to withstand a Soviet intervention, so they look

towards the western powers to help make the Soviets weak enough not to

invade them.

Although the situation at the shipyards looked very good to us, we did

see some things that we are quite critical of. Because the spirit of the

Poles was so unified against the Party, many people were having

difficulties seeing other causes of oppression. For instance, the

historical devotion to the Catholic Church and the Pope made the people

unaware of how, in a personal way, the Church oppresses them in their

daily lives. At one point, we did see the people begin to question at

least some of the devotion. One morning the Party newspaper printed a

call from the head of the Polish Catholic Church for the strikers to

return to work. The strikers were unanimous in their opposition to the

statement and actually began questioning his religious authority. The

opposition was so strong, in fact, that the priest officiating at the

shipyards found it necessary to announce to the strikers that evening

that the church official had been quoted out of context, and that the

church really did support the strikers. At that point, the strikers

stopped questioning the role of the church.

We also saw the creation of a personality cult around the leader — Lech

Walesha. He was considered a hero — people clustered around him for his

autograph and listened attentively to all he said. They were so united

in the struggle that they could not even comprehend that their fellow

worker turned leader could potentially cause a problem for them as much

as the Party had done.

Though in theory the structure of the strike committee was very

democratic, in day to day practice much of this broke down for varying

reasons. Some factories were almost a day’s trip away, so most of these

found it practical not to rotate their delegates. The fact that the

workers had forced the government to talk to them as a collective group

of over 400 delegates (and broadcast live over their loudspeaker) in the

shipyards was a major breakthrough. However, a decision was made to

change to a negotiating group of several people on each side. And

speaking for the workers were experts in economics who were

‘sympathetic’ to the strikes. Because of the development of a kind of

hierarchy it sometimes took several days for information to filter down

to the workers in the shipyard and in the instance concerning the free

unions, we knew about the decision three days before it was officially

announced to everyone else.

Though there were several vociferous women in the strike committee, the

support roles — making sandwiches, cleaning up, and typing — were mainly

filled by women.

We feel the strike was a very important experience in self-management

for the Polish workers. At this point we don’t want to attempt an

analysis of what is happening in Poland as the people are rapidly

changing their opinions and goals. There is much that we in the West can

learn from the experiences that the Poles are going through. We are

planning to write a more detailed analysis of the Polish situation

several months hence.

2. The betrayal begins (Editorial)

Just like everywhere else, the heady Polish summer moves slowly towards

autumn; the nights draw in; the brilliant sun of the world’s media begin

to sink and the hot news of last month cools down on inside pages.

Hot as it was, it did not quite set the world alight. The great,

expected climax was not reached and the Russian tanks did not roll.

A few heads did, though, near the top. What can only be described as

cosmetic changes, the sort that any party can make without altering its

own strength in any way, were publicised as culling out men who had lost

touch with the working class roots of the Communist Party, had

mishandled their responsibilities, fallen down on the job.

On top of all this, suddenly came stories of moral corruption, financial

back-handers (as distinct from the perfectly moral and justifiable

privileges like fine apartments, country houses, large cars, etc. etc.

for party officials) which made the Warsaw hierarchy look just as human

as any in the West. But they had to go — just as in the West.

Through the earlier reshuffle, Gierek himself sat tight, no doubt

privately telling himself that he really should have carried out some at

least of the promises with which he bought off the strikers in 1970,

getting himself the top job. He brought people with ‘moderate’

reputations into positions where they could be seen to be listening

sympathetically to the determined workers. After the workers had been

striking for a fortnight, he granted them the right to strike — an

amazing act of generosity in the circumstances since they had already

taken that right by their own direct action!

He also granted them the right to form their own ‘free’ trade unions —

the basic structure for which they had already created in their works

strikes committees. And then, as if all this had made him remember

something about the emancipation of the workers being the task of the

workers themselves — he had a heart attack.

Or so we are told. Whether Gierek’s coronary will prove to be as

cosmetic as the changes at the top, we shall not know yet awhile, but

the occasion was convenient to change still further the faces at the top

— which is, after all, what the cosmetic art is all about.

Into Gierek’s job steps a man who is hailed as a ‘moderate’ and has,

until now, maintained a low profile. One reason for this is that he has

been busy working his way up the party ladder, occupying the party posts

which have given him close relationships with the police, the militia

and the armed forces. Stanislaw Kania’s ‘unanimous’ election to the top

job by the central committee was reputedly greeted with enthusiasm by

Moscow. Having experienced the wonderful stability that can be

maintained in a state by the greatest apparatchik of all time — Josef

Stalin — Brezhnev and his boys must have heaved a sigh of relief when a

similar climber crept into the saddle in Poland.

And what is the real party task facing Kania now? It was summed up in an

anonymous quote from a ‘party journalist’ in Warsaw, the day Gierek

collapsed. He said, “First of all, we resisted the grassroots movement

for change. Then we accepted it. But now we have to take the third step

and lead it, and fat is the real difficulty” (our emphasis).

That is what Kania’s job is now: to lead the workers back into the

party’s own backyard. To contain their demands within bounds the party

can manage. It is the oldest trick in the book — to yield in the heat of

battle and then gradually to take it all back in the fullness of time.

It is said that Kania was opposed to the use of force against the

strikers when a faction in the Politburo was arguing for it at the time

(29 August) that Gierek was settling with the workers in Gdansk. At that

point Kania was responsible for ‘security’ (secret police?) and he was

backed up by General Jaruzelski, commander of the Polish armed forces,

while Admiral Janczyszyn told the local party in Gdansk that he was not

prepared to put his men in direct confrontation with the strikers.

In other words, as we suspected all along, the party had no confidence

that the armed forces would back them in a fight against the people —

just as, quite obviously, the Russians also felt that they could not

rely upon the Polish army’s support should the Soviets invade. In fact,

quite the opposite, they might well have had a fight with the Polish

forces on their hands.

So it was a case of softly, softly, catchee monkey. On paper the party

has graciously yielded to the undeniably just demands of the Gdansk

strikers — subject of course to the necessity to recognise what they

call the ‘raison d’Etat’ — the objects of the state. And it is

interesting to notice how this phrase has replaced the better known

‘raison d’etre’ — a rather more objective object — the object of being.

Another state that we should not forget, of course, in all this, is that

tiny state in the middle of Rome — the Vatican. It might be complete

coincidence that this upheaval in Poland happened so soon after the

Pope’s visit, but the fact is that the other great totalitarian power

fighting for the soul of Poland lathe Roman Catholic Church — with more

than 1000 years of experience in wheeling and dealing to draw upon.

One of the more disturbing factors in the Polish struggle has been the

role of Lech Walesa — the most publicised of the strikers’ leaders — who

was calling for ‘caution’ at about the same time as the Polish Pope was

saying the same thing in the course of leading masses of Italian

Catholics in prayers for what he called “My Poland”.

Walesa has been recognised by the Communist Party as the workers’ leader

entrusted with the task of setting up the organisation for the new

‘independent’ unions. Having appointed Jacek Kuron (the dissident

‘intellectual’ who produced the influential underground paper Robotnik)

as head of his advisory staff, Welesa went off to say mass with Cardinal

Wyszynskt, following a private audience.

‘Stability’ is in the interests of both the state and the church. Both

authoritarian, for each power-hungry outfit stability means the

suppression of the people to their separate dogma. Discipline and

obedience are key words in both of these religions — Catholicism and

Communism. If the Polish people have been fighting for freedom this

summer, they are well warned to beware of both these organisations —

even to look, if they will, to what is happening in Iran, where the

situation is not dissimilar.

The Marxists may have forgotten their most essential text of all — but

we do well constantly to remind the working class that — the task of

emancipation is the task of the working class alone. And by Christ, as

the Pope may say, are they alone: