FAQ
T_LOGIN Log in

Don't have an account on our website?

T_REGISTER Register

nr 8

2015 Next

Publication date: 2015

Licence: CC BY-NC-ND 3.0 Unported  licence icon

Editorial team

Editor-in-Chief Jan Skórzyński

Issue content

IDEE

Gesine Schwan

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 7-13

Read more Next

ANKIETA „WOLNOŚCI I SOLIDARNOŚCI”

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 14-36

Read more Next

ESEJ

Bronisław Geremek

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 37-48

Read more Next

STUDIA

Krzysztof Tarka

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 49-63

When Stanisław “Cat” Mackiewicz, as a signatory of “List 34” in 1964, was deprived of the possibility to publish his writings in the domestic press, he began to write articles under the pseudonym Gaston de Cerizay for Kultura, the Polish-émigré literary-political magazine published in Paris. The Security Service (SB) suspected from the very start that Mackiewicz was hiding behind this name. Cat’s apartment was wiretapped and the SB also intercepted a parcel containing an article by Gaston de Cerizay, he had mailed to an address in France with a request to forward the text to the editor of Kultura, Jerzy Giedroyc. In late June 1965, Mackiewicz was summoned to the Ministry of Internal Affairs for interrogation. He confessed that he had been the author of several articles published under the pseudonym in the émigré monthly. In Kultura’s July-August issue of 1965, another article by Gaston de Cerizay appeared, although Mackiewicz staunchly denied being its author. The matter of the authorship of the article is convoluted and unclear. It is likely that it had been written by Cezary Janusz Ketling-Szemley, who had also been charged with sending earlier articles by Cat to Kultura. Could he have been acting on the SB’s instructions in impersonating Mackiewicz? Mackiewicz faced several years of imprisonment for the “subversive” articles published in Kultura. In the fall of 1965 the prosecutor drew up an indictment, but the court suspended the proceedings referring to a medical opinion attesting that Cat was chronically ill. This odd lack of punishment only encouraged Mackiewicz, who, through friends at home and abroad, continued to send articles to Kultura. From the authorities point of view, the best solution to their problem would be for Cat to emigrate again but he had no intention of leaving the country. Finally, on February 16, 1966, under pressure from the Ministry of the Interior, the prosecutor’s office launched an investigation against Mackiewicz. Two days later, however, Cat died and the prosecutor dismissed the case.

Read more Next

Robert Brier

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 64-76

After Solidarity’s oppression in December 1981, a far-flung transnational network of support committees emerged, providing material aid and raising international awareness for Solidarity’s fate. In the existing literature, this kind of human rights advocacy is usually seen in association with the Helsinki Final Act of 1975. According to this interpretation, the West managed put its human rights values unto the agenda of East-West détente at Helsinki, thus spurring opposition movements in the Soviet bloc. This article puts forth a different interpretation. Though the Final Act was doubtlessly important, Solidarity still needed western supporters who would bring its situation before the Conference on Security and Cooperation and other international forums. Why did they help? And why did others not help? Usually, Western human rights advocacy is seen as an offshoot of the Cold War. Surprisingly, however, Solidarity’s diverse group of supporters did not entail only western “Cold Warriors,” but also French leftist intellectuals and even peace activists. To understand the motivations of Solidarity’s diverse supporters, the article argues, we have to understand two points: First, in the early 1980s, human rights activism was still a comparatively novel form of organizing political protest; second, Solidarity was a movement which eschewed western political categories and undercut taken-for-granted assumptions about the Cold War. For a variety of western actors, supporting Solidarity was a way of formulating a human rights policy in line with their own political views. Solidarity thus emerges as a contested icon – a powerful symbol which the movement’s supporters tried to claim for their own interpretation of human rights.

Read more Next

Paweł Sowiński

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 77-93

This study is in the current of transnational history. Most of the existing research concerning post-war Europe has strongly accentuated the importance of dividing the continent into two isolated parts. The author points to the systematic infiltration of Western ideas and values through the Iron Curtain without negating this thesis. Vienna – a city on the front of the Cold War – in the years 1959–1989 became one of the more important centers of smuggling operations for the so-called book program, a joint effort of the United States government and the Eastern European political diaspora. Visitors from Eastern Europe received free publications that were banned or difficult to obtain in their own countries which were shackled by the communist censors. They brought them back to their countries, thus creating a cultural bridge between the East and the West.
This article discusses the microenvironment of young Polish émigrés that congregated at Zofia Reinbacher’s “Xięgarnia Polska,” a Polish bookstore located at Burggasse 22. In the ‘80s it played one of the most active roles in the Viennese operation. We learn from the text how this social network was formed and about how the collaboration of the emigrants, the recipients of the publications in Poland and the International Literary Centre (the New York headquarters of the project, led by George Minden) took place. According to the author, the emigrants – with their talents and cross-border contacts – constituted a very important element of Minden’s system.
The informal, intimate atmosphere brought people together and gave the formula additional strength. The author also points out some of the more general factors which contributed to the success of this cultural infiltration from the West, such as the liberalization of cross-border traffic, the transnational nature of smuggling books and the significance of small-scale economic exchanges between the societies.
Read more Next

SIERPIEŃ ’80

Aleksander Hall

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 93-101

Aleksander Hall’s article describes in detail the activities of the young oppositionists of the Young Poland Movement (Ruch Młodej Polski – RMP) and the conduct of its members during the strike. One of RMP’s activities was the organization of prayer meetings at the Gdańsk Shipyards by Magdalena Modzelewska and Bożena Rybicka. These daily prayers provided an opportunity for people to get to know one another and created an atmosphere of reflection and calm when tensions ran high due to the threatening stance of the authorities.
Besides offering spiritual and religious support for the striking workers, the RMP helped the striking workers in printing publications such as the “Strike Information Bulletin” (“Strajkowy Biuletyn Informacyjny”) and various types of informational pamphlets and flyers regarding the strike. RMP activists circulated among the various workplaces. In addition to transporting the publications, their task was to relay information about the strike in the Gdansk Shipyard. Thanks to Arkadiusz Rybicki and Mirosław Grzywaczewski the Tri-City population was able to learn of the Strike Committee’s 21 Demands for the workers from boards they had prepared and hung at gate No. 2.
In deciding to get involved in helping the striking workers at the Gdansk Shipyard, the RMP activists did not expect the far-reaching effects of the protest. Their role in supporting the strike involved serving in an advisory capacity, assisting in the printing and distribution of strike materials, organizing prayer meetings and communication with other striking workplaces. The transformation of the protest at the Lenin Shipyards into a solidarity strike and the support it gave to the society-wide strikes opened the eyes of the movement’s activists to the strength of social resistance to the system.
Read more Next

Tomasz Kozłowski

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 102-113

One of the decisive moments during the protests of August 1980 at the Lenin Shipyard in Gdańsk was the end of the so-called “little strike” and the announcement of a sympathy, solidarity, strike. The management’s capitulation under pressure from the protesters and their promise to meet their submitted demands surprised the Strike Committee, whose members, especially those favoring the management, voted on August 16th to end the protest action. The majority of the shipyard workers, who had been fighting for higher wages, a free trade union and work for their dismissed colleagues, Anna Walentynowicz and Lech Wałęsa, did not understand the need to continue the protest in solidarity with the workers of other establishments. Nevertheless, they managed to start the sympathy strike thanks to the activists from the democratic opposition who appealed to the workers to remain at the shipyard. In order to continue the strike, it was necessary to form a new leadership and to record thae demands that were common to all the workplaces. This is how the Inter-Enterprise Strike Committee (Międzyzakładowy Komitet Strajkowy, MKS) came to be, bringing together representatives from workplaces in the Tri-City area and drawing up the list of 21 demands, which is now a part of UNESCO’s World Heritage Registry. This article focuses on the circumstances surrounding the ending of the so-called “little strike,” the start of the sympathy strike and the formation of the Inter-Enterprise Strike Committee. The author looks into the various, sometimes contradictory versions of the events as described by witnesses and compares them with the existing documentary evidence.

Read more Next

Anna Machcewicz

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 114-143

This text analyzes the politics of the Polish People’s Republic (PRL) towards the strikes in the Tri-City area (Gdańsk, Gdynia and Sopot) during August 1980. Drawing from materials from Gdańsk’s regional party archive (KW PZPR), the Central Archives of Modern Records in Warsaw (AAN), the Institute of National Remembrance (IPN), and Washington’s National Security Archive, as well as from the accounts of representatives of those in power, the author reconstructs the decision-making processes that lead to signing the Gdańsk Agreements.
The strikes of July 1980 which reached a peak in the Lublin Voivodeship were a prelude to the Gdańsk conflict. During this time the authorities tested the tactics of concessions concerning wages and entertaining “local, institutional” demands. Having survived the first wave of strikes, they concluded that the danger of destabilization had been averted; all the more so, since calm prevailed in the large industrial centers of the country.
Although the strike at the Gdansk shipyards in August 1980 surprised the authorities, the tactics of wage concessions at the largest institution and the promise to build a monument to those killed in December 1970, while ignoring the protests in the smaller workplaces, initially brought success. At first both the government and the workers failed to notice a newly formed force to reckon with – a collective representation of the striking workers, inspired by the activities of the Gdańsk opposition. On August 16, the Gdańsk shipyards became the headquarters of the Inter-Enterprise Strike Committee (Międzyzakładowy Komitet Strajkowy, MKS) which was joined by successive workplaces. After a week-long delay, the Government Commission took on negotiations with the Gdańsk MKS. All the same time, the Ministry for Internal Affairs was planning its own alternative “forceful solution” to the problem.
The lack of an efficient blockade of information weakened the position of the authorities, as foreign journalists showed up at the shipyards and Radio Free Europe reported on the negotiations. The arrests of dozens of the more prominent activists also failed to weaken the opposition. While support for the strike was growing throughout Poland, the resulting huge wave of strikes across the country proved decisive. In the face of such an enormous scale of support, the central government had to cool down the radicals within its own ranks and tried to reach an exotic alliance with the Catholic Church and the Americans. The party leaders in the Tri-City area took a pragmatic stance – urging negotiations. The intransigence of the striking workers made the demand for a new trade union seem all the more palatable. The USSR did not protest the decision to sign the Agreements, which was seen by the Polish communist authorities as “no red light.” The agreement itself, in their view, was to be only a temporary concession, forced by their disadvantaged position, which after changing the balance of power could be withdrawn.
Read more Next

REPORTAŻE Z PRZESZŁOŚCI

Tadeusz Strumff

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 144-158

Read more Next

Lech Bądkowski

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 159-184

Read more Next

Jan Waszkiewicz

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 185-188

Read more Next

OPERACJA "BRAMA"

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 189-220

Read more Next

ARCHIWUM WOLNEJ MYŚLI

Jan Strzelecki

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 221-228

Read more Next

SYLWETKI

Jan Olaszek

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 228-236

Read more Next

EX LIBRIS

Jerzy Holzer

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 237-239

Read more Next

Krzysztof Tarka

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 240-242

Read more Next

Marek Karpiński

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 243-244

Read more Next

Artur Kubaj

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 245-252

Read more Next

Anna Machcewicz

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 253-255

Read more Next

Przemysław Ruchlewski

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 256-257

Read more Next

Wolność i Solidarność, nr 8, 2015, pp. 258-259

Read more Next