The worst thing that could happen to an actual opposition leader now, Rafał Trzaskowski, is that these elections would really be annulled. I dare say that in such a situation, Rafał Trzaskowski would have a weaker result in the next election, if only because the electoral act was questioned, in which so many people participated
– says in an interview with the portal wPolityce.pl prof. Rafał Chwedoruk, political scientist.
wPolityce.pl: Chairman of the Civic Platform Borys Budka announced that he would submit an election protest to the Supreme Court demanding the annulment of the election. Earlier, Rafał Trzaskowski emphasized that he acknowledged the result of the election and nobody wanted to undermine the result. How do you read this double voice in the PO itself?
Professor Rafał Chwedoruk: One may wonder whether this is a conscious voice in order to maintain interest in various segments of the electorate, or whether it is a reflection of internal tensions. The result of the election necessarily meant a correction of some internal hierarchy in the PO and also had to bring a large group of dissatisfied, fearing for their future. Even if the two voices are intended at this stage, in my opinion the tensions in the PO will sooner or later become apparent. The space for these tensions is large because the opposition’s electorate is incoherent in this matter. Among the more than 10 million voters of Rafał Trzaskowski, there were those who would be inclined to take any form of action against the rulers, as well as those who more expect moderation and conciliation in politics. Regardless of how we interpret current events, an attempt to keep so many millions of voters with heterogeneous views and different views on the tactics of competing with PiS will cause tension.
And the very desire to annul the election in your opinion is beneficial from the point of view of interests for the Civic Platform?
I think this is another act of convincing those already convinced. There is a circle of voters who will accept any message that would hit the rulers. It’s just that convincing, especially in the current situation, this segment once again does not seem to me a good idea. The more so that even if we were critical of some aspects of these elections, the very high turnout and paradoxically high result of Rafał Trzaskowski very strongly legitimizes these elections socially. Many voters first appeared at the ballot boxes, or they appeared for the first time in a long time. Trying to convince them that all this was invalid because of minor sectoral deficiencies is probably not the most politically effective idea. The worst thing that could happen to an actual opposition leader now, Rafał Trzaskowski, is that these elections would really be annulled. I dare say that in such a situation in the next election, Rafał Trzaskowski would get a weaker result, if only because the election act in which so many people participated was questioned.
The election was followed by friction in the opposition, mutual exchange of “kindness” between PO, PSL and Left politicians. What do you think it results from?
On the one hand, they are a reflection of the universal and persistent problem of the opposition – to start a fight with PiS, you have to work together, or maybe take off under one banner. However, this means that these groups lose their subjectivity. In Polish politics, it has been going on since 2005 – in the initial stage it concerned SLD, now it also applies to PSL. If we really last three years without nationwide elections, then the polls will become a reference point for various opposition groups. Probably then we will be able to make many changes, shifts in opposition. The scale of Trzaskowski’s result shows that in personnel terms it will be difficult to “jump” over anyone. Sooner or later there will be questions about the internal situation in the Left and PSL. In my opinion, there may be a trend there for some politicians to enter the Trzaskowski project, and others will focus on subjectivity and separateness, hoping that among those more than 10 million voters of Trzaskowski, many were those who voted against PiS, and not for Trzaskowski. I think that these tensions may be no less than in the PO itself, where it will probably have a more dimension of a certain personnel conflict.
Meanwhile, Rafał Trzaskowski announces the construction of a social movement under the name “New Solidarity”.
I would distinguish two things – the idea itself from the way it is implemented. As for the idea itself, it is not irrational in politics to address the message to voters a little distant from the party to drag them, in a situation where you can be sure of the iron electorate. He has no choice – even if he would be offended at such a moderate line of his party, then he simply has nowhere to go. The slogan of “New Solidarity” is some negation of total opposition, economic liberalism etc. However, this may raise questions. Hardly anyone remembers that in 1993 the co-governing Liberal Democratic Congress at the time of rampant unemployment had the slogan “one million jobs”. A huge part of public opinion received this slogan as a provocation, because liberalism was identified with the eruption of unemployment in Poland. The fate of KLD did not go well as a consequence of this. The same question can be asked today – are many liberal voters who do not feel special solidarity with PiS voters, or will it be easy to convince many of these voters to speak and think in a different language, and to achieve this at a level local government a different policy. This is Trzaskowski’s problem. Of the more ad hoc things – I guess that NSZZ “Solidarność” will be very critical when it comes to using the term “solidarity” in any context. It would be better for Trzaskowski to have any choices during these years when it could be tested how it works. And yes, it will all be at some level of abstraction.
Interviewed by Adam Stankiewicz
–
