Problem realizmu w polskiej myśli politycznej na uchodźstwie po II wojnie światowej – pytania i tezy

Abstract

Problems of political realism in Polish political thought in exile after World War II – questions and theses

The study is devoted on the problem of political realism in Polish political thought in exile after World War II (1945‑1989). The author concludes that the categories of “political realism” and “political idealism” are generally inadequate to the history of Polish political thought. There is rather difficult to find the “political realism” or “political idealism” in a clear substantial phenomenon. Very often, political ideas incorporate idealism and realism. Realist analysis of the realities could lead to a moral capitulation under the conviction that the change of the conditions is impossible. Sometimes it permit to keep the “idealist” aims but also avoiding the hopeless decisions (insurrections). Obviously, a future restoration of Polish independence after Yalta required a great geopolitical revolution in Europe. Poles had no means to achieve this aim acting in isolation. They also had no idea to reconcile themselves with the realities of Soviet domination. Polish political thought after Yalta was an exercise in resolving the impossible questions. The most prominent Polish political writer in exile Juliusz Mieroszewski argued that the categories of “realism” and “idealism” are changing in history. Their real sense depends on geopolitical constellation of a given nation in a given time. A perfect policy is idealist in the sphere of aims and realist in the domain of methods as Prince Adam Jerzy Czartoryski thought. Political thinkers of Polish emigration tried to reconsider the lesson of the past – especially from the tragedy of Warsaw Uprising of 1944 – and not to permit for a new insurrection in 1956. Significant internal autonomy of the Polish People’s Republic after 1956 was considered not as a final achievement but only an “stage” on the rather long way to future independence. Mieroszewski’s „evolutionism” was not a sort of reconciliation with the communist order and the dependence on the USSR but a conception based on the conviction that only the internal changes inside the communist regime could bring the real progress in the fight for independence.