The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / History  % width posts: 65

Poland's 1945 - 1989 under communism or during socialism?


AdamKadmon 2 | 508
23 Apr 2011 #31
Do you regard PO as communists? Were PiS?

Party distinctions are superficial ones. I believe that politicians publicly do not address any real problem; they just play the game of power and take important decisions as technocrats do - in the name of the public, for the public sake, but avoiding involving it in any decision making. They are also restricted by the international context - what is possible and what is not - and by their willingness to take a risk. The general public may be not aware of all this.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
23 Apr 2011 #32
I'd agree in the context of Republicans and Democrats in America but not between PiS and PO. I see where you are coming from but they still follow agendas. I really think most don't understand political systems and defining features properly.
OP poland_
23 Apr 2011 #33
nothing changed

Nothing changed,as we are still seeing expansionism, panning out around the world,, with respect to geo political order.

So Wałęsa and Balcerowicz did nothing? I was referring specifically to the case of Poland.

Both of the above will go down in Polish history for the part they played, although I never admired or considered Wałęsa a statesman, I was much more convinced with Aleksander Kwaśniewski whom I admired for his ability to unite. Leszek Balcerowicz, was the most important Economist, the introduction of the Balcerowicz Plan also termed "Shock Therapy," was a method for rapidly transitioning from an ailing economy, based on state ownership and central planning, to a capitalist market economy, the results speak for themselves.

Do you regard PO as communists? Were PiS?

Neither PO or PIS do I regard as communists.

PiS and PO. I see where you are coming from but they still follow agendas. I really think most don't understand political systems and defining features properly.

We must also remember that both PIS and PO had to form coalitions, so it is always difficult to push all of your policies, as the coalition partners want points as well. Unless of course you are the British Conservatives who formed a coalition and have their own agenda, being happy to ignore the cries of the Lib Dems.
ala j
23 Apr 2011 #34
And think about efficiency and productivity -they were hopelessly low compared to the West.

Untrue. Myth. Memeber of my family was a manager in huge factory. He was invited to France in 80s to some factory and he was shocked how slowly people were working comparing to Poland.
Ironside 50 | 10,907
23 Apr 2011 #35
My Wife refers to the period as 'during socialism'

It only means that your wife's family was deeply involved in implementing soviet rule in Poland. Some of that has been rubbed on you as we had witnessed on PF.

Such as them I call traitors who should be lined against the wall and shot.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
23 Apr 2011 #36
That expansionism lies within the realms of geopolitics, warsz, not domestic politics. We are talking about the socialism/communism dichotomy within Poland.
OP poland_
23 Apr 2011 #37
It only means that your wife's family was deeply involved in implementing soviet rule in Poland. Some of that has been rubbed on you as we had witnessed on PF.

Quite the contrary, if they had been involved in implementing soviet rule, we would be quoting ' during communism'

Such as them I call traitors who should be lined against the wall and shot.

Such speech, is a reminder of communists and fascists. Maybe you are hiding a dark secret...
Seanus 15 | 19,706
23 Apr 2011 #38
I was interned into a gulag but I'm out now :) :0 Damn communists caught me, or were they socialists? ;) Hi Rock :)
OP poland_
23 Apr 2011 #39
Have you watched the Commanding Heights Part Three: The New Rules of the Game?

Looks interesting Adam, I will watch it over the next few days. Thanks.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
23 Apr 2011 #40
True, warsz, but both were operating under the notion of democracy and free elections. Communism has produced dictators whereas socialism has merely offered itself as a counter to capitalism.

If Poland was indeed socialist, meaning common ownership by the people, then why were so many jubilant when the regime changed in 1989?
OP poland_
23 Apr 2011 #41
That expansionism lies within the realms of geopolitics, warsz, not domestic politics.

We agree on that point.

I was interned into a gulag but I'm out now

AdamKadmon

Have you watched the film: imdb.com/title/tt1023114/. There is a link on Wroclaw boys thread Best films. I think you will both, enjoy.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
23 Apr 2011 #42
I was gonna watch that film but never got round to it :( There's still time :)

So, warsz, what separates communism from socialism? Where are the demarcation lines to be drawn?
OP poland_
23 Apr 2011 #43
Communism has produced dictators whereas socialism has merely offered itself as a counter to capitalism.

From a western educated perspective, you are correct, although from a Soviet block educated perspective Socialism was a milder form of Communism.

If Poland was indeed socialist, meaning common ownership by the people, then why were so many jubilant when the regime changed in 1989?

Because Poland was on the verge of bankruptcy, there was hyper inflation. More and more Poles had travelled to the west. The slogan West was best was the new war cry.
Maaarysia
23 Apr 2011 #44
edit.
what for involve in anoher pointless discussion. Everyone knows what it will evoluate into...
Ironside 50 | 10,907
23 Apr 2011 #45
Just out of curiosity. Ironside how old are you?

Guess ..

Quite the contrary, if they had been involved in implementing soviet rule, we would be quoting ' during communism'

You are mistaken, I have never heard expression "during socialism" its odd, on the contrary "during communism" is being used commonly, ask Seanus if you don't believe me.

Maybe you are hiding a dark secret.

I would rather bet on your wife's family hiding dark secrets.

I-S ( Hi Sheep, how are you)
Seanus 15 | 19,706
23 Apr 2011 #46
There is no escaping from the reality that communism produces dictators, warsz. It is an extreme regime. Milder as in that socialism was closer to the centre? That's a Western teaching too, I'd say.

Then if the model of 'socialism' didn't fit Poland then why weren't those who were behind it ousted long before? I think we both know the answer to that question.
OP poland_
23 Apr 2011 #47
So, warsz, what separates communism from socialism? Where are the demarcation lines to be drawn?

Seanus, IMHO, Socialism and communism are ideological doctrines that have many similarities as well as many differences. It is difficult to discern the true differences between socialism and communism, as various societies have tried different types of both systems in myriad forms, and many ideologues with different agendas have defined both systems in biased terms. Some general points distinguishing the two concepts, however, can still be identified.

One point that is frequently raised to distinguish socialism from communism is that socialism generally refers to an economic system, while communism generally refers to both an economic and a political system. As an economic system, socialism seeks to manage the economy through deliberate and collective social control. Communism, however, seeks to manage both the economy and the society by ensuring that property is owned collectively, and that control over the distribution of property is centralized in order to achieve both classlessness and statelessness. Both socialism and communism are similar in that they seek to prevent the ill effects that are sometimes produced by capitalism
SeanBM 35 | 5,808
23 Apr 2011 #48
Socialism and communism are ideological doctrines that have many similarities as well as many differences. It is difficult to discern the true differences between socialism and communism

To clarify when I speak, I use the term Nordic model or the Scandinavian model.
OP poland_
23 Apr 2011 #49
I don't know enough about that model to comment.
SeanBM 35 | 5,808
23 Apr 2011 #50
Under the right conditions, it is the best model I have ever come across.
The Nordic socialists have a much better distribution of wealth while at the same time adhering to all the things I like about capitalism and democracy.
AdamKadmon 2 | 508
23 Apr 2011 #51
Have you watched the film

I know the story. You know, I prefer reading to watching.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
23 Apr 2011 #52
I think Poland is trying to edge towards the taxation levels of Nordic countries without raising salaries enough but that's for another thread.

So do you feel that Poland became classless and stateless, warsz?
OP poland_
23 Apr 2011 #53
I would rather bet on your wife's family hiding dark secrets.

Then you will lose your money. If you are Polish you will understand the word ' Szlachta ' some lands have been returned and the others are still in the courts.

You are mistaken, I have never heard expression "during socialism" its odd, on the contrary "during communism" is being used commonly, ask Seanus if you don't believe me

Ironside, you don't need to hide behind Seanus you are a big man. During socialism or under socialism is a term used by Polish patriots, they prefer not acknowledge the occupation of Poland by the communists.

It was better during/under communism or when we had communism is used by the people who enjoyed times/privilages from the communist party.

I would rather bet on your wife's family hiding dark secrets.

They do there son in law is on the internet exchanges comments with an idiot like Ironside, very dark indeed.

I think Poland is trying to edge towards the taxation levels of Nordic countries without raising salaries enough but that's for another thread

They will not do it, the reason being they need to encourage inward investment. Raise taxes, employer overheads increase, then the Americans,Brits and Germans will start to look elsewhere. IMHO, taxes in the future will be increased on luxury items,cars,boats, second homes, which has already started with the increase in tax on property purchase, they may also look at ways of increasing the taxes on property transaction, maybe the way that Spain does.

So do you feel that Poland became classless and stateless, warsz?

What period exactly?
Seanus 15 | 19,706
23 Apr 2011 #54
They are doing it in raising VAT in an increasingly consumer-oriented Poland. It will be up at 25% before too long, mark my words. Income tax is way higher than an advanced, technological society like Japan.

The period in question, as per the thread.

Thanks, B :)

I don't think Poland would have fought with such vigour to throw off mere socialism. That's the key point!
Bzibzioh
23 Apr 2011 #55
I don't think Poland have fought with such vigour to throw off mere socialism. That's the key point!

Yep, you know the saying "za komuny", but how would it even sound in Polish to say "w czasach socjalizmu"? Weird and unpractical if only on linguistic level.
OP poland_
23 Apr 2011 #56
So do you feel that Poland became classless and stateless, warsz?

Stateless is normally used to describe an individual without a country or a stateless society where chaos is the " rule". Maybe we could consider that the USSR used the excuse of Poland being a stateless society, just before the introduction of martial law. Some could even say that Poland was stateless during occupation as they received policies directly from the kremlin.

Poland's new class was party membership, intelligentsia or through work, special privileges were given to some representatives of blue-collar workers, especially in heavy industry, steelworks or mining industry and farming. Also from the media who kept the party message alive.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
23 Apr 2011 #57
True, B! By saying 'in times of socialism' would be to very strongly imply that Poland never knew it before which just isn't true. They knew it all throughout the Partitions which lasted for a very long time. Lud Polski started it all off. Now, to really get down to the nitty gritty is to look at Lelewel when he sought to justify agrarian Communism and place it under the umbrella of socialism. That was back in the 19th century but the two can be differentiated and indeed should be.

Warsz, so you believe that Poland ceased to be an independent state during communism? I ask any older members here to tell me the significance of Nov 11 during the Soviet occupation. Was it freely celebrated or did the Soviets, in their traditionally brutal way, stamp it out?
OP poland_
24 Apr 2011 #58
True, B!

marxists.org/archive/luxemburg/1905/misc/polish-question.htm

Warsz, so you believe that Poland ceased to be an independent state during communism?

Now Seanus, all history books tell us that the Baltic states and Poland are independent during the occupation. But do you believe that Poland, was not operating under a system of socialism, during the period of occupation?
Seanus 15 | 19,706
24 Apr 2011 #59
Wow, a very thorough article which leaves no stone unturned. Thanks :)

Well, that's what I've been asking you, warsz. If you believe that Poland became classless and stateless then that's highly suggestive of communism. The best way forward for us would be to formulate a checklist based on ticks. We may find that there is much more substantive overlap between socialism and communism than most political commentators could ever have imagined. They are seen as synonymous by some Eastern political scientists. That's the impression I get anyway.

We cannot really say Poland was independent if it couldn't freely make decisions without the Soviets' say so.
OP poland_
26 Apr 2011 #60
We may find that there is much more substantive overlap between socialism and communism than most political commentators could ever have imagined. They are seen as synonymous by some Eastern political scientists. That's the impression I get anyway.

In the beginning of this thread I asked one question Poland 1945 to 1989 Communism or Socialism. To answer this question correctly we have to understand the following,

What is communism?

Communism is both an economic system that seeks equality among members of society and a political ideology that advocates a classless and stateless society and rejects religion. It is regarded as a more extreme form of socialism.

What is Socialism?

Socialism is commonly regarded as an economic system that seeks to achieve equality among members of society.

Socialism and communism both adhere to the principle that the resources of the economy should be collectively owned by the public and controlled by a central organization. They differ, however, in the management and control of the economy. In socialism, the people themselves decide through communes or popularly elected councils on how the economy should work. This makes socialism a liberal system because majority of the people have a say on how the economy should be run. Communism, on the other hand, controls its economy through a single authoritarian party. It is thus characterized as conservative because the economy functions based on the decisions of a few.

The views of socialism and communism also differ in the distribution of wealth produced by the economy. Socialism supports the view that the goods and services produced should be dispensed based on the productivity of an individual. In contrast, communism believes that the wealth should be shared by the masses based on the needs of the individual.

There are two kinds of properties in socialism: (1) personal property that an individual can own and enjoy; and (2) industrial property that is dedicated for the use of producing society goods. Individuals, for example, can keep their digital cameras but cannot retain a factory that produces digital cameras. While personal properties can be kept, socialists make sure, however, that no private property will be used as an instrument for oppression and exploitation. In comparison, communism treats all goods and services as public property to be used and enjoyed by the entire populace.

Finally, socialism and communism differ in their views on capitalism. Socialists regard capitalism as a threat to equality and public interest. They believe, however, that there is no need to eliminate the capitalist class because it can be used as a good instrument in the transition to socialism as long as it is properly controlled. Socialists also believe that capitalism can exist in a socialist state and vice versa. From the point of view of the communists, capitalism must to be destroyed totally in order to give way to a classless society.

Summary:

1. Socialism is an economic system while communism is both an economic and political system.

2. In socialism, the resources of the economy are managed and controlled by the people themselves through communes or councils while in communism, management and control rest on a few people in a single authoritarian party.


3. Socialists distribute wealth to the people based on an individual's productive efforts while communists farm out wealth based on an individual's needs.

4. Socialists can own personal properties while communists can not.

5. Socialism allows capitalism to exist in its midst while communism seeks to get rid of capitalist

Based on the above we can conclude that it is correct to use both Socialism and Communism to describe the period in question. The economic system of Poland was socialism, although the ruling Government of Poland was communist, ruled directly from Moscow. Poland during this period should NOT be considered as a full communist state, like Russia, China, North Korea or Cuba. Poland was a socialist state.


Home / History / Poland's 1945 - 1989 under communism or during socialism?
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.