Development of Parties and Party Systems in ... - lah@sam.sdu.dk

The first (semi) free election was most of all a referendum for or against the old system, not achoice between different political programmes. “Normal” elections were impossible under the firststage of extraordinary politics and transition anomie. Personalities, not the political orientations andideologies, decided the policy-line and those chosen as ministers in the first non-communist ledgovernment.2.3. The first yearsJust after the round table negotiations the civic committees (”Vomited Obywatelski”, OKP) led byLech Walesa was established, including representatives from cultural and scientific life and severalactive dissidents. Under the umbrella of OKP 15 different sub-commissions were establisheddealing with different important socio-economic questions and policy formulation. In addition,special commissions were set up dealing with subjects such as trade union pluralism, freedom oforganisations and with political and economic reforms. OKP’s organisational structure reminded usof a proto- party consisting of a shadow cabinet and with a broadly formulated political programmethat should make Solidarity ready to take over the government responsibilities when possible andfeasible.The first Solidarity parliamentary group (OKP) consisted of nine different political groups.Formally OKPs organisation worked independently from the trade union Solidarity. Furthermore,OKP was organized around small groups of persons, mostly intellectuals who aimed to create theirown parties.Before the 1989 election Lech Walesa had paved the way for a “systemic shift” proposing agovernment that included the two minor post-communist parties, ZSL and SD. This self-limitingstrategy would not provoke the leaders in Kreml. A humiliation of the communists, it was argued,might strengthen the hardliners inside the ruling party (PZPR). Furthermore, the problem about lackof comptetent administrative leaders recruited from Solidarity was ”solved”, as Solidarity acceptedthat key ministries, such as the Ministries of Home Affairs and Defence, so far were taken over bythe communists.The disagreements inside the Solidarity movement were kept down before the first semi-freeelection in summer 1989 and in the first months of the rule of the Mazowiecki government.Unfortunately, according to a big part of the electorate, many new Solidarity-leaders showed”euphoric arrogance”. Most new non-communist leaders expected that the people almost withoutreservations would accept the radical changes in society – based on the argument that the policy is”good” and ”self-evident”. This implied that the significance of political and economic learning and”socialist mind” was underestimated. Old subjects such as workers’ self-government, workers’councils, co-ownership, strikes and demonstrations, all known in 1980-81, disappeared from thepolitical agenda and was not even discussed after the struggle against the old system had been won.It soon became a hot issue, whether Solidarity’s parliamentary group should support the newSolidarity-led government or alternatively be the driving force in a reinforced and uncompromisingconfrontation with the old system (”przyspieszenie”). During the election campaign in 1990 LechWalesa supported the argument that the whole philosophy behind the round table agreementsshould be abandoned as quickly as possible. He openly supported Solidarity’s privatisation schemebased on “give away schemes” in the shape of shares given to the whole adult population. However,he still had to strike a balance between the different political groups inside the movement as a49