Was there ever a positive aspect to this movement or were they malicious reactionaries from the get go? Where they even a legit trade union?

What was Socialist Poland like compared to other Eastern Bloc states?


they never really collectivized for example and it was always one of the weakest links in the bloc.
and from what i heard they were always reactionary faggots, yes.

Pretty much like any other authoritarian socialist state.

Long lines, low supplies of goods, the party shooting workers etc. etc.

Pretty shit desu, got teargas'd in Krakow when I was a student.

poland was already reformist and liberal as fuck, if you hippie faggot still got into trouble there you would've gotten a bullet under normal circumstances when ML were to be enforced

Have you ever thrown rocks at men wielding automatic rifles?

If Poland was 'soft' according to your description, then I am fucking glad I was born there rather than under any other regime.

were you shot? no. end of story, hippy faggot.

it was based on the anti-communist catholic ideas of corporatism

Workers organize in an union and go on strike demanding better work and living conditions.

Tankies call it reactionary and prove yet again they're just LARPing teenagers with masturbatory fantasies of becoming a new Stalin.


"In the 1970s, Lenin was alive in the eastern bloc: through an organisation called Solidarity".
t. Zizek

that isn;t the exact quote, but with different words that is what he says in Lenin 2017

Well, I have to say that Wojciech Jaruzelski doesn't exactly rank high in the pantheon of communist leaders.

so what was the whole shit about?
why is it always students? Albania, and now Poland

are you legit retarded?

The fuck is wrong with Zizek? Lenin was not 'alive' in a CIA funded neoliberal capitalism restoring movement, no matter how shitty ML Poland may have been.

What the fuck?

From my understanding, Wałesa had good intentions and genuinely wanted a kinder communism, but he was a poor leader who let Catholics, liberal porkies, fascists, and Americans co-opt the movement.

FWIW you would have been killed in the US for this.

1. My father was activist of first Solidarity and he said me few days ago that he always perceived himself a communist.

2. Solidarity was indeed Leninist and that's why it so easly became counter-revolutionary.

…was an idiot and traitor, and I would personally execute him for betrayal of the working class.

Solidarność was cancer. One of their demands was broadcasting church service on TV. A small fraction of what used to be a mass movement of morons still exists today as a yellow union, urging the workers at Amazon to NOT go on strike. Fuck em.


I'm not aware of any.

AFAIK - yes.

Yes. First two years. As is - not banned. Whether or not they represented worker's interests is an open question. They didn't.

Just as MarkSoc as most of the rest.

Except not authoritarian, nor socialist.

Because it's textbook reactionary: strong religious and Liberal tendencies within the movement - which is reflected in political demands.

Nothing. Something is wrong with you, if you refuse to recognize the objective reality of him being vacuous crypto-Liberal and expect something Socialist from him.

solidarity began as an earnestly pro-communist movement before the west seized that opportunity to use it as anti-soviet propaganda. This is how the catholic church transformed the movement into an anti-communist one.


It ended the cancerous authoritarian government. Fuck ☭TANKIE☭s. I'd rather market liberalism than fucking dictatorships. It was like a clean fucking restart. Going back to the start so that the next time you can make things right.

Not from the start. But morphed into it yes.


It was chill compared to some Eastern Bloc states but GDR, Hungary and Yugo countries had it better at times as they got more western imports.

What is


Can all of you, please, go back to African savannah?

And what was in the start?

< not going Fascist is authoritarian
You are laying it on thick.

Are you a Bordigist?

No. What makes you think that?

Sure, ☭TANKIE☭-kun, free trade unions, the right to strike and freedom of speech are textbook reactionary demands.
Because revolutions are not about freeing the workers. They're about instituting a dictatorship with you at the top, and if workers get harmed and hate it, too fucking bad. You're not even trying to pretend otherwise anymore.
Thankfully you'll always be just a LARPer, but the problem is even your mere existence harms the leftist cause and gives ammo to actual reactionaries, in quite the same way the deranged neo-nazis harm the image of the entire nationalist/nativist movements.

Anyways, for the non-Poles who don't quite realize what happened here - the country was already bankrupt, IMF and the western creditors had it by the balls, and the so-called "Communist" Party was doing everything to please them (including pretty much a full market liberalization of economy) way before they let the opposition anywhere near any meaningful political power. And when they did, it was through propaganda peace talks with hand-picked representatives. The result was a "contract" parliament where the Party still held a significant majority. By the time of the first real election in 1991, the economy was already destroyed and capitalism firmly entrenched (and the opposition were too fragmented and incompetent to do anything with it anyway).

Yes, what was left of "Solidarity" at that point was eventually complicit in the regime change, which has forever sullied its name. But that does not apply to the original wave of strikes. The sole significant left-wing organization in Poland in the 00s called itself "August '80" for a reason.

it's like 1956 never happened, right
didn't happen
funny enough, that was the bureaucracy of your beloved market liberals.
i love how little fags like you know about history and polish one in particular and still talk shit

And what reason would that be? Also, co-ops are not Socialism.

It was the biggest labour revolt in the nation's history, obviously.
Also, state capitalism isn't socialism.

Why do you think it is the "left-wing"?

< if I redefine the meaning of Capitalism, it is still Capitalism

I.e. August 80

Why do I think a labor revolt is left-wing, you ask? Like… how am I supposed to answer that? First tell me how can I prove to you that anything was ever left-wing at all.

Also, it might make a few thing way clearer if you told me why do you think the government of Poland at the time was left-wing, or at least to the left of the workers.

Shitty liberal detected.


Dictatorship of capital. Working class in liberal capitalism have no political rights, only political class (bourgeoise) rules over them.

The difference between Bolshevist socialism and market liberalism is that the second is dictatorship of capital, and the first is dictatorship of dictatorship. Polish People's Republic, in the other hand, was a socialdemocracy with tanks and one-party-rule, which is not different than modern Poland, which is de facto still one-party-system when old Solidarity party (AWS) has splitted to smaller parties (PiS, PO, etc.).

The solition is in working class rule, which means working class democracy, also known as anarchism. What is funny, most people in Poland actually know this but at the same moment they don't believe it's possible and that's main problem: thei perceive authoritarian government as lessser evil than democtaric because it's at least effective.

I thought I clarified it: I'm asking about trade union. Wolny Związek Zawodowy "Sierpień 80" - is this sufficiently unambiguous?

It wasn't. It was centrist. SocDem. Revisionist. However, Solidarnosc was Liberal.

Some leaders and much of the rank-and-file in Solidarity were class conscious. One of the main demands of Solidarity was democratic control of the workplace. I also remember seeing a quote in The Shock Doctrine from one of the leaders of the movement saying something along the lines of "we weren't fighting for capitalism, if we knew that would be the outcome we would have all gone back to work."

They were definitely naive about what the results of cozying up to reactionary institution would be (Catholic Church and US government) and spooked by nationalism/religion though.

The Solidarity movement was not about restoring liberalism or even capitalism. It was about nationalism, religion, and workplace democracy.

To be more strict, Solidarnosc was precisely mutualist, proudhonist-like. They wanted to have an workers' collective control over means of production and the free market at the same time.

They have everything consistent with market anarchist thought. The problem is that only the free market could be achieved, because in a free market, nothing like a workers' control of means of production can exist. They were idealists who thought that their program and their consciousness would define being. But only being determines consciousness.

The second problem of Solidarność was that their leaders were mailny progressive intelligentsia (Walsesa was only a puppet) who, at some point was convinced by the liberals (including Friedman and Rothbard in person) that they know better what is good for workers than the workers themselves.

It was this famous Betrayal of The Round Table, which shaped the politics of this country for the next 30 years, to this day.
I honestly think that some of the leaders of Solidarity should be sentenced to death in front of the revolutionary tribunals of the people. Without irony, I am speaking as a child of the activists of the first Solidarity movement, granddaughter of soldiers of the AK, etc. and so on.


What is 1970 Polish protests

1956, Poznań protests, worker's condition is dire, frustrated workers go out to demand bread- military crushes demonstration, 49 killed, more than 200 injured
1970, Northern Poland, people are protesting prince increase of basic needs and imporvishment, again, military crushes demonstration, 45 killed, more than 1000 injured, many more repressed.