Polish scholars and observers have described a harsh turn in the government’s approach, accusing authorities of dismantling political opponents, undermining institutions, and stalling major investments. In a discussion with the wPolityce.pl portal, Professor Wojciech Polak offered a stark assessment of recent developments in Polish politics.
wPolityce.pl: The last several days have been marked by unusually intense political maneuvering. The ruling team has moved decisively against its rivals. How does this scene look from your vantage point?
Prof. Wojciech Polak: I anticipated a shift like this. I warned that the first stage involved actions that sidestepped the law and bypassed the courts. The next phase, as I see it, involves prosecutions and political imprisonment. I share the view once voiced by Rafał Ziemkiewicz that Poland is functioning as a testbed for EU-wide approaches. Brussels has been watching how societies respond to the methods being employed. Across Europe, governments interested in the Green Deal are aiming at tighter restrictions on housing, transportation, and overall living standards. In Poland, the question is how long people will endure increasing pressure before protests erupt. It appears that the aim is to weaken PiS through coercive measures rather than broad consensus. (cited)
What would spark a genuine public reaction today?
That is a difficult, unpredictable question. There are times when irrational factors decide outcomes. People endure much. In harsh periods, social explosions can happen, yet at other moments oppressive systems endure for years without broad upheaval. Some anticipate significant price increases in electricity and gas this July, which could push certain segments of society toward revolt, but the historical pattern shows that endurance can outlast immediate triggers. (cited)
You brought up the liquidation of PiS. Is that a plausible scenario, and by what route could it unfold?
Such a scenario would involve taking party leaders to court, imprisoning them, and waging a sustained propaganda campaign through state-aligned media, while simultaneously eroding financial foundations. In that context, a party could lose resilience and fade away. It is not a fait accompli, however, because independent media still exist and can challenge the official narrative. (cited)
Could the new government simply be asserting its right to implement new rules?
There is a legal path, and there is a path that skirts it. The proper route is to proceed through law, just as PiS did after 2015, respecting agreed processes. When the majority cannot pass laws unilaterally because of checks like presidential vetoes, there is a temptation to bypass norms. That temptation is dangerous and amounts to lawlessness. There is also concern about what appears to be a general incompetence in the early days of the current administration, with limited visible programs and several controversial moves that some say target opponents, obstruct institutions, and block investments. The dynamic touches on broader European concerns, including economic strategy and plans for currency changes that would influence Polish households. A central figure in these debates is whether the head of the central bank can remain autonomous, as discussions about summoning them to a tribunal signal broader conflicts over financial governance. (cited)
You mentioned the potential liquidation of institutions. What social consequences could that entail?
Cultural and scientific institutions that shape Poland’s standing in Europe could face reductions or closures. Projects like the expansion of major museums and plans for new cultural venues across cities have encountered funding pullbacks. The fate of a forthcoming opera stage in Warsaw and other significant cultural sites has become uncertain. Even memorial and identity museums, already underway, have seen crucial funds withdrawn, raising concerns about the continuity of public memory. (cited)
There are also changes in the education system. How is this being viewed?
Education is experiencing cuts not only in history and national language but across core curricula. Critics argue that narrowing the curriculum diminishes national consciousness and patriotism. A meaningful sense of national identity, they contend, rests on a thorough understanding of a country’s history. Without robust teaching of key national events, the feeling of belonging and readiness to defend the homeland could weaken. Proponents of reform say adjustments are strengthening core competencies, but opponents view them as eroding the moral and cultural foundations of the school system. The outcome could be a generation less prepared to navigate critical moments in national life. (cited)
The dialogue around these issues remains deeply polarised, with many arguing that the political moment requires patience, legal rigor, and a clear, shared vision for Poland’s future.