Prof. Leszek Balcerowicz shared on social media that mutual trust stands as the core element shaping how the state relates to its citizens. Internet users expressed strong feelings in response to the architect of Poland’s early 1990s economic reforms.
The well known Polish economist and former politician, who helped guide Poland’s transition to a market economy, wrote on the X platform that building a civil society hinges on interpersonal trust and on trust between citizens and public institutions.
Trust among people and between people and the state forms the backbone of social capital. Everyone relies on others because no person can know everything. When leaders make false promises or tell half truths, the quality of life declines. This is why uncovering deception matters.
– stated Balcerowicz on the X site.
“I advise you to pause before posting”
These remarks feel unusual coming from a figure who has long been associated with sharp skepticism toward public trust, especially given painful memories linked to the reform era. A prompt reply followed from critics who question the wisdom of his approach.
One commentator, an elder judge, reflected on having witnessed the effects of reform in the country. The point raised was simple: can trust be earned again after years of political upheaval? The reply suggested skepticism about endorsing ideas without scrutiny.
When public trust weakens, citizens grow wary of political promises and corporate rhetoric alike. The result is a climate where people feel uncertain about who to believe and what to expect from state actors.
During the era of the Third Polish Republic, leaders from several major parties often promised dramatic improvements during campaigns. Such claims historically fed a sense of disillusionment among many Poles and left a lasting impression of political distance between the public and its institutions. The consequence was a slower rebuilding of confidence and a persistent sense that change was uneven or insufficient.
Some commentators have suggested that reforms can be misrepresented or rushed in ways that erode trust further. The challenge is not merely to enact policy but to sustain credibility through transparent actions and accountable governance.
In the discussion, it is clear that trust is not optional; it underpins the practical functioning of markets, government services, and civic life. When institutions demonstrate consistency and honesty, people feel more secure about their future and about participation in public affairs.
Scholars and observers commonly contend that a healthy political culture relies on reliable information, clear accountability, and verifiable outcomes. Citizens respond to proof and parity between promises and results, rather than to slogans or rapid shifts in stance.
For those watching the political landscape, the dialogue around trust highlights a straightforward truth: building and maintaining trust requires ongoing effort from both leaders and communities. It demands openness, regular communication, and steadfast adherence to shared norms that protect the common good.
Source note: wPolityce