Talk:Law and Justice/Archives/2021/January

Nationalism

The English word covers two different words in Polish, nacjonalista and narodowiec, which have different connotations.[1] It is my understanding that PiS considers itself narodowiec but would reject characterization of nacjonalista. However, both of these fall under the umbrella of "nationalism" in English. (t · c) buidhe 20:38, 20 October 2020 (UTC)

@User:buidhe What is the difference in a) definitions and b) connotations between nacjonalista and narodowiec? Abcmaxx (talk) 02:59, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Abcmaxx, The former has a pejorative connotation in Polish so may be similar to "ultranationalist". I'm not a native Polish speaker so I can't tell you for sure. The point is that many reliable sources describe the party as nationalist. Eg. from a Google Scholar search I find the following descriptions used in peer-reviewed sources:

• "nationalist-populist party, Law and Justice"[2]
• "conservative-nationalist Law and Justice Party (PiS)"[3]
• "conservative nationalist project of PiS"[4]
• "anti-European nationalist framings of Law and Justice"[5]
• "nationalist Law and Justice (PiS) government"[6]
• "right-nationalist party"[7]

Etc. (t · c) buidhe 03:13, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

The article I linked in my October post states

the CBOS study suggests that the very word “nacjonalista” (“nationalist”) has such negative connotations in Polish that people are reluctant to self-define under this category. Indeed, one might argue that “nacjonalista” has a more negative resonance than “nationalist” in English. Even the National Radical Camp and All-Polish Youth tend to describe themselves as “narodowcy,” a term with the same basic meaning, but a different connotation. It is difficult to render the distinction in English, but “narodowiec” (in the singular) might be slightly closer to expressions like “national activist.”

(t · c) buidhe 03:22, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

@User:buidhe I see very little difference myself, to me they are one and the same, however I am not a linguistics expert. Interesting article here at koduj24 - obviously very anti-PiS and anti-right-wing but the title is Polski narodowiec to nadal tylko łagodny nacjonalista?, which translates to "The Polish narodowiec is still a harmless nacjonalista?". Confusingly the rest of the article uses both terms inter-changibly to make its point. Also found this forum entry (yes unreliable but still worth looking at) historycy.org seems to say essentially that narodowiec is a technical term for a supporter of endecja, whereas nacjonalista = supporter of nationalism. It quotes the PWN dictionary to back this up (Słownik Wyrazów Obcych PWN, J. Tokarski, Warsaw 1974) Abcmaxx (talk) 03:46, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

There also this entry from far-right portal narodowcy.net entitled Nowoczesny nacjonalista, captioned Nacjonalista - osoba, która stawia sprawe narodu ponad własny interes.. This translates to "The modern nacjonalista: nacjonalista - a person who puts the issues of the country above one's own interests." Abcmaxx (talk) 03:51, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Economic policy

How would it be best described their economic policy? Someone on the ZP page suggested socialist patriotism but it is definitely not that, as the party vehemently rejects any principles associated with the left-wing. Unquestionably they are pro-welfare state, social benefits etc., as per the flagship "500+ programme". So i would say they are economically socialist, something that they would frame within charitable element of Christianity rather than the economic or political ideology. They are definitely pro-nuclear and pro-fossil fuels on energy, which is a very conservative traditionalist stance. They are very much a statist party, but I would not say they are interventionist as they are reluctant on bailouts or funding for businesses. But as shown by the so-called "polonisation" of media and state-owned companies (especially Orlen, Sieci, Do Rzeczy, SKOK, PZU etc. etc.) they very much favour loading public money into private state-owned firms and place their own people in them too; state capitalism for sure, but is it state monopoly capitalism? Is crony capitalism too loaded term? Authoritarian socialism? Elements of Dirigisme or Lassallism? Someone with a better grasp of this have any comments? Abcmaxx (talk) 02:59, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Welfare state and social benefits are not necessarily "socialist" which often refers to a greater degree of, e.g. direct government ownership of means of production. I would say economic nationalism which we currently have, pretty much covers it, especially the so-called "re-Polonization" aspect. (t · c) buidhe 03:18, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Not on their own they are not, but their entire economic policy hinges on welfare and social benefits and it is those that made them electorally successful, especially among the lower socio-economic groups, which they definitely seem to favour with those polices. I object to economic interventionism label, I see no proof of that and the (highly critical) articles cited seem to definitely point to crony capitalism rather than anything else. Abcmaxx (talk) 03:56, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Crony capitalism is certainly how Hungary operates nowadays[8][9] but I'm not sure that Poland is there yet; for instance, see the striking difference in misappropriation of EU funds[10] A loaded term like "crony capitalism", however, probably shouldn't be in wikivoice per WP:IMPARTIAL. (t · c) buidhe 08:57, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

@Buidhe: I agree probably not enough just yet however my point was it's not economic interventionism, nor what the sources quoted are getting at. State capitalism would be my option. Abcmaxx (talk) 09:22, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

Left wing

The sources don't add up:

1. Sciendo paper actually calls PiS a "far right" party, not left-wing
2. the Globalist Does not appear to be a WP:RS
3. Syndicate Opinion piece, not RS
4. Krzysztof Dobrowolski, Grzegorz Pawłowski:"STATISM IN THE ECONOMIC POLICY OF THE PIS GOVERNMENT AS A FACTORAFFECTING THE COMPETITIVENESS OF THE POLISH ECONOMY" Statism != left wing
5. Prokapitalizm obviously opinion, not RS
6. Reuters The only mention of "left" is Andrzej Duda, a social conservative with a left-leaning economic agenda Duda != PiS and is on paper not even a member of the party.
7. Blog magnapolonia Blog is obviously not a reliable source

You may be able to cherry-pick sources that do use the word "left" but that's not how it works in Wikipedia, we reflect the bulk of reliable sources, which unanimously use a variant of "right-wing". (t · c) buidhe 09:08, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Ok, but they call it right wing because everyone will agree, that socially it's right wing party. But every serious source I found says, that PiS is centrist, or even sometimes openly left-wing in economic issues. Small Bayoent 10:45, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

And also, economical statism is surely not right wing economically, it's centrist AT LEAST. Small Bayonet 10:47, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

To say "left", you need sources that say "left". Otherwise, it's WP:OR. (t · c) buidhe 09:51, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

@Small Bayonet, what buidhe is saying is explained in Wikipedia:Verifiability: "Wikipedia does not publish original research. Its content is determined by previously published information rather than the beliefs or experiences of editors. Even if you are sure something is true, it must be verifiable before you can add it".

By the way, you seem to be copying buidhe's signature styling. See Wikipedia:Signatures for how to properly use your signature. Robby.is.on (talk) 10:01, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

Ok, but still - all of the sources I gave have proven, that this party is economically centre left. There are much more of them of course. Small Bayonet here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Small Bayonet (talk • contribs) 10:38, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

@User:Buidhe if it's not centre-left economics then what is it? Because it's economically certainly not anything on the right of the spectrum, just look at Confederation policies and how much they revile PiS economic stances. Compare it to The Left and you'd find many more similarities. Abcmaxx (talk) 01:11, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

It doesn't matter what you or I think about it, what does matter is the bulk of reliable sources. If you search "PiS Poland left" on Google Scholar[11] I do not find any calling PiS or its policies left-wing, rather the scholarly researchers call opposing parties and movements left wing. Yes, it's true that Confederation is more economically liberal than PiS but that doesn't make the latter "center-left". (t · c) buidhe 01:44, 25 January 2021 (UTC)

@User:buidhe I'm unconvinced by your argument. A lack of something isn't really valid to prove a point, especially when there are no sources to indicate otherwise. If you say this is what it is not, then I repeat my question what is it then if not that? I do not think anything about the suggestion is particularly controversial. Abcmaxx (talk) 17:57, 26 January 2021 (UTC)

The "political position" parameter is for whether the party is considered center, left, right, etc. by most reliable sources. In this case, most reliable sources consider it right-wing. (Even the party's economic policies are underpinned by right-wing logics, i.e. nationalism, social conservatism, traditional gender roles, etc.—as pointed out in reliable sources) (t · c) buidhe 20:11, 26 January 2021 (UTC)