Radykalizm czasu przełomu czyli spór o Okrągły Stół w latach 1988–1989

Przygotowania do Okrągłego Stołu i negocjacje między stroną społeczną (Solidarnością) a rządową (PZPR) w 1989 r. wywoływały różne krytyczne oceny w kręgach opozycji demokratycznej. Okrągły Stół przez wiele lat był punktem spornym debat historycznych i politycznych. Artykuł prezentuje sposoby argumentacji politycznych przeciwników Okrągłego Stołu – radykałów, którzy w latach 1988–1989 kontestowali linię działania Lecha Wałęsy i jego otoczenia.

The Round Table (February – April 1989) has been a thorny issue for many years, igniting debates among historians and politicians of the Third Polish Republic, and opinions about it – favourable or unfavourable – corresponded with the opinions of general achievements of the transformation of the Polish political system. Already during the negotiations, the Round Table talks caused controversies and deepened personal and ideological divisions within Solidarność and the opposition. The end of 1988 brought about the emergence of a tendency to contest the line of action of Wałęsa and his circle, and especially rejected the need of Round Table talks with the communist government. The tendency was shared by political groups originating from Solidarność and newly formed political parties, numerous but weak, existing on the margin. The article presents the most important arguments of political opponents of the Round Table talks – the radicals of the crucial time of changes in 1988 and 1989. The author answers the question whether it is right to use the term “radicalism” and attempts to determine the scope of a social base of radicals; he points out that many arguments put forward by the opponents of the negotiations were also presented by journalists and oppositionists supporting Lech Wałęsa. He thus advances a thesis that it was not political concepts that distinguished radicals from the rest of the opposition, but their specific psychological attitude; this, however, requires further study.