NATIONALIST POPULISM AND POST-COMMUNISM

2.3.3. Nationalist populism in domestic and foreign policies According to John Higley, Jan Pakulski and Włodzimierz Wesołowski, elite unity and elite differentiation are crucial determinants of the stability of political regimes. Differences in the extent of elite unity and its differentiation from the populace define the main configuration of the political elite: strong or weak unity accompanied by wide or narrow differentiation. These configurations are in turn the principal determinants of the political regime: a stable democracy occurs where there is both strong unity and wide differentiation; authoritarian regimes occur where there is neither; unstable democracies occur where there is wide differentiation but weak unity; and finally, totalitarian regimes occur where there is strong unity but narrow differentiation. 51 From this point of view, the Polish and Slovak democracies, which are changing from an unstable to a stable form, could be characterised by a wide differentiation of the political elite on the one hand, but not very strong unity on the other, especially when their visions of liberal democracy are taken into account. It can be argued, however, that among the uniting factors for either the government or opposition political elite in both countries is their positive attitude towards nationalist populism, as will be demonstrated in the analysed political discourses. In the theory of international relations, nation states are perceived as the most crucial actors in international politics. In all likelihood this will not change in the foreseeable future, despite the speedy process of globalisation. Apart from maintaining their internal cohesion, nation states have to interact with other states in the global arena. According to the Realist approach to international relations, each nation pursues its “national interests” on the international arena. The balance of power among countries, which is also understood as the balance of their “national interests”, is perceived to be the prime determinant of the state’s behaviour and the most important component of its foreign policy. 52 As Ilya Prizel argues, while a polity must meet a set of preconditions in order to form a nation, it is the nation’s interaction with the outside world, namely its acceptance or rejection of the “other”, that allows polities to develop a sense of national uniqueness. Therefore, most nationalisms, apart from emphasising common cultural bonds, kinship or a common language and history among the members of that particular nation, also refer back to a conflict with an outside power. When a state pursues the interests of a particular ethnic group, an outside power, or the so-called “external other”, is defined predominantly in ethnic terms. Similarly, a popular notion of “national interest” used widely by 51 See, for example, J. Higley, J. Pakulski, W. Wesołowski (eds.) Postcommunist Elites and Democracy in Eastern Europe. (Macmillan Press 1998). 52 See, for example, D. Miller et al. Blackwellova encyklopedie politického myšlení. (Barrister & Principal, 2003).

24