NATIONALIST POPULISM AND POST-COMMUNISM

From the six political parties that managed to enter the lower chamber of the parliament, only one did not use nationalist populist rhetoric in its party programme. Surprisingly, this was Samoobrona, which is known for a high level of social populism among its leaders, especially Andrzej Lepper. However, the anti-system and strong anti-government attitudes contained in the party manifesto of Samoobrona did not have nationalist populist accents. As will be shown in the forthcoming sub-chapter, the situation was rather different in the case of the media discourse. One of the possible explanations for this might be that the representatives of Samoobrona did not consider their party programme to be an effective communication channel with their supporters. From their point of view, media statements and direct contact with potential voters at the meetings organised in Polish towns or the countryside seemed to be much more effective tools for acquiring electoral success. Although the leaders of both parties are far from being new faces on the Polish political scene, their ability to transform their parties into parliamentary ones was viewed with particular interest by both the political leaders from other parties and the political analysts. However, apart from the Samoobrona and LPR leaders’ ability to mobilise the electorate, the good elections results of those two parties can be explained by disciplined and well-organised voters, as well as by a significantly low turnout. In terms of a positive self-presentation, many parties stressed the importance of the “Polish Nation” as a collective body and of individual “Poles” as smaller parts of this transcendental entity. Obviously, both the Poles and the Polish nation were presented in a very positive way. Apart frommentioning the “positive energy” that was to be released under the rule of the new government (PO) 151 , the PIS stressed the importance of preventing the parties with a communist heritage – namely the SLD – from gaining political power again. 152 However, the high level of support for the SLD in the election showed that such appeals did not find fertile soil among voters. In the field of economic nationalism, the most active roles were played by the PSL and LPR. While the first party presented itself as a defender of the interests of the large group of Polish farmers 153 , the LPR took the position of being against everything that was not Polish 154 . The issue of the sell-out of the “Polish” national 151 Sources: Program. 2001 rok, Warszawa, January 2001. See also Inka Słodkowska (ed.) Wybory 2001. Partie i ich programy. (Warszawa: Instytut studiów politycznych PAN, 2002), pp. 174–175. 152 Sources: Prawo i Sprawodliwość: “Program Prawa i Sprawiedliwośći“. See Inka Słodkowska (ed.) Wybory 2001. Patie i ich programy. (Warszawa: Istytut Studiów Politycznych PAN, 2001), p. 90. 153 Sources: Czas na zmianę… Program społeczno-gospodarczy PSL, Warszawa, April 2001. See also Inka Słodkowska (ed.) Wybory 2001.Partie i ich programy. (Warszawa: Instytut studiów politycznych PAN, 2002), p. 165. 154 Sources: Liga Polskich Rodzin. Polsce – niepodleglość, Polakom – praca, chleb, mieszkania.

61