Poland: A Proving Ground for Value Pluralism
Poland serves as a contemporary laboratory of value pluralism, where conflicting visions of the common good collide. From debates over abortion to education, reality shows that no single universal ideal satisfies all citizens. This article analyzes how, based on the thought of John Gray, we can move from permanent conflict toward a modus vivendi—the art of peaceful coexistence. You will learn why attempts to impose a hegemonic vision destroy the state and how to design institutions capable of managing enduring disagreement.
The 1997 Constitution and 2020: Poland's Modus Vivendi
The 1997 Constitution was designed as a modus vivendi mechanism, bridging religious and secular traditions in its preamble. It was intended to guarantee a "minimum of peace," yet over time, it became a battlefield for imposing a "maximum of values." The year 2020 and the collapse of the abortion compromise marked the moment when a fragile non-aggression pact gave way to an escalation of anger. This demonstrates that where values are incommensurable—such as a woman's autonomy and the life of a fetus—there is no rational measure, only institutional frameworks for coexistence.
A similar conflict concerns memory and education. The dispute over whether schools should produce "patriots" or "critical citizens" is a clash between two incompatible visions of the good. Instead of seeking the dominance of one narrative, the state should create space for both, recognizing that pluralism is a fact, not a defect of the system.
Institutional Reforms and Local Governance: Frameworks for Pluralism
To avoid "civil war," Polish politics requires institutional reforms. Key to this are local governance and decentralization, which act as a shield against top-down uniformity. Greater regional autonomy in education or culture allows different models of life to coexist side by side. Media and political parties, in turn, must abandon the logic of fighting an "enemy" in favor of acting as agents negotiating the terms of cohabitation.
In this model, religion within a modus vivendi changes its function. The Church ceases to be a moral hegemon, becoming an equal participant in the debate. Such coexistence requires public institutions to maintain a neutrality that is not indifference, but rather the active management of a diversity of voices in the public sphere.
Gray vs. Rawls: Value Incommensurability and the European Union
Unlike John Rawls, who sought an "overlapping consensus," John Gray points to the incommensurability of values. Political choices are often a tragedy of choice between goods that cannot be reconciled. This conflict is evident in Poland's dispute with the EU: a clash between a community's right to self-determination and universal individual rights. Gray suggests that the European Union should be viewed as a federation of disagreements rather than a project of axiological uniformity.
The philosopher distinguishes two faces of tolerance: as indifference and as a pragmatic condition for survival. For Europe, the only path forward is the latter—building institutions that can bear the weight of difference. Only by accepting the fact that member states interpret the "rule of law" or "equality" differently can we avoid a Brexit scenario and preserve the stability of the union.
Concordia Discors: A New Formula for Modern Humanism
The idea of concordia discors—agreement in disagreement—is the foundation of a mature democracy. Poland will find stability not through "one true narrative," but by learning to live in a polyphonic society. Compromise is not a defeat, but a civilizational virtue and an expression of humility toward the complexity of the world. Can we build bridges across value chasms, recognizing that our neighbor has the right to a different vision of the good? True humanism teaches us to endure uncertainty and to disagree without hatred.
📄 Full analysis available in PDF