Introduction
Modern political discourse often treats liberty and equality as an inseparable pair. However, the thought of Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn and the classics of liberalism proves that these are antagonistic concepts. While liberty allows natural differences between people to emerge, imposing equality requires state coercion and social engineering. This article analyzes how upsetting this balance leads to a crisis of democracy and the flourishing of Polish partiocracy.
Liberty and Equality: An Inevitable Conflict of Values
Liberty is a personal space of choice, while equality is a leveling operation in which the individual loses their unique form. James Madison warned in the "Federalist Papers" that the tyranny of the majority destroys the rights of the minority, threatening personal security and property. Therefore, he proposed a system of "checks and balances" to restrain the emotions of the crowd.
In turn, Alexis de Tocqueville observed that soft despotism lulls citizens to sleep, turning the state into a tutelary power that relieves people of the burden of thinking. Joseph Schumpeter, meanwhile, defined democracy as a political market—a method for selecting elites rather than rule by the people. To prevent the system from degenerating into tyranny, institutional safeguards are essential: barriers against the arbitrariness of power and a strong constitutional liberalism that protects the individual from the dictate of the 51% of voters.
Compromise vs. Dogmatism: Two Models of Political Culture
The stability of democracy depends on its cultural bedrock. The Anglo-Saxon model is based on pragmatism and precedent, where compromise is a virtue. The continental model, including the Polish one, often pursues absolute ideas, turning politics into a battlefield for metaphysical truth. Historical sources of distrust in Poland—from Sarmatian anarchy to the trauma of the Polish People's Republic—have caused the state to be perceived as either an enemy or a prize to be plundered.
In response to these pathologies, Kuehnelt-Leddihn proposed a "third way": a synthesis of constitutional liberalism with the presence of an arbiter standing above the partisan fray. Such a model would protect the state from massification and the plebiscitary hysteria that often replaces substantive debate in Poland.
Polish Partiocracy and Corrective Mechanisms
The contemporary Polish political class suffers from a chronic flight from responsibility. Parties change their platforms without any political cost, and clientelism has become the primary currency of the system. The citizen ceases to be a participant in the exchange of ideas, becoming instead a petitioner in a patronage-driven job distribution agency. Populism after 2005 became a technology for maintaining power through social transfers that build dependency rather than real equality of opportunity.
Fixing the system requires specific tools. Fiscal subsidiarity—leaving the majority of funds in the hands of local communities—forms the foundation of individual liberty. Equally important are sunset laws—a mechanism for the automatic expiration of laws after a set period, which could effectively curb legal inflation and the bureaucratic growth of the state.
Summary
In the pursuit of illusory equality, have we lost sight of the foundations of liberty? Has democracy, instead of being a tool in the hands of citizens, become a puppet theater where parties pull the strings? An analysis of political thought teaches us that without strong institutions and a culture of responsibility, this system will always drift toward soft totalitarianism. Or perhaps we Poles have still not learned to drink the wine of democracy in moderation, getting drunk on absolutes and passions instead of building a cool, institutional realism?
📄 Full analysis available in PDF