|
 POLISH BELARUSIANS IN THE EYES OF AN ENGLISHMAN
Michael Fleming
Being English has never been one of my identity projects. Like many of my ‘Sikh’, ‘Muslim’ and ‘Black’ friends in London, I find the hegemonic conception of Englishness unattractive. They equate ‘Englishness’ with being ‘white’, and thus feel excluded despite being born in
England.[1] I further object to the imagery best encapsulated by the former Prime Minister, John Major, of an England of „warm beer and cricket”. Furthermore, the continual dominance of ‘aristocratic’ imagery is at variance with the multicultural place England now is. England – ‘a green and pleasant land’; Constable’s ‘The Haywain’, and other paintings such as ‘Mr and Mrs Andrews’ continue to suggest (and are used to suggest) a patriarchal, protestant, ‘southern’ place (the north of England being associated with ‘old’ industry – and consequently as unlikely to be conceived as ‘English’, as ‘Englishness’ is reconceptualised in the framework of the New Economy), in which labour remains out of sight (and consequently out of mind). This England remains distant to
many[2] . Like my ‘Sikh’, ‘Muslim’ and ‘Black’ friends, I prefer the label
‘British’[3] if forced to be categorised.
There is no doubt that there is a crisis in the notion of ‘Englishness’, which is sure to be exacerbated by the Scottish and Welsh devolution. Despite this, in Poland I am made into an Englishman. (Would this also be case if my skin was of a darker pigment?). „Where are you from?” I am asked. „Liverpool” I reply. „Ah, you are English”. My actions and behaviour are immediately understood in terms of my alleged ‘Englishness’. I drink tea – „ah, so typically English”. I make a joke, tell a story, walk along the street – all my actions assume the resonance of ‘Englishness’ for the Other. I become alien to myself. The Other’s conception of me, of which I have no control, is surely one of the meanings of the idiom „he is a stranger to himself”. But it is up to me how I assume myself as this stranger – in pride (Yes, I am!), in indifference (Whatever you say), in offence (I am not English!) etc. What I cannot do is to reject the Other. Even in denial I assume my
‘Englishness’.[4]
Who is the Other? The Other is someone who is not English – a Pole, a Belarusian Pole, for example. My same actions and behaviour assume a different significance in London; there I am a Liverpudlian, a Scouser or a Northerner, with all the different kinds of baggage the Other loads onto me with these particular labels. In Liverpool, similarly I am from a particular part of the city, and greeted by the Other as
such.[5] It is through contact with the Other that I discover myself. I choose how to react to the Other’s judgement, but I cannot escape these judgements.
Who then are Belarusian Poles? Of course they are those who declare themselves to be Belarusian Poles, but from the preceding remarks it is clear that Belarusian Poles are also those who the Other (I, or, for that matter, Poles) consider to be Belarusian Poles. This complicates matters. The years of Communism’s ‘one nation’ policy facilitated assimilation. In addition the economic transformation which initiated migration from the village to the town has proved to be a factor encouraging
assimilation.[6] Whilst perhaps thirty years ago there was an equivalence between being Polish Belarusian and being of the Orthodox confession, this is no longer the case; „I am Orthodox... No, I am not Belarusian. Neither are my parents or grandparents, perhaps my great-grandfather was,” said a 22 year-old man to me in Białystok. There is therefore a disjuncture between those who declare themselves to be Polish Belarusian, and those who seem to me to be Polish Belarusian by merit of language(s) spoken, confession and cultural activity. It is not unusual to find people at BTSK functions who declare themselves to be Polish, but are Orthodox, and know Belarusian.
For me, this poses a question: Why do people who have the choice of
nationality[7] choose to declare themselves Polish? E. Czykwin (2000)[8] is probably right when she argues that Polish Belarusians are a stigmatised group. But this in itself does not necessitate flight from the group. Flight is one possible choice of many, which of course include nationalistic responses. (The correct comparison would be with the responses of other stigmatised groups; for example, ‘Black is Beautiful’, ‘Gay Pride’, various feminist responses, etc.). Belarusian Poles’ flight toward Polishness is a relatively easy one to make. The education system is to a large degree geared to facilitate it. (There is a ‘Belarusian’ school in Hajnówka and Bielsk Podlaski, but 50 years ago there were more. Sadowski (1995, p15) states that in 1944 there were 115 primary schools and 3 secondary – including one in Białystok[9]). Individuals have a useable personal history which can help them assume a purely Polish national identity.
In flight from ‘Belarusianness’ individuals choose their past as well as their future. To be ‘Polish’ necessitates a certain relationship with the past. Links with the Polish Belarusian minority assume a new aspect. These links may now be defined as an ‘interest’ in folklore, in folk music, in village life (and hence the individual assumes and understands these activities from the perspective of a sympathetic
Pole).[10] If the former Belarusian Pole, now just Pole, continues to take part in Polish Belarusian cultural activities (ie. the events organised by the BTSK) then these events are qualitatively different. They are a celebration of the Other who one once was, but has since left behind. They become superfluous and gratuitous, overflowing with language and symbolism which one no longer understands, sees or hears, but consumes as one might a game show or a soap opera. Culture is reduced to entertainment.
In choosing ‘Polishness’, the world is valorised in a new way. Whilst the original choice may have been instrumental – career prospects, a desire for material goods, conformity etc., the past, both individual and collective, remains open. Like the dead, the past is prey for the
living[11] . And it is this fact which must be exploited if there is to be a Polish Belarusian minority in Poland.
Other minorities have made ‘their’ past useful for contemporary collective identity. The Jews for example remember the
Holocaust[12] . Here in Poland many Jews, especially young Jews (i.e. PUSZ), understand this murderous period as a calling to promote tolerance in Poland (i.e. Day of Tolerance, Łódź ). Events subsequent to the Holocaust are understood and ascribed a meaning in the same way (i.e. Kielce 1946, and the antisemitic campaign of 1968). The Germans unite around their poor treatment during the communist period in which it was officially declared that there were no Germans in Poland, and in which native inhabitants of Silesia were discriminated
against)[13] . What past can Polish Belarusians unite around? Until this question is satisfactorily answered, the future of the Polish Belarusian minority does not look promising.
But obviously it is not only minorities who look to the past to promote a collective identity. The majority must do so too. And what the majority does has serious implications for minorities.
The State
The Polish State is involved in negotiations with the European Union for membership of this organisation. One of the conditions for entry is the good treatment of national
minorities[14] . The Polish government has signed a number of bilateral agreements, amended electoral law to the advantage of national minorities and set up a Commission on National Minorities. However, each national minority offers the State something different, and consequently the ‘actual’ treatment of each minority varies in reality, though not in principle. The Jewish minority can help the State overcome the image of Poland as a land of
antisemites[15], as it was recently characterised by the former Israeli leader Benjamin Netanyahu, and help it build more positive relationships with Israel and the Diaspora. The visit of Hillary Clinton to the Lauder Morashe school in Warsaw last year not only improved her profile with her New York Jewish constituency, and increased the profile of Poland’s Jewish community, but also gave some credence to the State’s claim that Poland is a tolerant
society.[16]
The German minority is often seen as a bridge to communication with
Germany[17]. The 1991 Friendship Treaty certainly suggests this. The German government is sensitive to the situation in Poland (less so under Schroeder, than Kohl), and in Germany there exist organisations supporting the cause of Polish Germans (e.g. Federation of Expellees). In addition, German investment is much sought after, and whilst the development of social and financial capital through the German minority is slow, there is always this possibility. Today German tourists make a significant contribution to the economy of many towns in Opole-Silesia.
It is difficult to see what the Polish Belarusians offer the State. There is a small international audience to please (mainly silent), and very little finance to attract (if any). At best the State can implement the law concerning minorities, but there is no real outside agent with the power capability to force change monitoring the situation (in contrast to the German and the Jewish minorities). In this situation, the action of the mayor in Bielsk Podlaski (the sacking of many Belarusian Poles, with the justification that in the USA, the new President appoints a new administration) assumes an ominous
coloration[18], but which can largely be ignored by the central authorities.
The Catholic Church
95.2% of people in Poland are Catholic[19], and mass attendance is still high. The Catholic Church has enormous influence and its policy towards the various minorities is very important.
The Pope’s advocacy of good relations with the Jews seems to be changing attitudes within the Church from the antisemitic stance which characterised its policy prior to World War II. It is with increasing frequency that priest and bishops in Poland refer to the Jews as ‘our elder brothers’ – a phrase coined by the Pope himself. Antisemitic remarks are frowned upon, and offenders reprimanded. Nevertheless problems do remain, in both the Catholic media and personnel, and Catholic-Jewish dialogue still has much to achieve.
The Catholic Church has responded pragmatically to the German minority. Most of them are Catholic, and are largely spatially concentrated in the eastern parts of Opole-Silesia. Mass is said in German in a number of parishes.
For the Polish Belarusians, the Catholic Church seems to be a problem. The Catholic Church drapes itself in Polish national imagery. In Białystok, where 30% of people are ‘Polish Belarusian’ (mainly Orthodox), the Polish flag flies beside the Vatican flag (I did not see this whilst I travelled around Opole-Silesia). It seems that the Catholic Church in Białystok, and in Poland, more generally continues in its project of constructing Poland as Catholic. This has a negative affect on those like the Belarusians who differ in nationality and religion from the majority. A Polish Belarusian woman, aged 34 explained „It is difficult for me to be Belarusian... the Catholic bishop, Szumecki, is very aggressive”.
In Podlaskie, not all people who are Orthodox are Belarusian. This has muted the response from the Orthodox Church (contrast with the role the Catholic Church played in fostering and supporting Polish nationalism). This deprives Belarusians of a useful source and history of solidarity to promote Belarusian identity. Polish Belarusian opinion is fractured between those who favour a purely religious conception and those who wish to link it with nationality.
Representation
The weakness of the idea of Polish Belarusians is reflected in the weakness of the parties claiming to represent them.
Związek Białoruski with its neoliberal policies (both economic and political) is distant from its alleged constituency. In one of Poland’s poorest regions, which is economically based on agriculture, the idea of laissez-faire is an anathema. Whilst the farmers of Podlaskie may not realise that only one country has ever developed due to laissez-faire (Great Britain - it was the first country to industrialise and benefited from this fact), or know about the Lewis model (it basically transfers wealth from the country to the town in labour surplus economies), they do know about the need for agricultural subsidies and state intervention in the
economy[20]. Should we be surprised that people vote for a party which is more likely to deliver on these demands? But this is only half the argument. Związek Białoruski also claim to be Belarusian. But this Belarusianness posits a future based on alien social relations – rather than on the tried and trusted methods which characterise activity around the Polish-Belarusian heartland in South East Podlaskie. To be successful, Polish-Belarusian parties must not only posit a future, they must also make a past. If they choose to be neoliberal parties, they must refer to the ‘great’ Polish Belarusian neoliberal tradition. If none can be found, it must be ‘invented’ and made meaningful for today’s Polish
Belarusians[21] .
This refers us back to an earlier point. Polish Belarusians lack an event around which to mobilise, or a shared experience which can be translated into a collective identity project. Until one is found, Polish Belarusians are to remain speaking in different voices.
Another problem for those who wish to see a vibrant Polish Belarusian community is the fact that many ‘Polish Belarusians’ declare themselves to be ‘from
here’[22] . This is a local understanding of the world, based on face to face contacts. The conception of nation, on the other hand, is an ‘imagined
community’[23] . To be part of the Polish Belarusian community one must recognise those ‘Polish Belarusians’ who one will never meet as part of the same community (and place a value upon the notion of community: this is implicit in the identification with others). This is done by the sharing of, for example, language, experience, religion, idioms, behaviour etc.. In the refusal to do this, we can detect a number of factors. There is an identification with the immediate environment (Heimat) which is connected with the type of economic activity performed – agriculture. ‘From here’ indicates a certain conception of hodological space in which acts and needs are performed and expressed to concretise an identity. One of these needs is the need to communicate with one’s neighbours who are engaged in similar activity. If for the outsider (i.e. me, city dweller, etc.) these neighbours are Polish, then the statement ‘from here’ not only avoids conflict (suggesting the priority of real, i.e. face to face communities above imagined communities, i.e. national – Polish / Belarusian), but also expresses a solidarity with the neighbour when confronted by the outsider.
One of the goals of sociology has long been objectivity. The great illusion for many years was that one could make an intervention (do research) without altering what is researched. Fortunately this illusion is now recognised24 . And it is also recognised by many ‘gatekeepers’ who have chosen not to assist me in locating particular Polish Belarusians. They advise me that „we are one
community”[25] . This demonstrates an awareness that my query valorises particular people in a particular way, and that in this valorisation I alter, however slightly, interactions within the community. Perhaps these ‘gatekeepers’ are right to exclude me.
Conclusion
The Polish Belarusian community is a failing project. Rapid assimilation is taking place, which is aided by rural-urban migration, and the education system. The attempts of the Polish Belarusian organisations to invigorate Polish Belarusian life has had little effect. One of the reasons is the power of the negative stereotype; the association of Polish Belarusians with what Marx termed the ‘idiocy of rural life’. This is contrasted with the alleged dynamism of Polish society expressed in growing materialism, consumerism and careerism. These are stereotypes held by both Poles and Polish Belarusians. Instead of rebelling, many Polish Belarusian have chosen flight. Flight is easier, and has less opportunity costs (as it appears to those involved).
For the Polish Belarusian project to succeed a viable and usable history needs to be developed. A more encouraging policy from the Orthodox Church would be helpful. Improved financing and organisational capabilities would undoubtedly help, as would a nationalist turn in Belarus itself. But even if these things were to happen, which is very unlikely, they would still not be sufficient for the Polish Belarusian project to succeed. The crucial factor is the ability to recognise the Other, for it is through the Other that one discovers oneself. And since this recognition is unlikely to occur in the small world of the ‘from here’, this presupposes engagement with industrial and post-industrial society. But as we have seen, movement to the town has thus far facilitated assimilation. It is only when sufficient numbers of ‘from here’ people are confronted by their Otherness in the modern workplace or by their exclusion from it, that the Polish Belarusian activists will taste success. When ‘Polish Belarusians’ experience themselves as lack, the construction of a vibrant Polish Belarusian community will assume an urgency. Until then, assimilation will continue, and with it the chance to redevelop Polish Belarusian education will gradually fade – and the hope for the future of the Polish Belarusian project.
1 The recent trouble in Belgium during football’s Euro2000 competition suggests a reason for this. Chauvinistic behaviour was much in evidence. The English violence and taunts directed at the Turkish and Moroccan minorities in Brussels even managed to unite these two usually opposed groups. (See, for example: The Guardian 20/6/2000).
2 The alternative suggestion was expressed in the streets of Brussels – a tragic mixture of chauvinism (both in its racist and sexist guises), and Thatcherite individualism (meaning that former restraints on behaviour such as notions of duty, fair-play and civility are now absent). Here the popular media (The Sun) provided the historical context – World Wars and previous footballing encounters with hyperbolic and atavistic xenophobic commentaries.
3 This too is problematic, with a series of different notions competing for hegemony. But the ascendancy of the hyphenated British person indicates that this label may well prove more inclusive than English. The main problem however is connected with the ‘Break-Up of Britain’, which therefore poses serious questions about its long-term efficacy.
4 See for example, Sartre, J P (1996) Being and Nothingness London, Routledge (Translator- Hazel Barnes) p529
5 This process of discovery through the ‘Other’ continues. I can never free myself from the Other. And of course in all these situations I discover my masculinity in different ways, as the Other apprehends me. It is clear that Polish, and for that matter Polish-Belorussian gender relations are different from those in the UK. But for lack of space I will not address this issue here, save to recognise the fundamental significance of gender in the confrontation with the Other.
6 This process of migration need not necessitate assimilation. Rural to urban migration often provokes the discovery of a national identity under the Other’s gaze. In my own city, Liverpool, at the beginning of the 20th century, the arriving Irish (most of whom were from rural Ireland) discovered their Irishness. Liverpool remains the only city in England to have elected an Irish Nationalist MP (in Vauxhall).
7 We all must choose our nationality, and thereby choose ourselves. (It is of course possible not to choose – i.e. Internationalists, but nevertheless, the Other will always see us. Choice then becomes how one assumes the Other’s judgement). In borderlands, as in Podlaskie, and Silesia for that matter – this choice becomes highly political, as it is in these areas that the possibility of choosing is most clear. (This of course causes problems for Nationalist ideologues who posit the essentialism of nationality).
8 Czykwin, E. (2000) Białoruska mniejszość narodowa jako grupa stygmatyzowana Trans Humana, Białystok.
9 Sadowski, A (1995) Pogranicze Polsko-Białoruskie: Tożsamość Mieszkańców Trans Human, Bialystok.
10 See for example ‘Komunikat CBOS „Stosunek do Mniejszości Narodowych” No138, 1999, which shows a fairly sympathetic attitude to Polish Belarusians.
11 Sartre J P (1996) Being and Nothingness London, Routledge (Translator- Hazel Barnes) p543.
12 See Young, J (1990) The Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning Yale University Press, New Haven. He demonstrates how the Holocaust is remembered in different countries, and shows how the form of remembrance is linked to the notion of nation. The contrast between the US and Israel is particularly interesting.
13 Kamusella, T (1996) ‘Asserting Minority Rights in Poland’ Transition / 9 February 1996.
14 See Jackson-Preece, J (1998) National minorities and the European Nation-State System Clarendon, Oxford.
15 See Krzeminski, I (1996) Czy Polacy są antysemitami? Oficyna Naukowa, Warszawa, for a comparison of antisemitism in different countries. From his analysis, Poland comes out rather favourably.
16 There are numerous other examples, i.e. Premier Buzek’s visit to the same school.
17 But see Dziennik Zachodni (15/5/00) where Markus Meckel argues that the German minority may become an obstacle to German / Polish communication.
18 See Przegląd Prawosławny 12/98 p18-20 „Wielkie Miasto Białystok” (Mieczysław Wnuk).
19 See Firlit, E (1997) ‘The Roman Catholic Church in Poland of the 1990s as a Social Fact’ in Wojtaszczyk, K (1997) (ed) Poland. Government and Politics ELIPSA, Warszawa.
20 See Wiatr, J (2000) ‘Lasting cleavages and the changing party system in Poland: 1989-1999’ in Wiatr, J & Kubiak, H (eds) (2000) Between Animosity and Utility: Political Parties and their Matrix SCHOLAR, Warszawa. As well as the economic cleavage which I have highlighted, the importance of ideological cleavages should not be overlooked. Jan Syczewski, a major figure in Białoruskie Towarzystwo Społeczno-Kulturalne, is also an SLD Member of Parliament.
21 But this would seem to be a hopeless endeavour. Gellner, E (1996, p141) has argued that „classes without ethnicity are blind, but ethnicities without class are powerless”. If Gellner is correct, and it seems to me that he is, then in failing to appeal to the class of most Polish Belorussians, Związek Białoruskie will remain a talking-shop for intellectuals, and associated classes, and not the mass movement it aspires to be. It would be easier to drop certain commitments (i.e. laissez faire) than to mould class identity to a new politics (class was remoulded during the Thatcher era in the UK, but, in particular conditions, which allowed over 9 pieces of anti-union (anti-working-class?) legislation which made it almost impossible to strike legally. It is not surprising that the Thatcherite era also saw the rapid development of issue politics, and New Social Movements.). The Polish Belorussians lack both the resources and ideological commitment to undertake such social transformations.
22 See Sadowski, A (1995) Pogranicze Polsko-Białoruskie: Tożsamość Mieszkańców Trans Human, Białystok.
23 See Anderson, B (1983) Imagined Communities Verso, London.
24 Sartre, J P (1996) Being and Nothingness London, Routledge (Translator- Hazel Barnes) p550.
25 The ‘gatekeepers’ who I have asked for assistance have been Polish Belorussians (for me).
BIBLIOGRAPHY
1) Anderson, B (1983) Imagined Communities Verso, London.
2) CBOS (1999) ‘Komunikat CBOS „Stosunek do Mniejszości Narodowych” No 138, 1999.
3) Czykwin, E (2000) Białoruska mniejszość narodowa jako grupa stygmatyzowana Trans Humana, Białystok.
4) Dziennik Zachodni (15/5/2000).
5) Firlit, E (1997) ‘The Roman Catholic Church in Poland of the 1990s as a Social Fact’ in Wojtaszczyk, K (1997) (ed) Poland. Government and Politics ELIPSA, Warszawa.
6) Hobsbawm, E J & Ranger, T O (1992) The Invention of Tradition CUP Cambridge.
7) The Guardian (various editions).
8) Gellner, E (1996) ‘The Coming of Nationalism and its Interpretation: The Myths of Nation and Class’ in Balakrishnan, G (ed) (1996) Mapping the Nation Verso, London.
9) Jackson-Preece, J (1998) National Minorities and the European Nation-State System, Clarendon, Oxford.
10) Krzeminski, I (1996) Czy Polacy są antysemitami? Oficyna Naukowa, Warszawa.
11) Young, J (1990) The Texture of Memory: Holocaust Memorials and Meaning Yale University Press.
12) Sadowski, A (1995) Pogranicze Polsko-Białoruskie: Tożsamość Mieszkańców Trans Humana, Białystok
13) Sartre, J P (1996) Being and Nothingness Routledge, London (translator Hazel Barnes).
14) Wnuk, M (1998) „Wielkie Miasto Białystok” in Przegląd Prawosławny 12/98.
SUMMARY
W referacie tym twierdzę, że:
1) Narodowość jest projektem (potencjalnością/celem)
2) Narodowość określona zostaje przez spojrzenie «Innego» i nadaje jej się znaczenie. Jest to wolny wybór.
3) Moja angielskość jest kontekstowa i jest mi przypisana przez «Innego».
4) Podobnie, polska białoruskość jest przypisywana (jak również wybierana)
5) Projekt polskiej białoruskości jest projektem słabym, głównie z następujących powodów:
a) łatwość asymilacji - migracja wieś-miasto
b) system kształcenia
c) negatywne stereotypy („idiotyzm życia wiejskiego”)
d) brak zasobów
6) Polskie białoruskie organizacje (Związek Białoruski) nie odniosły sukcesu dlatego, że:
a) programy polityczne nie wywodziły się z doświadczenia polskich Białorusinów
b) inne strony skuteczniej wykorzystały ekonomiczne i ideologiczne podziały w Podlaskim
c) Opinia polskich Białorusinów jest podzielona na tych, którzy chcą aby rozwijała się mniejszość narodowa i tych, którzy chcą widzieć w niej mniejszość religijną (wielu jest obojętnych).
Uważam, że polscy Białorusini muszą doświadczyć siebie jako «brak» (niekompletność – którą da się unicestwić tylko przez identyfikowanie się z polską białoruskością), aby zaistnieć mogła żywotna mniejszość polskich Białorusinów. Nastąpić to może tylko wtedy, gdy wystarczająca liczba ludzi zostanie postawiona wobec swej «inności» w miejscu pracy, lub wykluczona z miejsca pracy właśnie z powodu inności. Jest to jednak mało prawdopodobne, biorąc pod uwagę zły stan ekonomiczny Województwa Podlaskiego i mało inspirującą sytuację samej Białorusi.
Michael Fleming – doctoral candidate at the University of Oxford, researching selected contemporary national minorities in Poland.
|
Ïîëüñê³ à¢êöû¸í
