THE POLISH INTELLECTUALS
251
to look upon themselves as the real "vanguard of the working class."
They have even begun to elaborate the theoretical bases of their move–
ment, developing in the process a humanistic and pragmatic
Weltan–
schauung,
the main features of which can be summed up as follows,
on the basis of their writings:
The Utopian conception of Communism, according to which all
sacrifices were justified for the sake of a mythical future, is emphatically
rejected. Socialism must be judged according to its contribution to the
present: "We have certain obligations to the Communist idea, the
Communist movement.... But we are more concerned with the fate
of our nation, the fate of these millions of men,
iII
fed,
iII
clothed,
overworked, who have hoped for social justice"
(M.
Gornicki,
Sztandar
Mlodych
("The Banner of Youth"), Nov. 24, 1956).
This refusal to sacrifice the present generation on the altar of
some utopian future is coupled with the rejection of the teleological
view of history. In a view of history that conceives of the present only
sub specie futuri,
says Jan Kott, "everything that speeds up the his–
torical process is regarded as progress, and everything that slows it down,
as reaction. We have here a kind of bed of Procrustes. History must
be
tortured to force it to produce the next stage as quickly as possible"
(Przeglad Kulturalny,
No. 36, 1956).
The direction the historical process was to take was formerly de–
termined by the interests of the Soviet Union. By acting in the interests
of the Soviets, one speeded up the course of history, and the extent of a
given country's progress toward socialism was measured by the degree
to which it corresponded to the Soviet archetype. But to the Polish
writers of today, independence and national sovereignty seem not only
compatible with the building of socialism, but an indispensable condition
for it; there are many roads leading to socialism, and these can vary ac–
cording to place and time: "There will be no socialism in Poland if
there is no national sovereignty. Restrictions on sovereignty do not
bring socialism closer, but on the contrary paralyze its development"
(J.
Bochenski,
Przeglad Kulturalny,
No. 43, 1956).
The pragmatic approach is thus set over against the dogmatic ap–
proach. In the Stalinist era facts and experience did not count, any
more than the consequences of a given decision, so long as the decision
was "correct" from a doctrinal standpoint. Now Gomulka's appeal to
an empirical approach is echoed by most intellectuals. "In the course
of our lives we have had to memorize two different catechisms. Today
we reject all canons and versicles, all Holy Bibles and Unholy Bibles.
