This article's main aim is to propose a novel model explaining the continuous domination of identity issues in modern Polish political discourse. The model proposed here may also appear useful as an explanation of similar tendencies in some other Central european countries. It is based on a specific reading of the modern history of the region-one relying on a structural perspective and specifically using Pierre Bourdieu's notion of a "field of power." In conclusion, the article suggests that the perspective it proposes may challenge what it calls simplistic accounts of processes of long duration.

This article analyses the redefinition of global discourse in semi-peripheral settings; it proposes a model for the semi-peripheral recontextualization of critical discourses originating from the western core of the global intellectual system. The process of redefinition of global discourses in semi-peripheral settings appears to involve their parallel appropriation by actors whose positions can be reconstructed through Bourdieu’s field concept, in particular through the usage of his theory of cultural capital in the field of contemporary Polish sociology. The model presented in the article emphasizes a strong homology between the political field and the broader field of social sciences in peripheral countries. It appears that they are usually structured according to specific peripheral pro- vs anti-centre cleavages. Peripheral fields of power, which are organized around this binary logic, tend to produce specific, often contradictory, parallel redefinitions of western critical theory. Meanings become politically defined and distant from their original context. One of the paradoxical effects of these mechanisms is that the concepts which originally emerge as critical theory, in a semi-peripheral context, are often used in legitimization of and as apology for a neoliberal social order.

Citizenship is usually seen as a product of modern nation-states, or of other political entities which possess institutional infrastructures and political systems capable of producing a coherent framework that defines the relationship between that system and its members. In this paper, we show that an early system of modern citizenship was created in the absence of a formal state, notably by the cultural elite of a stateless nation. The Polish case illustrates that an elite may become a dominant class in the given society only later, and institutionalize that early citizenship system within the framework of a newly founded state. As a result of the legacy of the emergence of citizenship predating the restoration of statehood, the contemporary Polish citizenship model is influenced by a strong and largely overlooked cultural component that emerged at the turn of the 19th century. This model uses the figure of the intelligentsia member as its ideal citizen. Despite the dramatic political and economic changes in the decades which have passed since its emergence, this cultural frame, which was institutionalized during the interwar period, still defines the key features of the Polish citizenship model. Consequently, we argue that the culturalization of citizenship is hardly a new phenomenon. It can be seen as a primary mechanism in the formation of civic polities within the imperial context. Moreover, it shows that such processes can have many ambiguous aspects as far as their Orientalizing forces of exclusion are concerned.

No abstract

Looking at the contemporary Polish political sciences in a wider international perspective—and specifically analyzing their location within the global hierarchies of academic knowledge production—may not only shed new light on the field but will also provide interesting insight to workings of social sciences in peripheral context. The position of the Polish political science, as measured in terms of international rankings or indexes of citations, is rather low. Moreover, its dominant intellectual schools and most commonly used methodological approaches may be considered old fashioned from the perspective of leading Western centers of the discipline. Descriptive analysis and traditional institutionalism dominate, while more sophisticated behavioral approaches or new institutionalism are rare. On the other hand, the field as such may be seen as quite strong, especially given its visibility in the national media, its considerable institutional and human resources, or high numbers of students attracted each year. Moreover, it can be argued that the field has achieved considerable autonomy from the global political science system and has successfully endured post-Communist transformation, retaining most of its staff and institutional assets from the previous regime (which was not the case in most other central European countries). At the same time, one can find within it a smaller faction of internationally oriented scholars. They contest the dominant, locally oriented majority of the field and are well connected to global academic networks. In effect, an interesting duality within Polish political science may be observed and interpreted as a phenomenon typical for many peripheral countries, understood in terms of the world systems theory. Relying on Wallersteinian perspective on the global system of social sciences coupled with Bourdieusian field analysis allows for reconstruction of the genesis and underlying structures of the contemporary field of political sciences in Poland, which may be interpreted as a case of successful autonomy building of a peripheral field of social sciences.