In discussing the outcomes ascribed to globalization one should distinguish the symptoms from the causes. Globalization is to often blamed for the results of bad policies, especially those which hamper individuals’ adjustment to new pressures, and those which encourage them to take excessive risks.
“Inequality” refers to very important aspects of social life. But the debate on equality is full of confusion because of its many meanings, methodological and empirical errors and very strong emotions which “inequality” evokes. Conceptual confusion includes the lack of precise distinction between the inequality of situation and the inequality of opportunity.
As for the parliamentary elections, I felt much more uncertain. Like many others, I took the possibility of a coalition around the Law and Justice Party into account. In this variant, the president’s office in the hands of Komorowski became strategically important to prevent various anti-reforms (e.g. lowering the retirement age). I also did not rule out a weak coalition around the Civic Platform.
The process of unmasking social and national etatists is an extremely vital part of our mission to improve our political system. And it has to be a ceaseless offensive. One has to fight!
Many people, both in the West and in the former socialist countries, display an attitude which I call—somewhat pointedly—“a mentality of Soviet official”. It is a generalized belief: “whatever problem there exists, only the state can solve it.” The state is perceived as a deity, i.e. an omniscient and benevolent being with unlimited resources.