¹ ‘Intelligentsia’ (Inteligencja) is a broader term than ‘intellectuals’, usually comprising educated people (basically with higher education), whereas ‘intellectuals’ refers to those whose role is ‘creative’, ‘professional’ (writers, scholars, journalists, etc.). The division between these two categories is vague, as we should bear in mind when using the term ‘intellectuals’ in this paper. The fact is that in Poland, and probably in other Eastern European countries (especially Russia), the much more common, more frequently used term was ‘intelligentsia’, with roots going back to the nineteenth century. In 1956 in Poland the word ‘intellectuals’ was rarely used; in public language much more common were ‘intelligentsia’ and ‘members of the intelligentsia’ (inteligend). For the discussion of both concepts see Gella, Alexander, ‘The Life and Death of the Old Polish Intelligentsia’, Slavonic Review, Vol. 30, no. 1, (1971);Google Scholaridem, The Intelligentsia and the Intellectuals (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1976).Google Scholar

² The theoretical notions of mass movements and mass behaviour are well established in the social sciences, although they often tend to be somewhat obscure when used in historical empirical studies. A brief clarification of the terms used in this paper seems to be relevant. A mass social movement arises when ‘a group of people somewhat orient themselves to the same belief system and act together to promote change on the basis of the common orientation’. Tilly, Charles, From Mobilization to Revolution (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1978), 40.Google Scholar Mass behaviour is ‘group behaviour which originates spontaneously, is relatively unorganized, fairly unpredictable, and which depends on interstimulation among participants.’ Milgram, Stanley and Toch, Hans, ‘Collective Behaviour: Crowds and Social Movements’, in The Handbook of Social Psychology ed. Lindzay, G. and Aronson, E., Vol. 4: Group Psychology and phenomena of interaction (Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1969), 507.Google Scholar The concept of mass social movement is defined by contrast with some other social forms, such as formal organizations, mass parties, and clubs. Its more distinctive features include substantive and diffuse orientation and polymorphous structure combined with inclusive membership.… Because of their antiorganizational character and amorphous structure, movements articulate themselves in the form of short-lived, periodical bursts – rallies, blockades, marches, etc. They rely on the mobilization of the collective moral energy, commitment, and dedication, which – in the absence of an institutional framework – cannot be maintained for a long time.’ Pakulski, Jan, ‘Social Movements in Comparative Perspective’, Research in Social Movements, Conflicts and Change, Vol. 10 (1988), 248–50.Google Scholar

³ The main sources from which to reconstruct mass movements in 1956 are documents from the Party and Public Security apparatus archives. Archival materials from the Committee of Public Security (Komitet Bezpieczeństwa Publicznego) and local Public Security Offices (Urzedy Bezpieczeństwa) – now in Biuro Ewidencji i Archiwum Urzedu Ochrony Państwa; documents of Polish United Workers Party (both from the Central Committee and from local committees) – now in Archiwum Akt Nowych. The most useful are reports prepared systematically by the local Public Security Offices (Wojewódzkie Urzedy Bezpieczeństwa, Powiatowe Urzedy Bezpieczeństwa) and by the Central Committee's Organisational Department (Wydzial Organizacyjny KC PZPR), based on the regular reports of the provincial (voivode) and district (powiat) PZPR committees. The author's book, Polski rok 1956 [Poland in 1956] (Warsaw: Oficyna Wydawnicza ‘Mówia. Wieki’, 1993), was based on these previously inaccessible materials.

⁴ For the situation in Poznań plants before 28 June 1956 see Maciejewskigo, Jaroslawa and Trojanowiczowj, Zofia (eds.), Poznanski Czerwiec 1956 (Poznań: Wydarnictwo Poznanskie, 1990);Google ScholarZ˚echowski, Zbigniew, ‘Z ekonomicznych źródel sytuacji strajkowej w Zakladach im. H. Cegieskiego wiosna 1956 r.’, Kronika Miasta Poznania, Vol. 3–4 (1957).Google Scholar

⁵ Biuro Ewidencji i Archiwum Urzedu Ochrony Państwa (hereafter UOP), 155/5, 155/37.

⁶ Stanislaw Mikolajczyk was the leader of the Polish Peasant Party (Polskie Stronnictwo Ludowe), which in the period 1945–47 constituted the core of the legal anti-Communist opposition. In October 1947 Mikolajczyk fled Poland and became one of the most emminent Polish anti-Communist emigrés in United States.

⁷ UOP, 155/6, 155/14, 17/IX/124, t. 14, 17/IX/124, t. 9.

⁸ For the description of Budapest in 1956 see Litvan, György (ed.), The Hungarian Revolution of 1956. Reform, Revolt and Repression 1953–1963 (New York: Longman, 1996).Google Scholar

⁹ UOP, 155/6, 155/28, 155/37, 17/IX/124, t.9.

¹⁰ Dahrendorf, Ralf, Class and Class Conflict in Industrial Society (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1959).Google Scholar

¹¹ For the detailed description of the Poznań revolt see Poznański Czerwiec 1956; Machcewicz, Polski rok 1956; Jan Nalepa, Edward, Pacyfikacja zbuntowanego miasta. Wojsko Polskie w Czerwcu 1956 r. w Poznaniu w świetle dokumentow wojskowych (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo Bellona, 1992).Google Scholar

¹² For the internal situation of the Polish United Workers’ Party see Rykowski, Zbyslaw and Wladyka, Wieslaw, Polska próba. Paździemik ‘56 (Kraków: Wydawnictwo Literackie, 1989);Google ScholarFriszke, Andrzej, ‘Rozgrywka na szczycie. Biuro Polityczne KC PZPR w paździemiku 1956’, Wieź, Vol. 9 (1996), 188–212Google Scholar; Werblan, Andrzej, ‘Gomulka i Paździemik’, Dziś. Przeglad spoleczny, Vol. 10 (1996), 58–66.Google Scholar

¹³ For a description of the talks between the Polish Politbureau and the Soviet delegation see Machcewicz, Pawel, Wladyslaw Gomulka (Warsaw: Wydawnictwa Szkolne i Pedagogiczne, 1995), 40–1Google Scholar; Werblan, Andrzej, ‘Rozmowy kierownictwa PZPR z delegacja KPZR. Nieznane dokumenty z października 1956 r.’, Dziś Przeglad spoleczny, Vol. 4 (1995), 105–11Google Scholar; Gluchowski, L. W., ‘Poland 1956. Khrushchev, Gomulka and the “Polish October”’, Cold War Bulletin, Issue 5 (1995).Google Scholar

¹⁴ For a detailed description of the mass meetings and demonstrations which took place in Poland in Oct. and Nov. 1956 see Machcewicz, , Polski rok 1956, 153–67.Google Scholar

¹⁵ UOP, 17/IX/99, 17/IX/99, t. 6, 155/24; Archiwum Akt Nowych (thereafter AAN) 237/VII-3861, 71.

¹⁶ UOP, 17/IX/99, t. 6.

¹⁷ UOP, 17/IX/95; AAN, 237/VII-3843.

¹⁸ UOP, 17/IX/99, t. 6.

¹⁹ In the case of mass movements we have to refer to Party and State Security documents, which are the only available sources with which to reconstruct mass phenomena. If we want to reconstruct the political thinking and political demands of the intellectuals, we should use other types of sources. Basically, there are two: the press, and resolutions (taken, for example, at meetings held at academic institutions, research institutes, professional associations, e.g. the Union of Polish Writers). The latter were held in the former KC PZPR archives (after 1989 transferred to Archiwum Akt Nowych in Warsaw).

²⁰ Skórzyński, Jan, ‘Odwilż w cenzurze’, Krytyka, Vol. 34–35 (1991), 102–16.Google Scholar

²¹ For the factional struggle within the Party see Rykowski, and Wladyka, , Polska Próba; Friszke, ‘Rozgrywka na szczycie’; Werblan ‘Gomulka i Paździemik’; Witold Jedlicki, Klub Krzywego Kola (Paris: Instytut Literacki, 1963);Google ScholarZambrowski, Antoni, ‘Rewelacje wyssane z palca, czyli pulawianie i natolińczycy w 1956 roku’, Warszawskie Zeszyty Historyczne, Vol. 2 (1988), 49–78.Google Scholar For anti-semitism in Poland in 1956 see Kersten, Krystyna, Polacy. żydzi. Komunizm. Anatomia pólprawd 1939–68 (Warsaw: Niezalezna Oficyna Wydawnicza, 1992);Google ScholarMachcewicz, Pawel, ‘Antisemitism in Poland in 1956’, in Polonsky, Antony (ed.), Polin. Studies in Polish Jewry, Vol. 9 Poles, Jews, Socialists. The Failure of an Ideal (London: The Littman Library of Jewish Civilization, 1996), 170–83.Google Scholar

²² ‘Ludowadztwo’ is an ideological word from the Communist vocabulary. Its closest English equivalent would probably be ‘revolutionary democracy’ or ‘people's democracy’.

²³ Urban, J., ‘O ludowladztwie’, Po prostu, 15 Apr. 1956.Google Scholar

²⁴ For the discussions in the Crooked Circle Club see Jedlicki, Klub Krzywego Kola.

²⁵ Its meaning is very similar to the slogan invented and promoted thirty years later by Gorbachev – glasnost.

²⁶ AAN, 237/XVIII-153, 103–4.

²⁷ Such a union – Rewolucyjny Zwiazek Mlodziezy (Revolutionary Union of the Youth) – was founded on 7 Dec. 1956 by members of ‘revolutionary’ groups and committees, composed usually of students and former ZMP activists. The RZM activists had very good contacts with Po prostu and Sztandar Mlodych, which promoted the union and its programme. RZM existed only for a month. At the beginning of Jan. 1957, under pressure from the Party apparatus which could not tolerate an independent youth movement, RZM was united with another youth association and transformed into Zwiazek Młodziezy Socjalistycznej (Union of the Socialist Youth), controlled by the Party.

²⁸ Kossak, J., Wirpsza, W. and Lasota, E., ‘Przywódca czy administrator’, Po prostu, 4. Nov. 1956.Google Scholar

²⁹ See Borowska, M., Balcerak, J. and Gilejko, L., ‘Rady czy system rad’, Po prostu, 6 Jan. 1957.Google Scholar

³⁰ Chelstowski, S. and Godek, W., ‘Samorzad robotniczy w niebezpieczeństwie’, Po prostu, 20 Jan. 1957.Google Scholar

³¹ ‘Zobaczyć i zrozumieć’, 22 May 1956; ‘Trzy zasady’, 23 May 1956; ‘Kto i jak kieruje fabryka’, 4 June 1956.

³² The most important work on the workers’ attitudes towards workers’ councils was done by the team of sociologists from Zaklad Badań Socjologicznych (Institute of Philosophy and Sociology of the Polish Academy of Sciences) led by Jan Szczepański. See Jarosz, Maria, Kulpińska, Jolanta, Majchrzak, Irena and Szostkiewicz, Halina, ‘Samorzad robotniczy w opiniach załóg robotniczych’, in Studia nad rozwojem klasy robotniczej, ed. by Szczepański, Jan (Łodz-Warsaw: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 1962) ii 89–153.Google Scholar The weak point of this very valuable work is that it was based mostly on observations and interrogations of the workers of the FSO factory, which was an exceptional case and should not be treated as representative of the whole country. Nevertheless, one observation from this work may be very relevant here. The birth of the workers’ council was greeted with enthusiasm by the great majority of workers, but after a few months the situation had changed radically. The workers’ council supported the measures to increase the efficiency of production (e.g. by increasing production norms), which turned the majority of the employees against it.

³³ The workers’ councils movement (including especially FSO) is described by Kloc, Kazimierz, Historia samorzadu robotniczego w PRL 1944–1989 (Warsaw: SGH, 1992).Google Scholar See as well Jakubowicz, Szymon, Bitwa o samorzad 1980–1981 (Warsaw: In Plus, 1989), 21–39;Google ScholarSkórzyński, Jan, ‘Upadek rad robotniczych’, Zeszyty Historyczne, Vol. 74 (1985).Google Scholar

³⁴ There does exist a very valuable sociological literature (based on empirical surveys) on Polish workers for the second half of the 1950s, but it focused mostly on their social roots, economic situation, position in the factory, etc. Political and ideological orientations of the workers were not (for obvious reasons) analysed in those works. See Z badań klasy robotniczej i inteligencji. Jan Szczepański (ed.), (Łódź: Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe, 1958); Studia nad rozwojem klasy robotniczej. Praca zbiorowa pod red. Jan Szczepańskiego, I (Łódz Warsawa: 1961) II (1962); Kowalewska, Salomea, Psychospołeczne warunki w przedsiebiorstwie przemystowym. Studium o systemie społecznym socjalistycznego przedsibiorstwa (Wroclaw Warsaw-Kraków: Zaklad Narodowy im. Ossolińskich, 1962).Google Scholar

³⁵ The first document announced under Communist rule in Poland in July 1944.

³⁶ The workers of the Petersburg steel factory, who played an active role in the Russian Revolution of 1917.

³⁷ Lenart, J., ‘Tak uważamy’, Sztandar Młodych, 7 Nov. 1956.Google Scholar

³⁸ Kossak., J., Turski, R. and Zimand, R., ‘Internacjonalizm’, Po Prostu, 28 Oct. 1956.Google Scholar

³⁹ Uberman, Z., ‘Szanse polskiej polityki’, Poglady, 8 Nov. 1956.Google Scholar

⁴⁰ AAN, 237/V-294, 62.

⁴¹ ‘Revolutionary groups’ were groups of young radical Marxist activists, usually students, often former ZMP activists, who had been active since the autumn of 1956, trying to push the Party towards political reforms. ‘Revolutionary groups’ merged into Rewolucyjny Zwiazek Młodzieży, which was founded in Dec. 1956.

⁴² Jacek, , Kuroń, , Wiara i wina. Do i od komunizmu (Warsaw: Niezależna Oficyna Wydawnicza, 1989), 116.Google Scholar

⁴³ Łopieńska, Barbara and Szymańska, Ewa, Stare numery (Warsaw: Wydawnictwo ‘Alfa’, 1990), 67.Google Scholar

⁴⁴ Pomian, Krzysztof, Wymiary polskiego konfliktu (London: Aneks, 1985), 93–4.Google Scholar

⁴⁵ The best, most accurate and up-to-date overview of Polish ‘revisionism’, its roots and political and ideological development is given in an excellent book by Friszke, Andrzej, Opozycja polityczna w PRL 1945–1980 (London: Aneks, 1994).Google Scholar

⁴⁶ See Dudek, Antoni and Marszalkowski, Tomasz, Walki uliczne w PRL 1956–1989 (Kraków: Krakowska Oficyna Wydawnicza, 1992), 52–104;Google ScholarDudek, Antoni, Państwo i Kościół w Polsce 1945–1970 (Kraków: Wydawnictwo PiT, 1995), 74–211.Google Scholar