Global Journal of Human-Social Science, A: Arts and Humanities, Volume 22 Issue 8

Moreover, various members of the Polish Catholic Episcopate does not shy away from clear support for PiS. The supposed defense of “true” Catholic values and national traditions have led an important part of the Polish Catholic clergy to adopt radical anti-liberal positions. Polish press provide sample evidence regarding bishops and priests promoting radical nationalist ideas with clear messianic overtones, antiliberal messages, and clear support for PiS’s government. 14 The rise of illiberal democracy shows that far- right and far-left regimes have much in common despite being at the opposite ends of the ideological spectrum. Both extremes tend to destroy human freedom. The political proposal of Law & Justice in Poland represents a historical deja vu. PiS brings back a vision of centralizing and omnipotent state typical of the communist past. As the following table shows, the Law & Justice Party offers a nationalist-conservative model focused on protecting society from liberal threats, but that model is a mirror image of the prison society under the communist regime before 1989. Left-Wing Social Imprisonment (Communism) Right-Wing Social Protectionism (Pis) 1. Cult of the leader/idea 2. Espionage and censorship 3. “Democratic" uni-party system 4. Non-market economy 5. Official atheism 6. Equality-based welfare 7. Closed borders for citizens 8. Ideological struggle capitalism vs.communism 1. Cult of the nation 2. Media, prosecutors, and courts in the hands of "loyalists" 3. Electoral authoritarianism 4. Selective market economy 5. Preferred (instrumentalized) religion 6. Identity-based welfare 7. (Semi-)-closed borders for immigrants depending on ethnic criteria 8. Ideological struggle liberals vs.conservatives V. L iberal C atholicism: A n A ntipopulist P roposal To live in a pluralistic, open society is not equal to giving up Catholic values. A genuine liberal society ought to make room for peaceful and productive co- existence of people from all walks of life including conservative Catholics and atheists. Perhaps one of the main mistakes among liberals in the last 20 years or so has been to allow classical liberalism to be captured by radical progressive movements and agendas that use aggressive public policies. Classical liberalism is substantially different from progressive liberalism which becomes intolerant, antireligious, and anticonservative. Unlike progressives, liberals do believe in being virtuous, religious, and free. It is worth asking to what extent the criticisms explored in section 2.0. apply adequately to classical liberalism. Is it not perhaps that liberalism has become a contemporary scapegoat to be blamed for the consequences of libertarianism, hedonism, nihilism, materialism, woke thinking, and progressivism? Is it not perhaps that liberalism has become a populist invective? Do critiques of liberalism correctly distinguish between classical liberalism, progressive liberalism, libertarianism and their respective implications? (Neuhaus, 1997). 14 (Bartos, 2013). (Kozłowska, 2016). (Makowski, 2016). (Gadek, 2018). It is relevant to explore further whether antiliberal conservative populism has been successful in correcting the alleged flaws of liberalism. This paper has sought to demonstrate that the antiliberal response is erroneous on the theoretical level and the practical level. The theoretical dimension has been explored in Section 3, and the practical one in section 4. The instrumentalization of the Catholic faith for political purposes by PiS and other populist parties represents a serious risk of worsening the already weak social perception of the Catholic Church. The damage done by illiberal but supposedly conservative parties like Law & Justice may provokea further decline of Catholic practices and an allergy to Catholic participation in the public debate, similar to what already happened in Western countries in the 1960s and 1970s. Finally, the section 3 of this paper has shown a substantial axiomatic convergence between CST and liberalism. This convergence can be illustrated by a Ven diagram of two partially overlapping circles. Although the two circles are not juxtaposed, there exists a common zone of normative agreement regarding limited government, pluralism and participation, subsidiarity, responsible freedom, independent self-realization, economic freedoms, and civic society. It would be a stretch to assume that classical liberalism and CST are identical content-wise. However, it is also a stretch to portray classical liberalism and CST as antagonists. The substantial convergence between the two schools of thought constitutes a viable zone of consensus to rebuild a more centrist politics and to avoid populist Volume XXII Issue VIII Version I 6 ( ) Global Journal of Human Social Science - Year 2022 © 2022 Global Journals A Catholic Liberalism: An Anti-Populist Proposal