Considering the Power of Contemporary Poland – Hans J. Morgenthau’s Inspirations and Some Remarks on the Power Relations in East-Central Europe
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article refers to Hans J. Morgenthau’s concept of power as a useful background in the analysis of power of contemporary Poland and its neighbours – Germany and Russia. It considers some problems with the evaluation of power of Poland as well as some specific features of the power relations in East-Central Europe. Considering the idea of power present in Morgenthau’s political thought the author indicates the flexibility of this concept as well as some Morgenthau’s warnings against a narrow and single-factor understanding of power. Discussing the power of Poland the article underlines both material and some less tangible factors, including the social reception of the liberal reforms. The relations of Poland with Russia and Germany illustrate the relative character of power as both neigbours remain much more powerful countries in any aspects of power defined by Morgenthau. Besides, the Morgenthau’s concept of power helps to identify some regional problems that may destabilize the political relations in Europe. Thus the effective Polish foreign policy should be based on the proper evaluation of power and intentions of its two key neigbours as well as the understanding of mechanisms accompanying the power relations in the region.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".