Struggle: the Most Frequently Used Word in the Public Sphere Since the Beginning of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Already Jarosław Rudniański, the originator of the theory of a non-armed struggle, underlined that a man uses most often the word ‘a struggle’ (and synonymic terms: combat, contest, grapple, fight, wrestle, etc.) when “a given action is distinguishable by a high level of difficulty and psychic suspense.” Therefore, in Rudniański’s opinion, ‘struggle’ could be, for instance, forming mutations by bacteria or viruses to adjust to vaccinations and antibiotics as extreme cases of counteraction. The fact that living organisms do not have human consciousness has no vital meaning for those who fight them. Therefore, it is not surprising that the titles of many scientific publications dedicated to the COVID-19 pandemic, in addition to the media coverage, include the word ‘struggle’ or its synonym.The main barrier to the dissemination of knowledge about the science of struggle  identified with the general theory of struggle (agonology) and its four specific theories  in the global scientific sphere (dominated by the English language) relates primarily to the language in which they were published: all of them (since 1938 till 2000) were published in Polish. Admittedly agonology was included by its creator Tadeusz Kotarbiński into praxeology and translated into English, Czech, German, Japanese, Russian and Serbo-Croatian. In the fundamental lecture of praxeology by T. Kotarbiński “A Treatise on Good Work,” (first edition in 1955), it is included in the chapter entitled “Technique of struggle”. The political factor was a fundamental obstacle to the dissemination of both praxeology and agonology when Poland was beyond the Iron Curtain. Jarosław Rudniański published the theory of a non-armed struggle in two steps. Admittedly, his “Elements of praxeological theory of struggle. From the issues of negative cooperation” (1983) was published during the martial law in Poland, but it was not available for official sale. Its best recommendation would be the fact that for many of Solidarity’s leaders, it was a kind of instruction manual for conducting the struggle against communist authorities in a nonviolent way and led to achievement of the ultimate result: the overthrow of those authorities. The second step: “A Compromise and a Struggle. The efficiency and ethics of positive and negative cooperation in a dense social environment” (1989) is at the same time the most complete development of agonology; unfortunately, available only to those familiar with the Polish language. Paradoxically, the pandemic and the aggression against Ukraine are factors that can spark interest in innovative agonology which includes the theory of a non-armed struggle and the theory of compromise.