The Open Collections website will be unavailable July 27 from 2100-2200 PST ahead of planned usability and performance enhancements on July 28. More information here.

# Open Collections

## UBC Theses and Dissertations ## UBC Theses and Dissertations

### A profile of the socialist movement in the western half of the Habsburg Monarchy in the second half of… Black, John William 1975

Media
831-UBC_1975_A8 B53.pdf [ 16.36MB ]
JSON: 831-1.0093430.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0093430-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0093430-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0093430-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0093430-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0093430-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0093430-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0093430-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0093430.ris

#### Full Text

`A PROFILE OF THE SOCIALIST MOVEMENT IN THE WESTERN HALF OF THE HABSBURG MONARCHY IN THE SECOND HALF OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY BY JOHN WILLIAM BLACK B.A., York U n i v e r s i t y , 1968 A THESIS SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS i n the Department of HISTORY We accept t h i s t h e s i s as conforming to the requ i r e d sta>ldarcl THE UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA October, 19 75 In presenting t h i s t h e s i s in p a r t i a l f u l f i l m e n t of the requirements f o r an advanced degree at the U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia, I agree that the L i b r a r y s h a l l make i t f r e e l y a v a i l a b l e f or reference and study. I f u r t h e r agree that permission for extensive copying of t h i s t h e s i s f o r s c h o l a r l y purposes may be granted by the Head of my Department or by h i s re p r e s e n t a t i v e s . It i s understood that copying or p u b l i c a t i o n of t h i s t h e s i s f o r f i n a n c i a l gain s h a l l not be allowed without my w r i t t e n permission. Department of The U n i v e r s i t y of B r i t i s h Columbia 2075 Wesbrook P l a c e Vancouver, Canada V6T 1W5 Date A B S T R A C T The purpose of t h i s t h e s i s i s to examine s e v e r a l important aspects of s o c i a l democracy i n the C i s l e i t h a n i a n h a l f of the Habsburg Monarchy i n the years between 1867 and 1901. By e x p l o r i n g the environ-ment i n which the s o c i a l i s t movement developed, the s o c i a l i s t ideology, the development of the party and i t s o r g a n i z a t i o n , and the s o c i a l i s t l e a d e r s h i p , i t presents a p r o f i l e of the C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t move-ment . In s p i t e of the f a c t that the s o c i a l i s t movement i n C i s l e i t h a n i a was one of the l a r g e s t i n Europe by 1901, h i s t o r i a n s have tended to ignore both i t s development and i t s p e c u l i a r i t i e s . The C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t movement, and p a r t i c u l a r l y i t s German-speaking component, has been seen as merely a j u n i o r partner of the Reich-German s o c i a l i s t movement. To a c e r t a i n extent t h i s was t r u e , f o r C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l -i s t s d i d import t h e i r ideology and t h e i r o r i g i n a l conceptions of party and trade union o r g a n i z a t i o n from Germany. Yet the models imported from Germany a l l had to be adapted to the m u l t i - n a t i o n a l character of the s o c i a l i s t movement i n C i s l e i t h a n i a . Marxism was adopted, but C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s were forced to take a p o s i t i o n on the complex n a t i o n a l i t y question i n C i s l e i t h a n i a , a question f o r which there was no acceptable M a r x i s t "answer." The German i d e a of a c e n t r a l i z e d party o r g a n i z a t i o n was a l s o taken over, but i t had to be abandoned i n face of demands f o r autonomy on the part of Czech s o c i a l i s t s . An e n t i r e l y new and unique form of party i i i i i o r g a n i z a t i o n was evolved. In the trade union movement, the concept of c e n t r a l i s m was a l s o adopted, and once more proved un s u i t a b l e i n a m u l t i -n a t i o n a l environment, i n s p i t e of convincing arguments i n i t s favour. In these r e s p e c t s , and ot h e r s , C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s made an impor-tant c o n t r i b u t i o n to the development of the European s o c i a l i s t move-ment, a c o n t r i b u t i o n which deserves more a t t e n t i o n from h i s t o r i a n s than i t has rec e i v e d . The major problem the C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l movement faced was the n a t i o n a l i t y question. The m u l t i - n a t i o n a l nature of the s t a t e and the s o c i a l i s t movement, i n a context i n which n a t i o n a l i s t f e e l i n g was very s t r o n g , helped to determine both the development and the f a t e of the s o c i a l i s t movement of a l l n a t i o n a l i t i e s i n the western h a l f of the Monarchy. In f a c t , the n a t i o n a l i t y c o n f l i c t which developed i n the C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t movement mirrored the c o n f l i c t i n C i s l e i t h a n i a as a whole. Indeed, the c o n t r a d i c t i o n between the theory of s o c i a l i s t i n t e r n a t i o n a l i s m and the p r a c t i c a l r e a l i t y of n a t i o n a l i s m i n the working c l a s s was apparent i n the C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t movement long before the outbreak of t h e c F i r s t World War made i t c l e a r to n o n - s o c i a l i s t s and s o c i a l i s t s a l i k e . In t h i s sense, the study of the C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t movement i s a l s o a study i n n a t i o n a l i s m . TABLE OF CONTENTS Page ABSTRACT .......... • i i LIST OF TABLES v i i LIST OF FIGURES v i i i LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS i x ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS x PREFACE x i INTRODUCTION 1 CHAPTER I . THE ORIGINS AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOCIALIST MOVEMENT IN CISLEITHANIA 7 i ) The S e t t i n g : I n d u s t r i a l Development 7 i i ) The P o l i t i c a l S t r u c t u r e of C i s l e i t h a n i a 16 i i i ) The O r i g i n s and Development of the S o c i a l i s t Movement i n C i s l e i t h a n i a 22 i v ) The Czech S o c i a l i s t Movement 41 I I . ASPECTS OF CISLEITHANIAN SOCIALIST PARTY PROGRAMMES . . . . 54 i ) "Immediate" Demands i n C i s l e i t h a n i a n S o c i a l i s t Programmes 54 a) Democratic Aspects 54 b) S o c i a l Aspects 58 i i ) Ends and Means: I d e o l o g i c a l Aspects of C i s l e i t h a n i a n Programmes 65 i i i ) The Programmatic D i s c u s s i o n of the N a t i o n a l i t y Question 76 i v V CHAPTER Page I I I . SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY ORGANIZATION IN CISLEITHANIA . . . 103 i ) P a r t y Organization 1867-1891 104 i i ) The Move to a Federal Organization 1892-189 7 . . . . 108 i i i ) The F e d e r a l Organization a f t e r 189 7 123 i v ) The S o c i a l i s t Press i n C i s l e i t h a n i a 1867-1901 . . . 126 v) The A r b e i t e r - Z e i t u n g 132 IV. THE SOCIALIST TRADE UNION MOVEMENT IN CISLEITHANIA . . . . 147 i ) The S o c i a l i s t Trade Union Movement to 1885 149 i i ) The Trade Union Movement a f t e r 1885 152 i i i ) The N a t i o n a l i t y Question i n the Trade Union Movement 166 V. CISLEITHANIAN SOCIALIST PARTY LEADERSHIP 189 i ) Leadership before A d l e r 190 i i ) K a r l Kautsky's Role i n C i s l e i t h a n i a n S o c i a l i s m . . . 197 i i i ) V i c t o r A d l e r (1852-1918) 210 CONCLUSION 239 BIBLIOGRAPHY 256 APPENDIX I . Major S o c i a l i s t P a r t y Congresses 1867-1905 . . . . 282 APPENDIX I I . The D e c l a r a t i o n of P r i n c i p l e s at H a i n f e l d . . . . 283 APPENDIX I I I . The D e c l a r a t i o n of P r i n c i p l e s Adopted at Vienna 1901 284 APPENDIX IV. The Programme Commission's O r i g i n a l Proposal f o r a R e v i s i o n of the H a i n f e l d D e c l a r a t i o n of P r i n c i p l e s , 25 August 1901 286 v i Page APPENDIX V. The Party Executive's O r i g i n a l Proposal f o r a N a t i o n a l i t i e s ' Programme at the 1899 Briinn Congress of the C i s l e i t h a n i a n Party 288 APPENDIX VI. The M o d i f i e d F i v e P o i n t s Adopted by the Briinn Congress, 1899 290 APPENDIX V I I . The C i s l e i t h a n i a n S o c i a l i s t P a r t i e s i n 1901 . . . . 291 LIST OF TABLES Table Page I. Employment i n Industry and Ag r i c u l t u r e 10 I I . Employment by N a t i o n a l i t y i n Industry and Ag r i c u l t u r e 11 v i i LIST OF 'FIGURES Figure Page 1. The Habsburg Monarchy on the eve of the F i r s t World War: A d m i n i s t r a t i v e s t r u c t u r e 15 2. The Habsburg Empire 1867-1918 (Mhguisti'c aridge.thnic s t r u c t u r e ) 77 3. Censorship: Front page of the A r b e i t e r f r e u n d 1874 . . . 128 4. Front page of G l e i c h h e i t , 1886 130 5. Front page of Die Gewerkschaft 162 6. B r i c k l a y e r i n 1887 and 1912: The s o c i a l i s t s c l a i m c r e d i t f o r the m a t e r i a l and e d u c a t i o n a l improvement of the workers' c o n d i t i o n 216 v i i i LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS AGSA - A r c h i v f u r die Geschichte des Sozialismus und der A r b e i t e r - bewegung ASg - A r c h i v f u r S o z i a l g e s c h i c h t e CEH - C e n t r a l European H i s t o r y JCEA - J o u r n a l of C e n t r a l European A f f a i r s JCH - J o u r n a l of Contemporary H i s t o r y JMH - J o u r n a l of Modern H i s t o r y NZ - Die Neue Z e i t SR - S l a v i c Review and i t s predecessor American S l a v i c and East European Review SPD - Sozialdemokratische P a r t e i Deutschlands SM - S o z i a l i s t i s c h e Monatshefte VSWG - V i e r t e l j a h r e s s c h r i f t f u r S o z i a l - und W/irtschaftsgeschichte ZfG - Z e i t s c h r i f t f u r Geschichtswissenschaft i x ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I should l i k e to thank P r o f e s s o r Stanley Z. Pech of the UBC H i s t o r y department f o r i n i t i a t i n g me i n t o the mysteries and complexities of the h i s t o r y of E a s t - C e n t r a l Europe, and f o r r e v e a l i n g to me a new per s p e c t i v e on the h i s t o r y of C e n t r a l Europe. He also showed great patience and endurance throughout a long and d i f f i c u l t t ask, a task which at times appeared as i f i t would never end. Thanks are a l s o due to Pr o f e s s o r Ivan Avakumovic of the UBC H i s t o r y department, f o r h i s d e t a i l e d c r i t i c i s m was both very valuable and c o n s t r u c t i v e . P r o f e s s o r Marketa Goetz Stankiewicz of the UBC German depart-ment, who has a l s o " l i v e d " i n a S p e c i a l C o l l e c t i o n s c a r r e l l f o r a con-s i d e r a b l e length of time, has been very k i n d and h e l p f u l . Her d e t a i l e d knowledge of the Czech and German languages has been i n v a l u a b l e i n the day-to-day l i f e of a student s t r u g g l i n g w i t h a r e c e n t l y - l e a r n e d language and w i t h one he has never s t u d i e d . The I n t e r l i b r a r y Loan Department of the UBC Main L i b r a r y has been i n v a l u a b l e and k i n d i n h e l p i n g me to obtain d i f f i c u l t and oft e n incomprehensible sources from a l l over North America. F i n a l l y , I should l i k e to thank my w i f e E l i z a b e t h , without whose support and encouragement t h i s long and d i f f i c u l t task would never have been completed. x PREFACE: A NOTE ON SOURCES, PROBLEMS AND TERMINOLOGY The h i s t o r y of the s o c i a l i s t movement i n the Habsburg Monarchy i s a subject which has been sadly neglected by h i s t o r i a n s . Only since about 1960 have h i s t o r i a n s i n the West begun to study the movement, and that study has been r e s t r i c t e d l a r g e l y to the German-speaking coun-t r i e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y , of course, the Republic of A u s t r i a . In the Com-munist successor s t a t e s , h i s t o r i a n s have s t u d i e d the o r i g i n s and de-velopment of t h e i r own s o c i a l i s t movements, but much of t h e i r work before 1960 was e i t h e r too dogmatic, or contained such a strong ideo-l o g i c a l b i a s as to make i t almost useless to the serious s c h o l a r . Since 1960, the p i c t u r e has changed somewhat. A s m a l l group of h i s t o r i a n s i n A u s t r i a has begun to p u b l i s h a s e r i e s of works dea l i n g w i t h various aspects of the s o c i a l i s t movement i n the Monarchy, p a r t i -c u l a r l y i t s German-speaking branch. Czech Marx i s t h i s t o r i a n s have s t u d i e d the o r i g i n s and development of the Czech s o c i a l i s t movement i n the Monarchy, although t h e i r a t t e n t i o n has been mainly d i r e c t e d to the e a r l y years a f t e r 1867, and to the Russian Revolution and i t s impact upon the Monarchy. As a r e s u l t , i t i s only i n recent years that the pioneering h i s t o r i e s of the s o c i a l movement, w r i t t e n by e n t h u s i a s t i c s o c i a l i s t s i n the 1920's, have begun to be superceded. Thus one who embarks on the study of "the s o c i a l i s t movement i n the Habsburg Monarchy faces x i x i i problems which are not faced i n other f i e l d s . The p l e t h o r a of secon-dary works one might expect to f i n d simply does not e x i s t . In the E n g l i s h language, no major study of the s o c i a l i s t movement i n the Monarchy has been w r i t t e n . One of the major reasons f o r the neglect of the s o c i a l i s t move-ment i n the Habsburg Monarchy i n the West has been, of course, the i n t i m i d a t i n g number of languages spoken i n the Monarchy. As t h i s t h e s i s attempts to i n d i c a t e , however, the s o c i a l i s t movement i n at l e a s t the western h a l f of the Monarchy can be s t u d i e d i n s p i t e of language d i f f i -c u l t i e s . The l a r g e s t and most important component of the s o c i a l i s t movement i n the western h a l f of the Monarchy was the German-speaking group, and a l l of the major records of the s o c i a l i s t movement, i n c l u d i n g the p r o t o c o l s of party and trade union congresses, and Ithe major s o c i a l i s t newspapers are i n that language. This i s e s p e c i a l l y the case f o r the p e r i o d before 1901. This t h e s i s t h e r e f o r e concentrates on the s o c i a l i s t movement i n the western h a l f of the Monarchy, from i t s beginnings i n 1867 to 1901. The Hungarian h a l f of the Monarchy has not been discussed, f o r a f t e r the Ausgleich of 1867, developments i n Hungary were very d i f f e r e n t from those i n the western h a l f , and hence not comparable w i t h i t . The year 1901 i s a convenient c u t - o f f date, f o r a f t e r that year the non-German languages became much more important, as the s o c i a l -i s t movement d i s i n t e g r a t e d along n a t i o n a l l i n e s . At the same time, sources a v a i l a b l e i n North American l i b r a r i e s are not as p l e n t i f u l f o r the p e r i o d a f t e r 1901. x i i i The major source f o r t h i s t h e s i s has been the party and trade union congress p r o t o c o l s , published a f t e r each congress a f t e r 1888. In the p e r i o d discussed i n t h i s t h e s i s these were a l l p r i n t e d i n German v e r s i o n s , and the speeches made at the congresses were e i t h e r made o r i g i n a l l y i n German, or were t r a n s l a t e d i n t o German f o r the b e n e f i t of the m a j o r i t y of the delegates. Trade union and party congress p r o t o c o l s must, of course, be used w i t h c a u t i o n . P a r t y congresses i n p a r t i c u l a r were u s u a l l y stage-managed a f f a i r s , and much of the r e a l l y important business was t r a n s -acted i n camera. In s p i t e of these l i m i t a t i o n s , however, the party and trade union congress p r o t o c o l s are an extremely valuable source f o r the h i s t o r y of the s o c i a l i s t movement. The p r o t o c o l s (and the party newspapers) are the major source f o r the development of s o c i a l i s t ideology and o r g a n i z a t i o n , f o r p r i o r to 1900 there was v i r t u a l l y no s o c i a l i s t p e r i o d i c a l l i t e r a t u r e i n the Monarchy, and no important t h e o r e t i c a l w r i t i n g . As a r e s u l t , party congress debates, and p a r t i -c u l a r l y the programmes adopted at the congresses are a f a r more impor-tant source f o r the development of s o c i a l i s m i n the western h a l f of the Habsburg Monarchy than, f o r example, i n Germany. In the study of the Habsburg Monarchy i n the nineteenth century one of the major problems i s terminology. What name does one give to a country which d i d not even have an o f f i c i a l name i n the p e r i o d discussed i n t h i s t h e s i s ? In government documents the s t a t e was o f t e n r e f e r r e d to as the "Kingdoms and Lands represented i n the I m p e r i a l Parliament," o r , a l t e r n a t i v e l y as the "Kingdoms and Lands represented x i v i n the A u s t r i a n I m p e r i a l Parliament." In everyday usage, of course, the western h a l f of the Monarchy was r e f e r r e d to as " A u s t r i a , " but there are s e r i o u s l i m i t a t i o n s to the use of t h i s term. P r i o r to 1867 " A u s t r i a " r e f e r r e d to Jfehe Habsburg Monarchy as a whole, w h i l e a f t e r 1918, i t meant the t i n y Republic of A u s t r i a , which r e l u c t a n t l y took over that name. At the same time, what was an " A u s t r i a n ? " Many Austro-Germans f e l t that they were "Germans," and not " A u s t r i a n s , " andtfco many non-Germans the term " A u s t r i a n " was a p e j o r a t i v e . In an attempt to impose some r e g u l a r i t y i n t h i s t h e s i s , the term " C i s l e i t h a n i a " has been used to r e f e r to the western lands. The L e i t h a R i v e r t r a d i t i o n a l l y separated Hungary from the western h a l f of the Monarchy, and " C i s l e i t h a n i a " and " T r a n s l e i t h a n i a " were of t e n used to r e f e r to the two h a l v e s . The use of the term " C i s l e i t h a n i a " thus avoids the thorny question of whether or not there was such a t h i n g as " A u s t r i a " or an " A u s t r i a n . " Other terms w i t h which there are problems are those r e l a t e d to the word " n a t i o n , " i n c l u d i n g " n a t i o n a l , " " n a t i o n a l i t y , " " n a t i o n a l i s m " and " n a t i o n a l i s t . " In the West these terms htave t r a d i t i o n a l l y a p p l i e d to the s o - c a l l e d " n a t i o n - s t a t e s " of Western Europe, but i n m u l t i - n a t i o n a l Eastern Europe, they not only had t h e i r own s p e c i f i c and often p o l i t i c a l d e f i n i t i o n s , but a l s o were v i r t u a l l y meaningless i n a s t a t e such as the Habsburg Monarchy. In a d d i t i o n , the v i r u l e n t forms which n a t i o n a l i s m has taken i n t h i s century has tended to give the terms " n a t i o n a l i s m " and " n a t i o n a l i s t " p e j o r a t i v e meanings. In t h i s t h e s i s they are meant to be understood as purely n e u t r a l terms, w i t h no p o s i t i v e or negative connotations. "Eumptius in muro sedebat Dumptius alto, Humptius de muro Dumptius, heu! ceeidit. Nea equites regis, nex agmina cuncta tyranni Humpti te Dumpti restituere quent. " F r i e d r i c h Engels to KaflKautsky, 4 December 1893, Engels-Kautsky B r i e f w e c h s e l , p. 397. x v INTRODUCTION The purpose of t h i s t h e s i s i s to examine s e v e r a l important aspects of s o c i a l democracy i n the C i s l e i t h a n i a n h a l f of the m u l t i -n a t i o n a l Habsburg Monarchy i n the years between 1867 and 1901. By loo k i n g at the environment i n which the s o c i a l i s t movement developed, at the s o c i a l i s t i deology, the development of the party and i t s o r g a n i -z a t i o n , the nature and problems of the trade union movement, and the s o c i a l i s t l e a d e r s h i p , t h i s t h e s i s w i l l present a p r o f i l e of the s o c i a l i s t movement i n C i s l e i t h a n i a . In s p i t e of the f a c t that the s o c i a l i s t movement i n C i s l e i -t hania was one of the l a r g e s t i n Europe by 1901, h i s t o r i a n s have tended to ignore i t s development and i t s p e c u l i a r i t i e s . Instead, they have concentrated t h e i r a t t e n t i o n on s o c i a l i s t movements i n the t r a d i t i o n a l l y more important areas of Western Europe and Russia. The C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t movement, and p a r t i c u l a r l y i t s German-speaking component, has been seen as merely a j u n i o r partner of the Reich-German s o c i a l i s t movement. To a c e r t a i n extent t h i s was true, f o r the r e l a t i o n s between the C i s l e i t h a n i a n and German s o c i a l i s t movements were extremely c l o s e . C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s imported t h e i r ideology and t h e i r concepts of party and trade union o r g a n i z a t i o n from Germany. In many resp e c t s , German and Austro-German s o c i a l i s t s were pa r t of one great German-speaking s o c i a l i s t movement. Yet, as w i l l be i n d i c a t e d , the models imported from Germany a l l had to be adapted 1 2 to the m u l t i - n a t i o n a l character of the s o c i a l i s t movement i n C i s l e i -thania . Marxism was adopted, but C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s were forced to take a p o s i t i o n on the complicated n a t i o n a l i t y question i n C i s l e i -t h a n i a , a question f o r which there was no acceptable Marxist "answer." The German id e a of a c e n t r a l i z e d party o r g a n i z a t i o n was a l s o taken over, but i t had to be abandoned i n face of demands f o r autonomy on the p a r t of Czech s o c i a l i s t s . An e n t i r e l y new and unique form of party o r g a n i z a t i o n was evolved. In the trade union movement, the concept of c e n t r a l i s m was also adopted, and once more proved u n s u i t a b l e i n a m u l t i - n a t i o n a l environment, i n s p i t e of convincing arguments i n i t s favour. In these re s p e c t s , and others, C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s made an important c o n t r i b u t i o n to the development of the European s o c i a l i s t movement, a c o n t r i b u t i o n which deserves more a t t e n t i o n from h i s t o r i a n s than i t has received. The environment i n which the C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t movement developed was more complex than any other i n Europe i n t h i s p e r i o d . The Habsburg Monarchy c o n s i s t e d of two separate s t a t e s (and a f t e r 1878 a t e r r i t o r y , Bosnia-Hercegovina, which belonged to n e i t h e r ) both of which had unbelievably complicated e t h n i c and l i n g u i s t i c s t r u c t u r e s . In T r a n s l e i t h a n i a , or Hungary, the Magyars formed a t l e a s t a r e l a t i v e m a j o r i t y of the p o p u l a t i o n , but i n C i s l e i t h a n i a no one group had that p r i v i l e g e . In 1900 the n a t i o n a l i t y s t r u c t u r e of C i s l e i t h a n i a was as follows:"^ 3 German 9,170,939 or 35.1 per cent Czech 5,955,397 22.8 P o l i s h 4,239,052 16.2 Ruthene 3,375,576 13.0 Slovene 1,192,780 4.5 I t a l i a n 727,102 2.8 Serbo-Croat 711,380 2.7 Rumanian 230,963 0.9 Others 504,115 2.0 26,107,304 100.0 Of the seventeen Crown Lands i n t o which C i s l e i t h a n i a was d i v i d e d , only three (Upper A u s t r i a , Salzburg and the Vorarlberg) had no s i g n i f i c a n t m i n o r i t i e s i n 1900. The e t h n i c (and p o l i t i c a l ) d i v e r s i t y of C i s l e i -t h a n i a created enormous o r g a n i z a t i o n a l and p o l i t i c a l problems f o r the s o c i a l i s t movement. As i n d i c a t e d i n the f i r s t chapter of t h i s t h e s i s , however, the e t h n i c s t r u c t u r e of the s o c i a l i s t movement was not as complex as that of the s t a t e . The nature of i n d u s t r i a l development was such that "only" s i x n a t i o n a l i t i e s had a c t i v e s o c i a l i s t movements by 1901. Of these only the Czech and German movements were s i g n i f i c a n t , w h i l e the P o l i s h movement occupied a middle p o s i t i o n . This t h e s i s seeks to demonstrate, however, that i t was not simply the e t h n i c d i v e r s i t y of the s o c i a l i s t movement i n C i s l e i t h a n i a which made i t so d i f f e r e n t from other s o c i a l i s t movements. Rather, i t was n a t i o n a l i s t f e e l i n g among the various groups i n the movement, p a r t i c u l a r l y the Czech s o c i a l i s t s . The form t h i s n a t i o n a l i s t f e e l i n g took r e f l e c t e d a s i g n i f i c a n t d i f f e r e n c e between the n a t i o n a l i t i e s and nati o n a l i s m s of the non-German peoples of C e n t r a l and Eastern Europe and those i n Western Europe and Germany. With the exception of the 4 Germans, Poles and I t a l i a n s , a l l of the peoples of the Monarchy under-went what has come to be known as " n a t i o n a l r e v i v a l s " i n the l a t e e i g h -teenth and i n the nineteenth c e n t u r i e s . By e s t a b l i s h i n g or re-estab-l i s h i n g a l i t e r a r y language and c u l t u r e , each of these peoples entered i n t o the age of i n d u s t r i a l i s m and urbanism w i t h a new-found consciousness of themselves as a n a t i o n a l i t y . As the l i t e r a r y and c u l t u r a l r e v i v a l movements became mass movements, they were transformed i n t o p o l i t i c a l n a t i o n a l i s t movements, seeking to emancipate the "people" from every aspect or v e s t i g e of f o r e i g n domination and r u l e , although they d i d not n e c e s s a r i l y c a l l f o r the d i s s o l u t i o n of the Monarchy. The working c l a s s e s of the various n a t i o n a l i t i e s , i n c l u d i n g those of the Germans, Poles and I t a l i a n s , were as much a par t of t h i s phenomenon as were the middle c l a s s e s . In f a c t , the n a t i o n a l i t y c o n f l i c t which developed w i t h i n the C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t movement mirro r e d the c o n f l i c t i n C i s l e i t h a n i a as a whole. Indeed, the c o n t r a d i c t i o n between the theory of s o c i a l i s t i n t e r n a t i o n a l i s m and the r e a l i t y of n a t i o n a l i s m i n the working c l a s s was apparent i n the C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t movement long before the outbreak of the F i r s t World War made i t c l e a r to s o c i a l i s t s and non-s o c i a l i s t s a l i k e . In t h i s sense, the study of the C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t movement i s a l s o a study i n n a t i o n a l i s m . The f i r s t chapter of t h i s t h e s i s e s t a b l i s h e s the background. I t presents a d i s c u s s i o n of the development of i n d u s t r y and urban-i z a t i o n i n C i s l e i t h a n i a , and i n d i c a t e s the impact t h i s had on the s o c i a l i s t movement. In a d d i t i o n , the p o l i t i c a l and l e g a l s t r u c t u r e 5 of C i s l e i t h a n i a i s discussed, i n order to e s t a b l i s h those aspects of the laws which were d e c i s i v e i n the development of the s o c i a l i s t move-ment. Because the primary focus of t h i s t h e s i s i s on the years a f t e r 1886, the h i s t o r y of the movement between 1867 and 1890 i s presented, i n order to provide a framework on which the r e s t of the t h e s i s can be b u i l t . NOTES - INTRODUCTION Figures quoted in Richard Charmatz, Der demokratisch-nationale Bundesstaat Osterreich (Frankfurt-am-Main 1904), p. 29. Percentages are my own calculation, and are rounded. Serbs and Croats were not differentiated between by the Cis-leithanian census, which asked only for the language spoken in daily l i f e (Umgangssprache). 6 CHAPTER I THE ORIGINS AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE SOCIALIST MOVEMENT IN CISLEITHANIA i ) The S e t t i n g : I n d u s t r i a l Development I n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n and u r b a n i z a t i o n , the source of the modern working c l a s s movement, began somewhat l a t e r i n Austria-Hungary than i n Germany and Western Europe. From the beginning of the process un-t i l the d i s s o l u t i o n of the Monarchy i n 1918, Austria-Hungary as a whole lagged behind Western Europe and Germany i n i t s development. I n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n began i n the t e x t i l e i n d u s t r y i n North Bohe-mia, but the o l d t r a d i n g centres, Vienna and Lower A u s t r i a , Graz, L i n z , and the German-speaking regions of Bohemia and Moravia were a l s o i n c l u -ded i n the e a r l y stages. The transformation ushered i n by i n d u s t r i a l -i z a t i o n thus commenced i n the German-speaking areas of the Monarchy, and only l a t e r d i d i t begin to occur i n areas i n h a b i t e d by other peoples. Among the p r e c o n d i t i o n s f o r i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n was freedom of movement f o r the p o p u l a t i o n . As long as feudalism e x i s t e d peasants could not move to the new i n d u s t r i a l centres to work i n i n d u s t r y . Symptomatic of the economic backwardness of the Monarchy was the l a t e a b o l i t i o n of feudalism. Whereas i n England i t had disappeared i n the f a i r l y remote p a s t , i n France a f t e r the r e v o l u t i o n of 1789, and i n 7 8 Germany i n the p e r i o d between the r e v o l u t i o n a r y wars and 1848, i n Aus-tria-Hungary feudalism only ended f i n a l l y i n 1848. As w i t h so many other ideas and processes i n Europe i n the l a s t few c e n t u r i e s , the progression was from west to east. Thus feudalism l a s t e d t i l l 1861 i n R u s s i a , and i n some areas of the Balkans, to 1918. Another b a s i c f a c t o r was the c r e a t i o n of a modern system of t r a n s p o r t a t i o n and communication to f a c i l i t a t e the formation of a s i n g l e market. In the nineteenth century the most important v e h i c l e f o r t h i s was the r a i l r o a d . C i s l e i t h a n i a opened the f i r s t (horse-drawn) r a i l w a y i n Europe i n 1832, although s e r i o u s r a i l r o a d - b u i l d i n g d i d not commence u n t i l 1841."'" In t h i s respect development i n C i s l e i t h a n i a was not q u i t e so retarded. At f i r s t c o n t r o l l e d by government, r a i l r o a d - b u i l d i n g ex-panded r a p i d l y , p a r t i c u l a r l y a f t e r 1860. By 1870 there were 6,112 k i l o m e t r e s of t r a c k i n the C i s l e i t h a n i a n h a l f of the Monarchy, and by 2 1900 t h i s had grown to 19,229 k i l o m e t r e s . Despite Austria-Hungary's l a t e s t a r t , the a c t u a l record of i n -d u s t r i a l growth was impressive. Producing 1.2 m i l l i o n m e t r i c tons of c o a l i n 1850, 15.0 i n 1880, and 39.0 m i l l i o n tons i n 1900, the Mon-archy's output i n the l a t t e r year was exceeded only by those of the United S t a t e s , Great B r i t a i n and Germany. In p i g i r o n production the Monarchy was s i x t h i n the world i n 1900, j u s t behind France and Russia. The increase i n production between 1870 and 1900, almost 400 per cent, \was surpassed by the United S t a t e s , Russia and Germany. I t was e i g h t times that of B r i t a i n , and over three times the growth i n 4 French output. In the even more important area of s t e e l p r o d u c t i o n , 9 Austria-Hungary was a l s o s i x t h , but the r a t e of growth a f t e r 1890 was not as high as elsewhere. Within the western h a l f of the Monarchy economic development i n the p e r i o d a f t e r 1867 was a l s o impressive. N a t i o n a l income grew at an annual r a t e of 2.6 to 2.8 per cent. Only the United S t a t e s , Canada and Japan had higher growth rates i n the same years.^ The i n -d u s t r i a l growth r a t e , 3.46 per cent per year a f t e r 1865, was a l s o r e s p e c t a b l e , comparing favourably w i t h Germany's 3.7 per cent. Per c a p i t a p r o d u c t i o n , however, 75 per cent of Germany's i n 1850, had f a l l e n to only 58 per cent by 1914. Even l e s s encouraging was the f a c t that the p r o p o r t i o n of the p o p u l a t i o n i n v o l v e d i n i n d u s t r i a l production d i d not expand as r a p i d l y as i t d i d i n Germany. whereas the per centage of the p o p u l a t i o n working i n i n d u s t r y i n C i s l e i t h a n i a i n creased from 19.7 i n 1869 to 22.2 i n 1900, i n Germany there was a much l a r g e r i n c r e a s e , from 27.6 to 36.8 per cent, i n the same years.^ The reason f o r the discrepancy between these f i g u r e s and those f o r the growth i n annual income and i n d u s t r i a l production becomes c l e a r i f we look at the r e g i o n a l nature of i n d u s t r i a l development i n C i s l e i t h a n i a . As p r e v i o u s l y noted, i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n and u r b a n i z a t i o n began i n the l a r g e l y German-speaking western and extreme northwestern areas. The r e s t of the Monarchy, except f o r the Czech regions, was overwhelm-i n g l y a g r i c u l t u r a l before 1914. As the decades passed, however, i n -d u s t r i a l i s m d i d expand eastwards, enveloping f i r s t the Czechs and l a t e r the other peoples. Only a f t e r 1900, could one even begin to speak of 10 i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n i n the southern and eastern parts of the Monarchy. Regional imbalances were thus q u i t e l a r g e , and the h e a v i l y indus-t r i a l i z e d n orth and northwest tended to overcompensate f o r the under-developed east and south, and so d i s t o r t the o v e r a l l f i g u r e s . An examination of the percentages of the population i n the various regions of C i s l e i t h a n i a employed i n i n d u s t r y and a g r i c u l t u r e i n 1890, 1900 and 1910, i n d i c a t e s the r e g i o n a l imbalance. Table 1 Employment i n Industry and A g r i c u l t u r e R Percentage i n Percentage i n Region Industry A g r i c u l t u r e A l p i n e Lands 1890 26.08 1890 51.15 1900 27.66 1900 45.05 1910 27.10 1910 39.30 Bohemian Lands 1890 32.95 1890 49.44 1900 34.25 1900 44.00 1910 35.18 1910 38.94 9 Southern Area 1890 10.83 1890 75.26 1900 11.81 1900 72.54 19'10 13.42 1910 64.57 G a l i c i a 1890 6.26 1890 83.88 1900 5.88 1900 83.31 1910 6.77 1910 78.71 Bukovina 1890 7.39 1890 83.02 1900 7.85 1900 78.97 1910 7.51 1910 77.23 C i s l e i t h a n i a 1890 21.23 1890 62.41 1900 22.25 1900 58.16 1910 22.65 1910 53.10 11 I t i s evident that the A l p i n e and Bohemian Lands had the l i o n ' s share of the i n d u s t r i a l p o p u l a t i o n . As one moved eastwards and south-wards from the northwestern i n d u s t r i a l core, the percentage of the pop u l a t i o n dependent upon a g r i c u l t u r e f o r i t s l i v i n g i n c reased sharply. The percentages by n a t i o n a l i t y employed i n i n d u s t r y and a g r i c u l t u r e i n 1900 emphasize t h i s even f u r t h e r : Table 2 Employment by N a t i o n a l i t y i n Industry and A g r i c u l t u r e " ^ A g r i c u l t u r e -N a t i o n a l i t y Industry F o r e s t r y Germans 38.3 33.5 Czechs 36.5 43.1 Slovenes 13.4 75.4 I t a l i a n s 23.4 50.1 Poles 14.8 65.6 Serbo-Croats 4.6 86.9 Ruthenes 2.5 93.3 Rumanians 2.7 90.3 Germans and Czechs were thus overwhelmingly predominant i n i n d u s t r y i n 1900. In f a c t , 50 per cent of i n d u s t r i a l workers i n C i s -l e i t h a n i a were Germans, and 31 per cent Czechs.''"'*" Only 19 per cent were d i s t r i b u t e d among the approximately 41 per cent of the p o p u l a t i o n which was n e i t h e r German nor Czech. These percentages were a l s o r e -f l e c t e d i n the n a t i o n a l i t y s t r u c t u r e of the s o c i a l i s t movement. The focus on i n d i v i d u a l regions and n a t i o n a l i t i e s b e l i e s the o v e r a l l s t a t i s t i c s f o r C i s l e i t h a n i a , and i n d i c a t e s that socio-economic 12 d i s p a r i t i e s among the peoples were very l a r g e . In order to understand the reasons f o r t h i s i t i s important to remember the p o s i t i o n s the various peoples occupied i n s o c i a l , economic, p o l i t i c a l and c u l t u r a l l i f e at the beginning of the i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n process. P r i o r to the great changes i n the second h a l f of the nineteenth century the Germans— and to a c e r t a i n extent the I t a l i a n s and P o l e s — w e r e predominant i n a l l these areas of l i f e . The other peoples were l a r g e l y peasant peoples, 12 and so began the new era at a great disadvantage. Only the Czechs proved to have the a d a p t a b i l i t y necessary f o r a r e l a t i v e l y quick t r a n s i t i o n i n t o i n d u s t r i a l i s m , and by 1900 they were r a p i d l y o v ertaking the Germans. Perhaps t h e i r long a s s o c i a t i o n w i t h the Holy Roman Empire and the German Confederation had equipped them w i t h the more Western c u l t u r a l p a t t e r n s and experience which were apparently necessary. In s p i t e of the l a i s s e z - f a i r e nature of c a p i t a l i s t ideology i n the nineteenth century, the government of C i s l e i t h a n i a played a much l a r g e r r o l e i n economic development than governments i n B r i t a i n and the Low Countries. Generally speaking, t h i s was p a r t of a p a t t e r n which emerged i n those countries east of the Rhine R i v e r , and which became more intense as one moved eastward. A f t e r 1867 the l i b e r a l B u r g e r m i n i s t e r i u m — s o - c a l l e d s i n c e i t had more commoners than any previous government—began the s e r i o u s removal of b a r r i e r s to trade and the growth of i n d u s t r y . The government was e s p e c i a l l y i n v o l v e d i n the expansion of the economic i n f r a s t r u c t u r e , i n c r e a s i n g the percentage of s t a t e expenditure devoted to i t from 12 13 to 42 per cent between 1869 and 1913. Concomitantly i t used the supe-r i o r t a x resources of the more i n d u s t r i a l provinces to help overcome r e g i o n a l d i s p a r i t i e s . "^ I n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n was only p a r t of the process of change which a f f e c t e d Europe i n the nineteenth century; another part was urbaniza-t i o n . Large s c a l e population movements transformed the human s t r u c -ture of the land. Improvements i n a g r i c u l t u r e and a c c e l e r a t e d popu-l a t i o n growth provided an ever expanding labour pool f o r the new indus-t r i e s i n the c i t i e s and towns. M i g r a t i o n to the new i n d u s t r i a l centres created the i n d u s t r i a l p r o l e t a r i a t , the source of the s o c i a l i s t move-ment. As i n other European countries the s c a l e of p o p u l a t i o n growth and movement i n C i s l e i t h a n i a was l a r g e . On the whole the p o p u l a t i o n increased -from 18.2 m i l l i o n i n 1860 to 26.1 m i l l i o n i n 1900, or 42 14 per cent i n 40 years. This compared favourably w i t h a 50 per cent increase i n Germany i n those y e a r s , and 40 per cent i n Transleithania."'""' The movement to the c i t i e s was e x t e n s i v e , although i t d i d not q u i t e compare w i t h that i n Germany. With approximately twice C i s l e i -t h a n i a ' s p o p u l a t i o n i n 1900, Germany.yhad 36 c i t i e s w i t h more than 100,000 i n h a b i t a n t s to C i s l e i t h a n i a ' s 6, and 526 w i t h more than 10,000, w h i l e 16 C i s l e i t h a n i a had only 92. Despite t h i s , however, growth rates i n C i s l e i t h a n i a were not unimpressive. In the s i n g l e decade of the 1880's f o r example, w h i l e the p o p u l a t i o n as a whole grew by 8 per cent, the numbers l i v i n g i n c i t i e s of 100,000 and more increased by more than o n e - t h i r d . " ^ Even more imposing was the growth of c i t i e s of 10,000 or more. Between 1850 and 1910 they increased by more than 400 per 14 18 cent. Vienna, w i t h a p o p u l a t i o n of 898,855 i n 1869, had a t t a i n e d 19 1,769,028 by 1900—an increment of almost 100 per cent i n t h i r t y years. Prague's growth was not as l a r g e . I t had 157,713 i n h a b i t a n t s i n 1869, 20 and 201,589 i n 1900, a 28 per cent i n c r e a s e . Because of the v a r y i n g l e v e l s of socio-economic d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n among the peoples of C i s l e i t h a n i a , the p r o p o r t i o n of each n a t i o n a l i t y ' s p o p u l a t i o n p a r t i c i p a t i n g i n the move to the c i t i e s was d i f f e r e n t . This i s i n d i c a t e d by the percentage of each n a t i o n a l i t y ' s p o p u l a t i o n l i v i n g i n c i t i e s i n 1900: 21 Germans 27.8 per cent Czechs 15.3 Poles 12.9 Slovenes 5.8 Ukrainians 2.08 Serbo-Croats 0.75 C i s l e i t h a n i a 17.8 By 1910 Germans formed 57.2 per cent of the urban po p u l a t i o n i n C i s -l e i t h a n i a , although t h e i r p r o p o r t i o n of the p o p u l a t i o n as a whole was 22 only 35.58 per cent. In s p i t e of the apparent German predominance i n the c i t i e s , u r b a n i z a t i o n brought great changes to the e t h n i c s t r u c t u r e of c i t i e s i n the Monarchy, mostly to the disadvantage of the Germans. Prague, P i l s e n , Budweis and other c i t i e s w i t h a l i e n h i n t e r l a n d s l o s t t h e i r German character as a r e s u l t of migrations i n the nineteenth century. For a 23 time, even Vienna appeared to be threatened. Along w i t h the l a r g e -s c a l e Czech migrations i n t o i n d u s t r i a l German Bohemia, the i n d u s t r i a l -i z a t i o n process appeared to endanger the German p o s i t i o n i n C i s l e i t h a n i a . This circumstance, among othe r s , was to c o n t r i b u t e g r e a t l y to the i n -c r e a s i n g l y defensive a t t i t u d e of the Germans as the century progressed. Figure 1. The Habsburg Monarchy on the Eve of the First W o r l d W a r ADMINISTRATIVE STRUCTURE 16 24 The t h r e a t to the German p o s i t i o n was a r e a l one. As indus-t r i a l i z a t i o n and u r b a n i z a t i o n spread to the peasant n a t i o n a l i t i e s of the Monarchy, they began to develop modern s o c i a l s t r u c t u r e s . The new groups which emerged clamoured f o r a share i n both wealth and power i n the s t a t e , and a long s t r u g g l e f o r power began. I t was complicated by n a t i o n a l i s t f e e l i n g among a l l groups i n C i s l e i t h a n i a , not excluding the s o c i a l i s t s . As the s o c i a l i s t movement, one of the products of i n d u s t r i a l -i z a t i o n and u r b a n i z a t i o n , developed, i t faced not only the economic problems encounted by s o c i a l i s t s and workers elsewhere, but a l s o the r e p r e s s i v e nature of the p o l i t i c a l s t r u c t u r e of C i s l e i t h a n i a . i i ) The P o l i t i c a l S t r u c t u r e of C i s l e i t h a n i a A f t e r a d i s a s t r o u s defeat at the hands of P r u s s i a i n 1866 the r u l e r s of the Habsburg Monarchy, apprehensive about the s u r v i v a l of the s t a t e , decided to reorganize i t . I n 1867 an A u s g l e i c h was con-cluded w i t h Hungary, and from thenceforth Hungary developed i n a d i f -f e r e n t d i r e c t i o n from the r e s t of the Monarchy. In those p a r t s of the Monarchy l e f t over—known as the "King-doms and Lands represented i n the R e i c h s r a t " — a new system of govern-ment was organized during 1867. This new governmental s t r u c t u r e was not democratic, nor even as advanced as the German system. In form i t was l i k e the B r i t i s h model. A bi-cameral parliament, c o n s i s t i n g of a Herrenhaus and an Abgeordnetenhaus was created. The 17 lower house was not e l e c t e d by the p o p u l a t i o n , however, but r a t h e r by the Landtage or p r o v i n c i a l assemblies. These i n turn were e l e c t e d on the b a s i s of a r e s t r i c t e d three or four c l a s s f r a n c h i s e , s i m i l a r to 25 that i n P r u s s i a . The Landtag f r a n c h i s e was not broadened before the c o l l a p s e of the Monarchy. Although a form of cabinet government was e s t a b l i s h e d , the cabinet d i d not have to be based on a m a j o r i t y i n parliament. As time passed a t r a d i t i o n of doing so developed, but t h i s was not always the case. Although parliament had many of the r i g h t s and p r i v i l e g e s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the B r i t i s h system, such as the r i g h t to i n i t i a t e 26 l e g i s l a t i o n and to approve the budget, the government was i n r e a l i t y an emperor's government. Franz Josef had the r i g h t to i n i t i a t e l e g i s -l a t i o n , though h i s every act had to be counter-signed by a re s p o n s i b l e 27 m i n i s t e r . The e f f e c t i v e n e s s of t h i s l i m i t a t i o n was c u r t a i l e d by the f a c t that the emperor could appoint and dismiss m i n i s t r i e s a t w i l l . He a l s o had the power to decide upon peace and war and the making of t r e a t i e s , a c l e a r i l l u s t r a t i o n of the concentration of power i n h i s hands. The infamous " A r t i c l e 14" of the new c o n s t i t u t i o n f u r t h e r l i m i t e d the power of parliament. When parliament was not i n se s s i o n the govern-29 ment was given the r i g h t to r u l e by decree, i f necessary. Such decrees had the force of law, although they had to be approved by parliament when i t assembled. As n a t i o n a l i s t o b s t r u c t i o n i n c r e a s i n g l y hampered parliament's a c t i v i t y a f t e r 1897, the emperor and h i s government tended 18 to v i o l a t e the s p i r i t of the law by proroguing parliament and r u l i n g by decree. I n d i v i d u a l s were granted e q u a l i t y before the law, the r i g h t to assemble and a s s o c i a t e i n g r o u p s — i n c l u d i n g p o l i t i c a l groups—and other democratic r i g h t s . There was to be a f r e e p r e s s , unencumbered by censorship. In s p i t e of the apparent l i b e r a l i t y of these r i g h t s , however, there were s t r i c t l i m i t a t i o n s on them, and they could r e l a -t i v e l y e a s i l y be set aside. While the p o p u l a t i o n was given the r i g h t to organize p o l i t i c a l l y , f o r example, the d e f i n i t i o n of what c o n s t i -t uted a p o l i t i c a l a s s o c i a t i o n was often l e f t to the r e l e v a n t a u t h o r i t i e s , 30 and they could use or abuse t h e i r power as they wished. This was a r e a l problem, p a r t i c u l a r l y f o r the s o c i a l i s t movement. Furthermore, a p o l i t i c a l a s s o c i a t i o n approved by the a u t h o r i t i e s could not develop 31 t i e s w i t h other p o l i t i c a l a s s o c i a t i o n s . This r e s t r i c t i o n prevented the s o c i a l i s t s from e s t a b l i s h i n g a concrete o r g a n i z a t i o n u n t i l a f t e r 1891. In a d d i t i o n , i n case of war, " i n t e r n a l unrest," or "treasonous a c t i v i t i e s , " the b a s i c r i g h t s of the i n d i v i d u a l — i n c l u d i n g freedom of person, freedom of the pr e s s , and of a s s o c i a t i o n and assembly— 32 could be " l i m i t e d . " Once again, these terms were not s p e c i f i c a l l y defined. As a r e s u l t , f o l l o w i n g a demonstration i n Vienna i n 1869, the leaders of the s o c i a l i s t movement were t r i e d f o r "high-treason." One aspect of the new c o n s t i t u t i o n which was unique was the l e g a l p r o t e c t i o n of the r i g h t s of the peoples of C i s l e i t h a n i a . A l l n a t i o n a l i t i e s were declared to be equal, and were to have complete freedom to propagate and preserve t h e i r n a t i o n a l i t y and language; a l l "customary" languages were guaranteed t h e i r r i g h t s i n s c h o o l s , and 33 i n o f f i c i a l and p u b l i c l i f e . This p r o g r e s s i v e law had no counter-34 part i n the other m u l t i - n a t i o n a l s t a t e s i n Europe at the time. In p r a c t i s e , of course, n a t i o n a l i t i e s were not equal, nor d i d they have equal access to education i n t h e i r own languages, but as time passed a gradual development towards language e q u a l i t y d i d occur. C l e a r l y the C i s l e i t h a n i a n h a l f of the Monarchy was an undemo-c r a t i c s t a t e a f t e r 1867. For the upper c l a s s e s there was indeed r e p r e s e n t a t i o n and a c e r t a i n amount of p o l i t i c a l power, but f o r the "lower orders" there was next to nothing. S o c i a l i s t s were thus placed i n a more d i f f i c u l t p o s i t i o n than comrades i n Western Europe and even Germany, f o r they had no hope of e l e c t i n g members of parliament who could f r e e l y express s o c i a l i s t views. In Germany u n i v e r s a l manhood s u f f r a g e , at l e a s t f o r the c e n t r a l parliament, was granted i n 1867 and t h e r e a f t e r the German s o c i a l i s t s could e l e c t members of parliament and have t h e i r views r e p r e s e n t e d — i f not acted u pon—at the highest l e v e l i n the land. The l a c k of the f r a n c h i s e and other r i g h t s i n C i s l e i t h a n i a meant that the C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t movement had to add to i t s a c t i -v i t y a s t r u g g l e f o r the most b a s i c democratic r i g h t s . Not only were workers excluded from the b a l l o t , but the laws granting r i g h t s to i n d i -v i d u a l s , i n c l u d i n g those of a s s o c i a t i o n and assembly, d i d not i n e f f e c t apply to s o c i a l i s t s . The various organs of government concerned w i t h the s o c i a l i s t movement c o n s t a n t l y took advantage of those aspects of 20 the laws which permitted them to repress the s o c i a l i s t s . P a r t y pro-grammes were declared S t a a t s g e f a h r l i c h (a danger to the s t a t e ) , meetings were ordered d i s s o l v e d or even p r o h i b i t e d , o r g a n i z a t i o n s were a b o l i s h e d , and s o c i a l i s t s were thrown i n p r i s o n or e x i l e d . S o c i a l i s t s newspapers were censored, and the Kaution system—each paper had to deposit a lar g e sum of money w i t h the a u t h o r i t i e s from which f i n e s were to be subtracted i n case of i n f r a c t i o n of the law—made i t extremely d i f f i -c u l t f o r s o c i a l i s t newspapers to s u r v i v e . There was, however, progress of a s o r t . A f t e r 1890 r e p r e s s i o n of the s o c i a l i s t movement slackened p e r c e p t i b l y . A d d i t i o n a l l y , the f r a n c h i s e was g r a d u a l l y extended. In 1873 a f r a n c h i s e reform made e l e c t i o n s to the Re i c h s r a t d i r e c t , though only those who p a i d at l e a s t 10 to 20 gulden taxes could vote f o r the four c u r i a e i n t o which the lower house was d i v i d e d . Workers, peasants and much of the lower middle 35 c l a s s were s t i l l excluded from the vote. Another m o d i f i c a t i o n i n 1882 reduced the tax q u a l i f i c a t i o n to 5 gulden but s t i l l l e f t the mass of the po p u l a t i o n unrepresented. Only i n 1896 was there a major change. In that year an e l e c t o r a l reform which permitted a l l men over age twenty-four to vote was introduced. Only 72 of the 353 seats were to be e l e c t e d 36 on t h i s b a s i s , however. The other four c u r i a e were maintained. At l a s t , however, s o c i a l i s t s and others could run f o r parliament. In the f i r s t e l e c t i o n s under the new system fourteen s o c i a l i s t s were suc-c e s s f u l . F i n a l l y , i n 1907 u n i v e r s a l manhood suf f r a g e f o r a l l seats was won, i n p a r t due to the e f f o r t s of the s o c i a l i s t s . Only a f t e r 189 7, 21 t h e r e f o r e , could one speak of any k i n d of s o c i a l i s t parliamentary a c t i -v i t y . In so f a r as the s o c i a l i s t party e x i s t e d i n the years before 189 7 i t functioned as an extra-parliamentary p a r t y , and could have no d i r e c t i n f l u e n c e on parliament and the laws of the land. For other p a r t i e s i n C i s l e i t h a n i a the s i t u a t i o n was d i f f e r e n t . The age of mass p a r t i e s r e a l l y began w i t h the e l e c t o r a l reform of 1882, which enfr a n c h i s e d the lower middle c l a s s . By the e a r l y 1890's the f i r s t mass p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s had emerged. S i g n i f i c a n t l y , the changes i n the f r a n c h i s e d i d not lead to the growth of mass l i b e r a l p a r t i e s . Instead the lower middle c l a s s and the working c l a s s p r e f e r r e d n a t i o n a l or s o c i a l r a d i c a l i s m . Of the p a r t i e s represented i n parliament before 189 7 only the C h r i s t i a n S o c i a l P a r t y even attempted to appeal to a m u l t i - n a t i o n a l e l e c t o r a t e . Once the s o c i a l i s t s won parliamentary r e p r e s e n t a t i o n , however, they were the only s u p r a - n a t i o n a l l y - o r g a n i z e d mass party i n parliament. The adoption of u n i v e r s a l manhoodssuffrage i n 1907 placed C i s -l e i t h a n i a among the more l i b e r a l European s t a t e s . That t h i s progres-s i v e step occurred at the expense of the Germans i s evident from t h e i r p r o p o r t i o n of deputies i n parliament. At the time of the 1873 reform they h e l d a two-thirds m a j o r i t y of the seats i n the lower house. The 1882 m o d i f i c a t i o n reduced t h i s to 52.4 per cent, and the 1896 reform 37 to 47 per cent. The 1907 reform i r r e t r i e v a b l y ended any p o s s i b i l i t y of a German m a j o r i t y i n parliament. I t i s thus c l e a r that the democra-t i z a t i o n of the s t a t e occurred at the expense of the Germans, i n the same sense that i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n and u r b a n i z a t i o n i n t h e i r l a t e r stages d i d . 22 i i i ) The O r i g i n s and Development of the S o c i a l i s t Movement i n C i s l e i t h a n i a S o c i a l i s m i n C i s l e i t h a n i a d i d not emerge overnight a f t e r the l i b e r a l i z a t i o n of 1867. A long p e r i o d of organizationalowbrk-had pre-ceded the a c t u a l growth of a s o c i a l i s t movement. The f i r s t worker o r g a n i z a t i o n s of any k i n d had begun i n 1804 when " f a c t o r y funds" were 38 e s t a b l i s h e d i n the t e x t i l e and p o r c e l a i n i n d u s t r i e s i n Bohemia. O r i g i n a l l y formed to provide sickness and t r a v e l b e n e f i t s f o r members, many began to c o l l e c t funds f o r support of unemployed workers, thereby assuming some c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s of trade unions. By 1840 some workers began to th i n k of them i n terms other than as mere benevolent asso-39 c i a t i o n s . The government of Bohemia became alarmed, and as of 14 March 1845 c o l l e c t i o n of money among workers was forbidden, except i n so f a r as the a u t h o r i t i e s s p e c i f i c a l l y permitted i t . A h i s t o r i a n of the labour movement says that the government feared " s o c i a l i s t a g i -40 t a t i o n " i n these a s s o c i a t i o n s . The r e v o l u t i o n of 1848 was a s i g n i f i c a n t event i n the develop-ment of the labour movement i n C i s l e i t h a n i a . For the f i r s t time indus-t r i a l workers, as a s e l f - c o n s c i o u s group r a t h e r than as i s o l a t e d i n d i -v i d u a l s , appeared on the h i s t o r i c a l stage i n Prague and Vienna. Pub-l i c a l l y they r a i s e d demands of t h e i r own; f o r increased wages, s h o r t e r 41 working hours and b e t t e r working c o n d i t i o n s . These demands, and the appearance of workers on the ba r r i c a d e s i n the l a t t e r stages of the upheaval, were important:, not only i n t h e i r s i g n i f i c a n c e i n the r e v o l u t i o n a r y process i t s e l f , but a l s o f o r t h e i r impact upon the 23 evolution of the workers' self-consciousness. I n t e r e s t i n g l y , however, when K a r l Marx appeared i n Vienna i n 1848, seeking support for h i s 42 ideas, he found l i t t l e response. I t i s c l e a r , however, that the creation of separate worker organizations during the revolution e v i -denced the workers' consciousness of themselves as separate from the bourgeoisie. Following the collapse of the revolution and the return of absolutism there was l i t t l e s o c i a l i s t a c t i v i t y u n t i l the 1860's. As a movement did begin to emerge'it was l e d e i t h e r by Reich-German workers or Austro-Germans who had been a c t i v e i n the s o c i a l i s t movement i n Germany. For this reason, the new ideologies beginning to spread among workers i n C i s l e i t h a n i a i n the 1860's were imported from Germany. They took two forms, " s e l f - h e l p " (Schulze-Delitzsch) and "state-help" (Las-s a l l e ) . Schulze-Delitzsch believed that workers should not expect any help from the state, and that they should organize t h e i r own " s e l f -help" s o c i e t i e s by forming consumers' and producers' associations and savings' s o c i e t i e s . The working class should r e f r a i n from p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t y . In contrast, the Lassalleans opined that the state should be used as an instrument by workers to create "state-help" associations and co-operatives which could then replace c a p i t a l i s t industry. The means to be used were p o l i t i c a l ; workers would obtain u n i v e r s a l man-hood suffrage and take over the state apparatus. To do t h i s they would need to co-operate with the l i b e r a l s against the n o b i l i t y and other reactionary forces. 24 Marxism was not one of the i d e o l o g i e s competing f o r the favour of the workers at t h i s time. Although Marx and Engels' "Communist 43 Manifesto' was pu b l i s h e d i n Vienna as e a r l y as 1868, and although Czech s o c i a l i s t papers began p u b l i s h i n g Marx's comments on the Franco-44 P r u s s i a n War i n 1870-71, i t was not u n t i l the 1870's that Marxism began to have an impact i n C i s l e i t h a n i a . In any case, u n t i l the adoption of a new c o n s t i t u t i o n i n 1867, l e g a l s o c i a l i s t a c t i v i t y i n C i s l e i t h a n i a was v i r t u a l l y impossible. The p a r t of the new c o n s t i t u t i o n immediately relevant to the workers was, of course, the " l i b e r a l i z a t i o n " of the a s s o c i a t i o n s and assembly laws of 1852. As the government i n t e r p r e t e d i t , t h i s permitted workers to form n o n - p o l i t i c a l a s s o c i a t i o n s , such as worker's e d u c a t i o n a l asso-c i a t i o n s , a form pioneered i n Germany i n 1859. In mid-November 1867, the s t a t u t e s of the f i r s t l e g a l e d u c a t i o n a l a s s o c i a t i o n , founded i n 45 Vienna, were approved by the I n t e r i o r M i n i s t r y . This opened the way to the founding of ed u c a t i o n a l a s s o c i a t i o n s i n the major i n d u s t r i a l centres of C i s l e i t h a n i a . I n i t i a l l y l o c a t e d i n Vienna, North Bohemia, Brlinn, and i n Graz, the new or g a n i z a t i o n s began opening reading rooms f o r workers and forming d i s c u s s i o n groups. They e s t a b l i s h e d contacts w i t h one another, but no attempt could be made to form a n a t i o n a l or r e g i o n a l a s s o c i a t i o n , i n s p i t e of the f a c t that they were n o n - p o l i t i c a l . A c t i v i t y i n the new a s s o c i a t i o n s r a p i d l y became p o l i t i c a l , however, as they began t o consider what form of ideology to adopt, and to take a p o s i t i o n on the iss u e s of the day. During 1868 s o c i a l i s t s .25-began to h o l d what they c a l l e d worker's assemblies, and adopted reso-l u t i o n s on various t o p i c s . At the n i n t h of these, h e l d on 30 August 1868 i n Vienna, the Vienna o r g a n i z a t i o n adopted a L a s s a l l e a n pro-46 gramme. Even before t h i s they had taken a p o s i t i o n on the compli-cated n a t i o n a l i t y problem i n C i s l e i t h a n i a . I t was argued that the " p r i n c i p l e of n a t i o n a l i t y i s today only on the agenda of r e a c t i o n a r i e s , " and that the v i c t o r y of s o c i a l i s m and the achievement of e q u a l i t y would 47 s o l v e the n a t i o n a l i t y question. This statement t y p i f i e s the view of the n a t i o n a l i t y question h e l d by European s o c i a l i s t s i n the n i n e -teenth century and can be seen as one of the c a r d i n a l defects of s o c i a l i s t thought. I n i t i a l l y the government permitted the s o c i a l i s t s considerable freedom of a c t i o n , provided they d i d not contravene the law. F o l l o w i n g the Eisenach founding Congress of the German s o c i a l i s t party i n August 1869, however, the government launched a r e p r e s s i v e campaign against them. Some d i s c u s s i o n of the background to t h i s i s necessary. P r i o r to the Austro-Prussian War of 1866 C i s l e i t h a n i a was, of course, a member of the German Confederation. As a r e s u l t , C i s -l e i t h a n i a n Germans and Reich-Germans d i d not d i f f e r e n t i a t e between the two c o u n t r i e s , e s p e c i a l l y i n the s o c i a l i s t movement. There was f r e e passage of both men and ideas across the borders. As the s o c i a l i s t movement emerged among Germans i n C i s l e i t h a n i a , t i e s between them and s o c i a l i s t s i n Germany were very c l o s e , and f o r a long time a f t e r Kbnig-grat z the new r e a l i t y was r e j e c t e d . On 25 J u l y 1869, f o r example, Wilhelm Liebknecht, one of the leaders of the s o c i a l i s t movement i n 26 Germany, spoke i n Vienna. He argued t h a t : The present e x c l u s i o n of A u s t r i a from Germany i s only pro-v i s i o n a l and temporary. A u s t r i a must come back to Germany . . . We do not stand i n an i n t e r n a t i o n a l r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h A u s t r i a n workers, on the c o n t r a r y , our r e l a t i o n s h i p i s a n a t i o n a l one; we cannot organize without you.48 C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s agreed w i t h t h i s view, and as a r e s u l t , when the Bebel-Liebknecht f a c t i o n i n the German worker's movement h e l d a congress at Eisenach Germany i n order to found a s o c i a l i s t p a r t y , 49 C i s l e i t h a n i a n Germans sent r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . Despite Liebknecht s warnings about the danger of p o l i c e r e p r e s s i o n , the congress decided to l o c a t e the new party's C o n t r o l Commission i n Vienna. A f t e r the congress, C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s adopted the pro-gramme of the Eisenach p a r t y . Based l a r g e l y on the programme of the F i r s t I n t e r n a t i o n a l , ^ i t . i t i e a l l e d f o r the establishment of a " f r e e s t a t e , " which could only mean a r e p u b l i c . This was i n t o l e r a b l e to the C i s -l e i t h a n i a n a u t h o r i t i e s , and the programme was p r o h i b i t e d i n C i s l e i t h a n i a . A massive campaign of r e p r e s s i o n of the s o c i a l i s t movement began. The c r i s i s brought on by the campaign climaxed i n a l a r g e demon-52 s t r a t i o n before the assembling R e i c h s r a t on 13 December 1869. This was the f i r s t major demonstration by workers i n C i s l e i t h a n i a s i n c e 1848, and was 'remarkable f o r the o r d e r l i n e s s i n which the ten to twenty thou-53 sand workers paraded before parliament. A p e t i t i o n , c a l l i n g f o r freedom of a s s o c i a t i o n , a f r e e press and e l e c t o r a l r i g h t s , was presented to the m i n i s t e r - p r e s i d e n t , Graf Taaffe. Freedom of a s s o c i a t i o n was granted, but the government immediately acted to prevent the s o c i a l i s t s 54 from t h i n k i n g they had won a major v i c t o r y . The le a d e r s - o f . t h e 27 de l e g a t i o n which had presented the p e t i t i o n were a r r e s t e d , and on 2 March 1870, l e a d i n g Viennese s o c i a l i s t s , i n c l u d i n g H e i n r i c h Oberwinder and Andreas Scheu were a l s o apprehended. Far from g i v i n g i n to pres-sure, the government was planning a high-treason t r i a l , w i t h the i n t e n -t i o n of completely destroying the worker's movement. At the t r i a l , which occurred i n J u l y 1870, the defendants were found g u i l t y , and Scheu, Oberwinder and one Johann Most were sentenced 56 to s e v e r a l years at hard labour. In one f e l l swoop the leadership of what was becoming C i s l e i t h a n i a n r a t h e r than merely Viennese s o c i a l democracy was removed. On 30 J u l y 1870 the Vienna e d u c a t i o n a l asso-c i a t i o n , and many others as w e l l , was d i s s o l v e d by governmental decree. Another r e s u l t of these events was the c l o s u r e of the V o l k s -stimme, Vienna's only s o c i a l i s t n e w s p a p e r . I t was replaced i n January 1870, however, by the weekly V o l k s w i l l e and by G l e i c h h e i t i n Wiener 58 Neustadt, both e d i t e d by Austro-Germans. The establishment of the Volksstimme—on 11 A p r i l 1869—had marked an important step i n the growth of the s o c i a l i s t movement; a p o l i t i c a l forum was created i n which s o c i a l i s t views could be expressed p u b l i c l y . In a d d i t i o n , the press served as the l e a d e r s h i p of the s o c i a l i s t movement w e l l i n t o the 1890's, f o r l e a d i n g s o c i a l i s t s i n e v i t a b l y centred t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s i n the e d i t o r i a l committees of the press. On the same day the v e r d i c t i n the high-treason t r i a l was announced, France declared war on P r u s s i a . The i n t e r n a t i o n a l s i g n i -f i c a n c e of the Franco-Prussian War i s w e l l known, but i t a l s o had an impact on the future of C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l democracy. The War, and 28 r e a c t i o n s to one of i t s r e s u l t s , the P a r i s Commune, had important im-p l i c a t i o n s f o r both Czech and German s o c i a l i s t s i n the Monarchy. Their a t t i t u d e s to each other and t h e i r n a t i o n a l i s t movements, as w e l l as 59 to t h e i r middle c l a s s e s , changed. Some Czech workers i n Prague began to consider c l o s e r r e l a t i o n s w i t h Austro-German s o c i a l i s t s . This occurred because many Austro-German s o c i a l i s t s took the same p o s i t i o n as Czech s o c i a l i s t s — s u p p o r t f o r the French Republic ( u n t i l the P a r i s Commune was suppressed), and t h e r e f o r e o p p o s i t i o n to the new German R e i c h . ^ Since there had been voices among the Germans, which had favoured the idea of Czech-German -co-operation from the beginning, t h i s r a i s e d the p o s s i b i l i t y of forming a b i - n a t i o n a l s o c i a l i s t movement i n C i s l e i t h a n i a . T i e d d i r e c t l y to t h i s was the s o c i a l i s t s ' r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h the middle c l a s s and i t s p a r t i e s as a whole. When these had condemned the P a r i s Commune—which the s o c i a l i s t s saw as the f i r s t s o c i a l i s t r e v o l u t i o n i n Europe—both Czech and German s o c i a l i s t s began to r e -evaluate t h e i r r e l a t i o n s w i t h the middle c l a s s . Since the n a t i o n a l movements were p r i m a r i l y i d e n t i f i e d w i t h the middle c l a s s and i t s p a r t i e s , t h i s meant a r e c o n s i d e r a t i o n of the r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h the n a t i o n a l movements as w e l l . For German-speaking s o c i a l i s t s , at l e a s t i n terms of a c t u a l l y e x i s t i n g t i e s w i t h t h e i r middle c l a s s , t h i s d i d not pose a r e a l problem, f o r the German middle c l a s s was l a r g e l y h o s t i l e to the s o c i a l i s t movement i n both the A l p i n e and Bohemian lands. I t d i d pose a problem f o r the Czechs, however, f o r the Czech middle c l a s s had had both an i n t e r e s t i n and t i e s w i t h the s o c i a l i s t movement sin c e 61 i t s i n c e p t i o n . 29 The d i f f e r e n c e s between the a t t i t u d e s of the Czech and German middle c l a s s e s were important. Czech l i b e r a l s , genuinely i n t e r e s t e d i n the w e l f a r e of Czech workers, had attempted to organize them a f t e r 1867. This a c t i v i t y a l s o r e f l e c t e d t h e i r d e s i r e to i n c l u d e workers i n the Czech n a t i o n a l i s t movement. The German middle c l a s s , on the other hand, l a c k i n g a n a t i o n a l i s t movement, and unclear as to what a German n a t i o n a l i s t movement should stand f o r i n the f i r s t p l a c e , took l i t t l e i n t e r e s t i n the workers' movement, and thus i n s o c i a l i s m . Among German-speaking s o c i a l i s t s the r e a l problem was not what the German middle c l a s s thought of the s o c i a l i s t movement, but r a t h e r what some s o c i a l i s t s thought of the middle c l a s s . Following the amnesty of the imprisoned Vienna l e a d e r s h i p i n February 1871 s o c i a l i s t a c t i v i t y i n the c a p i t a l expanded once more. The i d e o l o g i c a l c o n f l i c t which was about to occur found expression i n the views of the two major lea d e r s . This was a s i g n i f i c a n t phenomenon i n i t s e l f , f o r i t emphasized that the s o c i a l i s t movement had developed to the p o i n t where s p e c i f i c i n d i -v i d u a l s could be c l e a r l y i d e n t i f i e d as l e a d e r s . H e i n r i c h Oberwinder (1846-1914), as a German-born L a s s a l l e a n , stood f o r co-operation w i t h the middle c l a s s and i t s p a r t i e s . He was a l s o a pan-German n a t i o n a l i s t , had favoured P r u s s i a i n the war, and wanted to take p a r t i n a Sieges- f e i e r a f t e r i t ended. Andreas Scheu (1844-1927), the f i r s t important native-born s o c i a l i s t l e a d e r , was an i n t e r n a t i o n a l i s t , and was opposed 62 to any co-operation w i t h the b o u r g e o i s i e . Contrary to the claims 6 3 of some h i s t o r i a n s , however, Scheu was not a M a r x i s t . His views d i d , however, r e f l e c t the i n f l u e n c e of the F i r s t I n t e r n a t i o n a l i n the C i s -l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t movement. 30 That i n f l u e n c e was extremely important. A l l of the l e a d i n g members of the movement i n Vienna were members of the I n t e r n a t i o n a l , 64 and t i e s between i t and the s o c i a l i s t movement were c l o s e . Orxgx-n a l l y , the German-language s e c t i o n of the I n t e r n a t i o n a l , b a s e d 1 1 1 Geneva, had seen i t s e l f as the a c t u a l party of German-speaking workers. A f t e r the founding of the Eisenach party i n Germany, however, and e s p e c i a l l y a f t e r the events of 1870-71, t h i s f i c t i o n could no longer be maintained. At the 1872 Hague Congress of the I n t e r n a t i o n a l — a t t w h ' i e h Oberwinder was a d e l e g a t e — i t was decided that each n a t i o n a l group should form i t s own independent n a t i o n a l p a r t y . Appropriate i n s t r u c t i o n s were sent out to the c o r r e s p o n d e n t s . ^ These were a powerful weapon i n Scheu's s t r u g g l e w i t h Oberwinder. Oberwinder's d e s i r e to co-operate w i t h the middle c l a s s found expression i n h i s welcoming of the 1873 e l e c t o r a l reform, even though i t granted no concessions to workers. This was the immediate cause of the s p l i t between the two men. Scheu saw t h i s as a r e t r e a t from the goal of u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e , and a compromising departure from 66 s o c i a l i s t p r i n c i p l e . The c o n f l i c t between Oberwinder and Scheu soon became general i n the Vienna movement, and was u l t i m a t e l y , i n conjunc-t i o n w i t h other f a c t o r s , to c r i p p l e i t f o r some time to come. The p r o v i n c i a l German groups tended to declare f o r Scheu, though Graz r e -mained n e u t r a l . To complicate matters, i n May of 1873 the Vienna stock market c o l l a p s e d , ushering i n the worst depression of the nineteenth century. Between 1867 and 1873 C i s l e i t h a n i a had enjoyed an unprecedented 31 economic boom, and t h i s had l u l l e d the s o c i a l i s t s into a f a l s e sense of s e c u r i t y — a l o n g with everyone else i n the society. Many s t r i k e s had been successful, and by 1873 the trade union movement was impres-s i v e l y strong. A f t e r the crash, however, the decline of the movement was pre-c i p i t a t e . The trade association of manufacturing workers i n Reichen-berg f e l l from a peak of 3,535 members i n 1870 to a low of 68 i n 1877. The Vienna Worker's Educational Association, founded with such high hopes i n 1867, and with nearly 6,000 members i n 1868, had s l i p p e d to 68 a mere 180 members by 1878. F r u s t r a t i o n i n the economic realm only i n t e n s i f i e d the per-s o n a l i t y c o n f l i c t i n Vienna, although Oberwinder's p o s i t i o n was de-c l i n i n g . At the end of June 1873 Scheu's f a c t i o n united with another opposition group, c a l l i n g f o r the creation of a new programme. In November, the Graz organization, which had not become involved i n the struggle, proposed a congress to unite the factions and to create a worker s party. Czech and German s o c i a l i s t s were agreeable to the idea, and both were represented at the Neudbrfl Congress, held i n A p r i l 1874. O r i g i n a l l y to be held i n Baden, Lower A u s t r i a , i t had to be adjourned to Neudbrfl i n Hungary because the C i s l e i t h a n i a n p o l i c e forbade i t . Oberwinder's group refused to take part i n an i l l e g a l congress, so they returned to Vienna. A s l i g h t l y modified Eisenach programme was adopted by those who remained, and a section on r e l a t i o n s with the Czechs, which c a l l e d 32 f o r n a t i o n a l s e l f - d e t e r m i n a t i o n , was added. I t was agreed that Czechs and Germans would c o - e x i s t i n the un i t e d p a r t y , though they would each 70 have t h e i r own o r g a n i z a t i o n s . The Neudbrfl Congress was the founding congress of the s o c i a l democratic party i n C i s l e i t h a n i a , f o r both Czechs and Germans. I t thus deserves to be ranked w i t h the Eisenach Congress i n importance. In a wider sense, and even more s i g n i f i c a n t l y , Neudbrfl represented the f i r s t attempt i n the h i s t o r y of the i n t e r n a t i o n a l s o c i a l i s t move-ment to solv e the n a t i o n a l i t y question as i t a f f e c t e d party o r g a n i z a t i o n 71 without s a c r i f i c i n g u n i t y . The e f f e c t s of the congress were, however, v i r t u a l l y n u l l i f i e d when the government attacked the new o r g a n i z a t i o n . Andreas Scheu was hounded out of C i s l e i t h a n i a , and i n J u l y 1874 the party executive i n Graz was a r r e s t e d . Treason t r i a l s f o l l o w e d , and by the end of 1874 the new party was i n d i s a r r a y . An attempt to h o l d another congress i n 1875 was broken up by the p o l i c e . Repression only served to a c c e l -erate the d e c l i n e of the German movement. Several years of confusion followed. In 1876, under the lea d e r s h i p of Emil K a l e r - R e i n t h a l (1853-722 189 7), according to K a r l Kautsky an opponent of " m a t e r i a l i s m , " an attempt was made to u n i t e w i t h the Oberwinder f a c t i o n , and to b r i n g the party programme i n t o l i n e w i t h K a l e r - R e i n t h a l ' s concept of " l e g a l i t y . " At the Wiener Neustadt Congress of August 1876 agreement was reached w i t h p a r t of Oberwinder's f a c t i o n . At the same time, a new programme was adopted. Although i t was based on the Germany party's Gotha 33 programme, K a l e r - R e i n t h a l ' s c o n v i c t i o n that the party must avoid " i l -l e g a l i t y " l e d to a r e t r e a t from the p r i n c i p l e s expressed at Neudbrfl. As the programme phrased i t : The workers of A u s t r i a s t r u g g l e on the b a s i s of the e x i s t i n g c o n s t i t u t i o n . . . f o r a r a d i c a l r e o r g a n i z a t i o n of the s t a t e and of s o c i e t y . . . but they r e j e c t a l l p l a y i n g w i t h revo-l u t i o n . 73 Ost e n s i b l y c a l l e d to u n i t e the p a r t y , the Congress went so f a r as to r e j e c t the i d e a of a nation-wide p a r t y : Because a u n i t e d o r g a n i z a t i o n . . . under a common p o l i -t i c a l and s o c i a l programme has foundered on the r e s i s t a n c e of the government, the worker's assembly recognizes . . . [that] any extensive t h e o r e t i c a l programme and any [na t i o n -wide] o r g a n i z a t i o n should be abandoned.^ The abandonment of any attempt to maintain a nation-wide or-g a n i z a t i o n was expressed by the f a i l u r e to i n v i t e the Czechs to the Co n g r e s s . ^ P a r t l y as a r e s u l t , the Neudbrfl d e c i s i o n s concerning n a t i o n a l s e l f - d e t e r m i n a t i o n and an i n t e r n a t i o n a l party o r g a n i z a t i o n 76 were allowed to lapse. I t was c l e a r that c o n t i n u i n g r e p r e s s i o n and the cumulative e f f e c t s of the l a s t i n g depression were t a k i n g t h e i r t o l l . Reaction to the new programme was b i t t e r i n many quarters and l e f t and r i g h t wing f a c t i o n s developed. The le£t wing m a j o r i t y r e -j e c t e d the emphasis on l e g a l i t y and the abandonment of the t i e w i t h the Czech s o c i a l i s t s . The r e s u l t of t h i s was that an o p p o s i t i o n to K a l e r - R e i n t h a l ' s l e a d e r s h i p and h i s programme developed w i t h i n the party. At the Atzgersdorf Congress of 1877 t h i s found expression i n the r e j e c t i o n of the Wiener Neustadt programme, and i n a b i t t e r a t t a c k on K a l e r - R e i n t h a l . The Congress decided to recognize the Eisenach 34 programme, but to base i t s a c t i v i t y on the Neudorfl programme.^ K a l e r -R e i n t h a l ' s pre-eminence i n the s o c i a l i s t movement began to d e c l i n e . The r e t u r n to the p r i n c i p l e s of the Ne u d o r f l programme recon-firmed the t i e w i t h the Czech s o c i a l i s t s . At the same time, the Atzgers-dorf Congress achieved a reunion w i t h the remanants of Oberwinder's o r g a n i z a t i o n — h e had l e f t C i s l e i t h a n i a i n 1876. For the f i r s t time i n s e v e r a l years u n i t y was r e s t o r e d to the C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t movement. The new-found u n i t y i n the s o c i a l i s t movement was not threatened by the foundation of a separate Czech party at Brevnov, a suburb of Prague i n 1878, f o r the Czechs s t i l l considered t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n to 78 be an "inseparable p a r t of the . . . i n t e r n a t i o n a l p a r t y . " The Ger-mans agreed w i t h t h i s view, f o r at the next Congress of the C i s l e i -thanian party the r e s u l t s of the Brevnov Congress were approved, and the new Czech party l e a d e r s h i p was recognized. The decade of the 1870's had seen the C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t p arty make some advances. R e l a t i o n s between Czech and German s o c i a l i s t s were r e l a t i v e l y harmonious. Some u n i f o r m i t y had been achieved i n ideo-l o g i c a l matters. The negative aspects, however, c l e a r l y outweigh the p o s i t i v e ones. Although a party had been founded, the s o c i a l i s t s had been unable to give i t a coherent form. C e n t r a l committees and other o r g a n i z a t i o n a l forms had been e s t a b l i s h e d , but had f a l l e n v i c t i m to governmental r e p r e s s i o n . S o c i a l i s t newspapers, the r e a l centre of the movement, had not been e s t a b l i s h e d on a f i r m foundation. The party had been unable to do anything about p o l i c e r e p r e s s i o n , other than to 35 h o l d a few s e c r e t congresses. Through most of the decade the continuing depression had taken i t s t o l l of the p a r t y ; i n 1878 a party paper, 79 p u b l i s h e d i n l i e u of membership dues, had a c c i r c u l a t i o n of only 2,800. I t i s not s u r p r i s i n g that many s o c i a l i s t s were f r u s t r a t e d at t h e i r l a c k of success, and responded to a wave of a n a r c h i s t v i o l e n c e which spread across Europe from Russia and swept over C i s l e i t h a n i a i n the e a r l y 1880's. In C i s l e i t h a n i a t h i s phenomenon was not based on the philosophy of anarchism but r a t h e r r e f l e c t e d only i t s t e r r o r i s t i c aspect. The emerging r a d i c a l f a c t i o n i n the s o c i a l i s t p a r t y thus came to b e l i e v e i n the propaganda of the "deed" as a means to b r i n g the r e v o l u t i o n nearer. They f e l t that p u b l i c and open o r g a n i z a t i o n s were absurd i n the face of p o l i c e r e p r e s s i o n , and that parliamentarism was a waste of time. They ther e f o r e stood f o r s e c r e t o r g a n i z a t i o n s , a c l a n d e s t i n e and i l l e g a l p r e s s , and argued that the s o c i a l i s t goal of u n i v e r s a l manhood s u f f r a g e was mistaken. The suppression of the Reich-German s o c i a l i s t party i n 1878 appeared to confirm the r a d i c a l view. In i t s i d e o l o g y , t a c t i c s , and o r g a n i z a t i o n , as w e l l as i t s commitment to parliamentarism, the German party had been a model f o r C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s to f o l l o w . As such i t had had an enormous i n f l u e n c e on the C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t movement. The r e v e l a t i o n of i t s apparent bankruptcy had a great impact i n C i s l e i t h a n i a . When Johann M o s t — a l r e a d y well-known i n C i s l e i t h a n i a as one of the Hochverrater of 1870—began p u b l i c a t i o n of a r a d i c a l paper i n London i n January 1879 i t found an even wider audience i n 80 C i s l e i t h a n i a than i n Germany. During 1880 a s t r u g g l e f o r power w i t h i n the party began, and by the end of the year the r a d i c a l s had c l e a r l y gained the upper hand. The "moderates," as those who s t i l l b e l i e v e d i n the o l d approach came to be c a l l e d , founded t h e i r own newspapers as the r a d i c a l s took over the o l d papers. T -With the a r r i v a l of Josef Peukert, a r e a l a n a r c h i s t , i n Vienna at the.end of 1881 i t r a p i d l y became c l e a r that i t was im-p o s s i b l e f o r r a d i c a l s and moderates to c o - e x i s t w i t h i n the same pa r t y . In J u l y 1882 the moderates f i n a l l y broke w i t h the r a d i c a l m a j o r i t y , and h e l d t h e i r own party congress at Brunn, t h e i r stronghold. A- l a s t minute attempt at compromise f a i l e d , and the b i f u r c a t i o n was complete. Both Czech and German s o c i a l i s t s had s p l i t along i d e o l o g i c a l l i n e s . I n d i c a t i v e of the depth of the i d e o l o g i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s was the f a c t that Czech r a d i c a l s f e l t c l o s e r to German r a d i c a l s than to t h e i r c o - n a t i o n a l s i n the moderate camp. The same cannot be s a i d of the moderates. Although the programme adopted a t Brunn was a c l e a r statement of moderate views, r e t a i n i n g the demand f o r u n i v e r s a l s u f f -rage, and r e j e c t i n g c l a n d e s t i n e o r g a n i z a t i o n and acts of t e r r o r , Czech and German moderates s p l i t over i t s n a t i o n a l aspects. In October 1883 the r a d i c a l s h e l d t h e i r own party congress, and s p e l l e d out t h e i r commitment to r a d i c a l a c t i o n . They would: work w i t h a l l p o s s i b l e means f o r the r e v o l u t i o n , and keep the p o p u l a t i o n aroused through pamphlet campaigns or 'deeds.,181 This r e s o l u t i o n was c a r r i e d out i n 1883 and 1884—whether at the behest of the r a d i c a l leaders or not i s unclear. Several s p e c t a c u l a r r o b b e r i e s , k i l l i n g s , and dynamitings occurred. To the a u t h o r i t i e s these "deeds" 37 represented a concerted p l a n to overthrow the governments of C e n t r a l Europe, and they were not slow i n r e a c t i n g . On 30 January 1884 m a r t i a l law was decreed i n the Vienna region. In 1885 an " a n t i - s o c i a l i s t " law was introduced i n t o parliament. Even though the b i l l was u l t i m a t e l y forced to be r e d i r e c t e d against "anar-c h i s t s " by the l i b e r a l o p p o s i t i o n i n parliament, the mere t a b l i n g of the b i l l caused those s o c i a l i s t s (of both f a c t i o n s ) who were s t i l l a c t i v e a f t e r the debacle of January 1884 to d i s s o l v e t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n s and go underground. Within a short time the Briinn Volksfreund was the s o l e remaining German-language s o c i a l i s t paper i n the e n t i r e Mon-82 archy. By mid-1885 the s o c i a l i s t movement i n C i s l e i t h a n i a had v i r -t u a l l y ceased to e x i s t as a v i s i b l e f o r c e . A new beginning was neces-sary. In order to b r i n g about the r e c o n c i l i a t i o n of the remnants of the feuding f a c t i o n s , a new l e a d e r s h i p , unconnected w i t h e i t h e r , was needed.. This l e a d e r s h i p was provided by V i c t o r A d l e r (1852-1918). Born i n Prague, the wealthy A d l e r had e a r l y e s t a b l i s h e d contact w i t h the s o c i a l i s t movement, but d i d not j o i n u n t i l a f t e r h i s f a t h e r ' s death i n 1886. He rose r a p i d l y to prominence. His view, that a p e r i o d of common a c t i v i t y was necessary before a new p a r t y which u n i t e d r a d i c a l s 83 and moderates could be formed, turned out to be the c o r r e c t one. A f t e r almost three years of c o n c i l i a t o r y a c t i v i t y and endless nego-t i a t i o n s , A d l e r was able to c a l l a u n i t y congress f o r the end of Decem-ber 1888 i n the Lower A u s t r i a n town of H a i n f e l d . I t was preceded by the Czech party's Briinn Congress of 1887, which r e u n i t e d the Czech movement, and at H a i n f e l d both Czechs and Germans were represented. 38 A new p a r t y w i t h a Mar x i s t programme was created at the Con-gress. I n d i c a t i v e of f u t u r e developments, f i v e n a t i o n a l i t i e s — G e r m a n s , Czechs, P o l e s , Slovenes, and I t a l i a n s — w e r e represented at the Congress. The H a i n f e l d Congress marked the beginning of a new era i n s o c i a l i s t , and indeed, i n C i s l e i t h a n i a n p o l i t i c s . As o f f i c i a l r e p r e s s i o n of the s o c i a l i s t movement s u b s i d e d — t h e a n t i - a n a r c h i s t l e g i s l a t i o n lapsed i n 1891—and as the economy f i n a l l y began to recover from the great depression, the s o c i a l i s t movement grew by leaps and bounds, and was soon i n a new p o s i t i o n of power. On 1 May 1890, the f i r s t May Day, the party t e s t e d i t s new strength-by c a l l i n g a work stoppage. "The a u t h o r i t i e s showed them-84 selves to be almost h e l p l e s s against t h i s great demonstration." Several times the government t r i e d to f o r b i d t h i s demonstration of s o l i d a r i t y w i t h the newly-founded S o c i a l i s t I n t e r n a t i o n a l , but the s o c i a l i s t s simply ignored them. The success of the demonstration made c l e a r the message that the s o c i a l i s t movement was becoming a f a c t o r to be reckoned w i t h . I n c r e a s i n g l y during the 1890's the party became preoccupied w i t h the n a t i o n a l i t y question and w i t h winning u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e . A d l e r had thought that the n a t i o n a l i t y question i n the party was " w i t h e r i n g away" i n the aftermath of H a i n f e l d , but he was i n c o r r e c t . Although the Czech p a r t y had decided i n 1890 that i t would no longer h o l d separatee-congresses, i t s p o s i t i o n was ambiguous, f o r i t s t i l l r e t a i n e d a separate o r g a n i z a t i o n . This ambiguity was lessened i n 1893 when Czech s o c i a l i s t s h e l d a separate congress and refounded t h e i r 39 p a r t y , a l b e i t as p a r t of the C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r t y . A f t e r 1893 the Czech s o c i a l i s t s launched a d r i v e f o r more autonomy w i t h i n the movement. Under Adler's l e a d e r s h i p compromise a f t e r compromise was made, and i n 189 7 the C i s l e i t h a n i a n party became a f e d e r a l p a r t y , composed of s i x n a t i o n a l s o c i a l i s t p a r t i e s . This s t a b i l i z e d the p a r t y , and pro-vided a great opportunity f o r the development of s o c i a l i s m among the other n a t i o n a l i t i e s , p a r t i c u l a r l y by easing a g i t a t i o n a l problems. The r e a l harbinger of the problems which were to beset the s o c i a l i s t movement a f t e r 1900 was the trade union movement. I t s leader, Anton Hueber, f e l t that i t was p o s s i b l e — o n l y j u s t — f o r the party to be f e d e r a l i s t i c i n form, but not the trade union movement. With good reason, Hueber and other trade u n i o n i s t s argued that the trade unions had to be c e n t r a l l y organized i n order to carry out t h e i r f u n c t i o n s most e f f e c t i v e l y . As time passed, however, t h i s argument c a r r i e d l e s s a n d i l e s s weight w i t h Czech trade u n i o n i s t s , e s p e c i a l l y as Hueber was u n w i l l i n g to grant them even the s l i g h t e s t autonomy. At the second trade union congress i n 1896 the Czech delegates walked out, and s h o r t l y afterwards founded t h e i r own trade union commis-s i o n . While most of the Czech unions remained a f f i l i a t e d w i t h the c e n t r a l Trade Union Commission i n Vienna, as the years passed a t t r i t i o n s et i n . The f a i l u r e to r e s o l v e the c o n f l i c t i n the trade union move-ment had a d i r e c t impact on the p a r t y , and i n .1911 the Czech s o c i a l i s t s broke t h e i r t i e s w i t h the C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r t y , and the i n t e r n a t i o n a l u n i t y of the:proletariat i n C i s l e i t h a n i a c o l l a p s e d . The other major concern of the party i n the 1890's, the s t r u g g l e f o r u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e , f i r s t found concrete expression when i t was 40 made one of the demands at the second May Day c e l e b r a t i o n i n 1891. In 1892 A d l e r and the party leadership decided that the s o c i a l i s t s should concentrate t h e i r e f f o r t s on winning the vote. During 1893 a massive campaign of p u b l i c meetings, demonstrations and p r o t e s t s occurred. The Taaffe government, p a r t l y i n response to the s o c i a l i s t e f f o r t s , introduced a b i l l to grant l i m i t e d s u f f r a g e i n October 189 3. Though the government f e l l over the i s s u e , i n 1896 a new government introduced a reform which allowed u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e i n a new f i f t h c u r i a . At l a s t s o c i a l i s t s could run f o r parliament w i t h an exp e c t a t i o n of success: The e l e c t i o n s of 189 7, i n which fourteen s o c i a l i s t s were e l e c t e d , marked the beginning of parliamentary a c t i v i t y f o r C i s l e i -thanian s o c i a l i s t s , and at the same time, gave f u r t h e r impetus to t h e i r s t r u g g l e f o r true u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e . I t s f i n a l achievement i n 1907 was perhaps the great v i c t o r y the s o c i a l i s t s i n C i s l e i t h a n i a ever, won. At the same time, however, the concentration on the campaign f o r the vote l e d to the growth of f a i t h i n u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e as the great panacaea. This was evident i n the 1899 and 1901 s o c i a l i s t pro-grammes, which pl a c e d great r e l i a n c e on the achievement of the s u f f r a g e . The problem w i t h t h i s was t h a t , i n C i s l e i t h a n i a at l e a s t , u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e d i d not s o l v e a l l problems. At the very time at which the s o c i a l i s t s committed themselves i n t h e i r p a r t y programme, parliamentary government i n C i s l e i t h a n i a broke down. This was the great tragedy of both the s o c i a l i s t movement and the Habsburg s t a t e . The gradual 41 democratization of C i s l e i t h a n i a d i d not end n a t i o n a l i t y c o n f l i c t . On the c o n t r a r y , i t only i n t e n s i f i e d i t . As German power d e c l i n e d i n C i s l e i t h a n i a , the n a t i o n a l i s t emancipation movements among the non-German peoples, as w e l l as the Germans themselves, became i n v o l v e d i n a massive, all-embracing s t r u g g l e to f i l l the vacuum created. The gran t i n g of u n i v e r s a l manhood s u f f r a g e only worsened the s i t u a t i o n , f o r i t weakened German power even f u r t h e r , and thus provided more scope f o r the ambitions of the various peoples. What i s so f a s c i n a t i n g about the s o c i a l i s t movement i n C i s l e i -t h a n i a i s that i t too r e f l e c t e d t h i s s t r u g g l e . L i k e the Habsburg s t a t e , i n i t s o r i g i n s i t was l a r g e l y German. As i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n and urban-i z a t i o n continued, however, the s o c i a l i s t movement became i n c r e a s i n g l y complex i n i t s n a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e . In t h e i r d e s i r e to avoid c o n f l i c t , and to maintain the u n i t y of the s o c i a l i s t movement, C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s developed o r i g i n a l forms of o r g a n i z a t i o n and thought which were of the utmost s i g n i f i c a n c e , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n t h e i r impact upon the s o c i a l i s t movements of Eastern Europe. i v ) The Czech S o c i a l i s t Movement The Czech s o c i a l i s t movement was perhaps the most i n t e r e s t i n g i n the Habsburg Monarchy. I t was the d r i v i n g f o r c e behind the unique d i r e c t i o n s C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s m took a f t e r 1893. Complicating the development of the Czech s o c i a l i s t movement was the f a c t that four d i f f e r e n t centres emerged a f t e r the reforms of 1867. Czech s o c i a l i s t s were a c t i v e i n Prague, Brunn, North Bohemia and i n Vienna. In the l a t t e r three regions Czech s o c i a l i s t s developed cl o s e t i e s w i t h German s o c i a l i s t s , but i n Prague the Czech s o c i a l i s t movement developed i n a d i f f e r e n t d i r e c t i o n , at l e a s t at f i r s t . In Prague the f i r s t worker a s s o c i a t i o n s e s t a b l i s h e d a f t e r the reforms of 1867 were founded by Dr. F r a n t i s e k L. Chleborad, a c t i n g under the auspices of the conservative "Old Czech" wing of the Czech N a t i o n a l p a r t y . N o n - p o l i t i c a l trade u n i o n - l i k e a s s o c i a t i o n s and co-85 operatives were e s t a b l i s h e d . By mid-1868 an o p p o s i t i o n , supported by the l i b e r a l "Young Czech" wing of the Czech N a t i o n a l P a r t y and l e d by Jan Bavorsky, a typographer, had emerged. Predominant i n Prague by e a r l y 1869, i t fo l l o w e d the model adopted by Vienna, and founded worker's e d u c a t i o n a l a s s o c i a t i o n s . What d i f f e r e n t i a t e d the Prague s o c i a l i s t s from those i n Vienna, of course, was t h e i r c l o s e t i e s w i t h the Czech n a t i o n a l i s t movement. German-speaking s o c i a l i s t s had n a t i o n a l i s t f e e l i n g s as strong as the Czech s o c i a l i s t s had, but they were not r e f l e c t e d i n t i e s w i t h t h e i r middle c l a s s p a r t i e s . At f i r s t , Bavorsky and h i s supporters were b i t t e r about the a t t i t u d e taken by Vienna s o c i a l i s t s to the n a t i o n a l i t y question. Bavorsky expressed h i s view i n Delnjk on 1 May 1868.:; Why d i d you decorate the speaker's p l a t f o r m w i t h German colours when you say from the same p l a t f o r m that there i s no d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n by n a t i o n a l i t y among workers? . . . Our paths are d i f f e r e n t — w e recognize the brotherhood of workers, but i t must be based on a completely d i f f e r e n t foundation than a speaker's p l a t f o r m draped w i t h German colours!86 In the years 1869 and 1870, however, they developed cl o s e t i e s w i t h s o c i a l i s t s i n Reichenberg ( L i b e r e c ) , and the f u n e r a l of one of the 43 German s o c i a l i s t leaders i n Reichenberg, which occurred a f t e r h i s death i n a Prague p r i s o n , became the occasion f o r a l a r g e demonstration of , . . . 87 i n t e r n a t i o n a l i s t s o l i d a r i t y . F o l l o w i n g the Franco-Prussian War and the P a r i s Commune a group emerged i n Prague who took a p o s i t i o n somewhat s i m i l a r to that taken by Andreas Scheu i n Vienna. Led by Josef B. Pecka and L a d i s l a s Zapo-tocky, they accepted the p r i n c i p l e s of the F i r s t I n t e r n a t i o n a l , and 88 favoured the c r e a t i o n of an independent s o c i a l i s t p a rty. On 6 Feb-ruary 1874, Pecka i n d i c a t e d h i s views of the Young Czechs and t h e i r g o a l , the achievement of Bohemian S t a a t s r e c h t : We working people would i n any case re c e i v e very l i t t l e , even i f Bohemian S t a a t s r e c h t were to be recognized tomorrow.89 S o c i a l i s t s i n Prague had e s t a b l i s h e d close t i e s w i t h Czech s o c i a l i s t s i n Vienna, and on 17 August 1873 a meeting h e l d i n Vienna adopted a r e s o l u t i o n demanding a congress of workers of a l l n a t i o n a l i t i e s i n 90 C i s l e i t h a n i a to adopt a programme and e s t a b l i s h a pa r t y . Czech s o c i a l i s t s t h e r e f o r e p a r t i c i p a t e d i n the Ne u d b r f l Con-gress, and an independent s o c i a l i s t p a r t y , independent, that i s , of the middle c l a s s and i t s p a r t i e s , was founded. Immediately a f t e r the Congress, however, a s p l i t occurred among s o c i a l i s t s i n Prague, and Pecka and Zapotocky were fo r c e d to found a new paper, Budoucnost, on 91 1 October 1874. The c o n f l i c t w i t h i n the Prague s o c i a l i s t movement between those who d e s i r e d a separate Czech s o c i a l i s t movement, and those who stood f o r a C i s l e i t h a n i a n party was to continue down to 1914. When the Czechs were excluded from p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the Wiener Neustadt Congress, and when that Congress abandoned the i d e a of a 44 C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r t y , Czech s o c i a l i s t s began to move i n a more indepen-dent d i r e c t i o n . On 28 September 1876 a conference of Czech s o c i a l i s t s from Bohemia, Moravia and Vienna met i n Prague. There Pecka r a i s e d the question of an independently-organized Czech party w i t h a c e n t r a l 92 l eadership i n Prague and a f f i l i a t e s i n Briinn and Vienna. A year and a h a l f l a t e r t h i s party was founded, although i t was seen as an i n t e g r a l p a r t of the C i s l e i t h a n i a n p arty. The establishment of a Czech s o c i a l democratic party was a n a t u r a l r e s u l t of the growth of the n a t i o n a l i s t emancipation movement among the Czechs. Although there was some d i s s e n s i o n among Czech 93 s o c i a l i s t s i n North Bohemia and Briinn, an independently-organized 94 Czech party was e s s e n t i a l , e s p e c i a l l y f o r a g i t a t i o n a l purposes. The new party d i d not l a s t very long, however, f o r a f t e r 1880 Czech s o c i a l i s t s , i n company w i t h the Germans, s p l i t along radical-moderate l i n e s . Not u n t i l 1887 d i d they r e u n i t e . S i g n i f i c a n t l y , the reunion was c a r r i e d out under the lea d e r s h i p of Josef Hybes, a former r a d i c a l who had become a d i s c i p l e of V i c t o r A d l e r . In a d d i t i o n , the centre of the Czech (and indeed of the German) s o c i a l i s t movement had s h i f t e d to moderate Briinn a f t e r the r a d i c a l s were d i s c r e d i t e d . N a t i o n a l i s t f e e l i n g was weaker there. As a r e s u l t , when the C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r ty was r e - e s t a b l i s h e d a t H a i n f e l d i n 1888/9, the n a t i o n a l i t y question and the i d e a of an o r g a n i z a t i o n a l l y - d i s t i n c t Czech partyv,were~-ri6t s t r e s s e d . During the 1890's, Prague began to regain i t s l e a d e r s h i p of the Czech s o c i a l i s t movement. A f t e r 1893 the Prague s o c i a l i s t . leadership launched a d r i v e f o r autonomy w i t h i n the s o c i a l i s t movement i n C i s l e i t h a n i a . As the s o c i a l i s t movement, at l e a s t among Czechs and Germans, grew i n t o a mass movement during the 1890's, s e r i o u s prob-lems emerged f o r Czech s o c i a l i s t s . The German m a j o r i t y i n the C i s -l e i t h a n i a n party tended to ignore the Czechs, and i n some senses could be seen as an e x p l o i t i n g element i n the s o c i a l i s t movement. In t h i s sense, one might argue t h a t , f o r the Czech s o c i a l i s t s at l e a s t , the s o c i a l and n a t i o n a l questions became fused i n t o one thorny problem. As Czechs, Czech s o c i a l i s t s saw themselves as an e x p l o i t e d n a t i o n a l i t y , dominated by an a l i e n German group. As s o c i a l i s t s they a l s o saw them-selves as a subordinate group, e x p l o i t e d by German c a p i t a l i s t s . F i n a l l y , as members of a German-dominated C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r t y which at f i r s t d i d not d i f f e r e n t i a t e by n a t i o n a l i t y , they saw that i n the very movement which was supposed to b r i n g about t h e i r l i b e r a t i o n , they were d i r e c t e d by the r u l i n g German n a t i o n a l i t y . In the same sense as the Czech n a t i o n a l i t y s t r o v e to create an independent place f o r i t s e l f i n the Habsburg Monarchy, the Czech s o c i a l i s t s began to s t r u g g l e to e s t a b l i s h an independent p o s i t i o n i n the s o c i a l i s t movement. NOTES - CHAPTER I 1 Arthur J . May, The Hapsburg Monarchy 1867-1914 (New York, 1968 ), p. 64. 2 k. k. S t a t i s t i s c h e n Zentralkommission, O s t e r r e i c h i s c h e s  S t a t i s t i s c h e s Handbuch, XXX (1911), p. 212. 3 Andrew G. W h i t e s i d e , A u s t r i a n N a t i o n a l S o c i a l i s m before 1918 (The Hague, 1962), p. 22. American production was 244.0 m i l l i o n metric tons, B r i t i s h 228.0 m i l l i o n , and German 149.0 m i l l i o n tons. I b i d . Between 1903 and 1914 Austro-Hungarian c o a l production increased by 54 per cent, a r a t e surpassed only by Germany's 61 per cent expansion. I b i d . 4 C a l c u l a t e d from f i g u r e s i n i b i d . P e t e r Hanak, "Die b i i r g e r l i c h e Umgestaltung der Habsburger Monarchie und der A u s g l e i c h , " Der b s t e r r e i c h i s c h - u n g a r i s c h e A u s g l e i c h  1867, ed. L'udovit H o l o t i k ( B r a t i s l a v a , 1971), pp. 347-8. ^ Gybrgy Ranki, " E i n i g e Probleme der w i r t s c h a f t l i c h e n Entwick-lung i n der Osterreichisch-Ungarischen Monarchie," i b i d . , p. 397. L. Katus gives a f i g u r e of 4.0 per cent f o r Germany and 3.9 f o r C i s -l e i t h a n i a i n the years 1869/70 to 1913. He compares t h i s w i t h 6.1 per cent f o r Sweden, 4.2 i n T r a n s l e i t h a n i a , 3.5 i n R u s s i a , 2.2 f o r I t a l y , 2.1 i n England, and 1.9 per cent i n France. L. Katus, "Economic Growth i n Hungary during the Age of Dualism 1867-1913," Social-Economic  Researches on the H i s t o r y of E a s t - C e n t r a l Europe, ed. E. Pamlenyi (Budapest,1970), p. 113. ^ Ranki, p. 396. 8 ^ J u r i j K r i z e k , "La c r i s e du dualisme et l e d e r n i e r Compromis austro-hongrois (1897-1907)," H i s t o r i c a , XII (1966), pp. 132-3. In Lower A u s t r i a and Bohemia almost 43 per cent of the p o p u l a t i o n was engaged i n i n d u s t r y i n 1900, and i n some areas of Bohemia the propor-t i o n was as high as 60 per cent. W h i t e s i d e , p. 26. 9 C a r n i o l a , the L i t t o r a l and Dalmatia. Otto Bauer, Die N a t i o n a l i t a t e n f r a g e und die Sozialdemokratie (Vienna,1924 ), p. 240. The v a r i o u s peoples are arranged roughly i n order of distance from the northwestern i n d u s t r i a l core. There i s some d i s t o r t i o n of the f i g u r e s among I t a l i a n s and Slovenes because of the p o s i t i o n of T r i e s t e . 46-47 K a r l F r a n z l , " N e u z e i t l i c h e Entwlcklung der bohmischen Indus-t r i e und des bohmischen- Handels,"- Das bohmische V o l k y ed. Zdenek V. Tobolka (Prague-, 1916) , i p 2 1 2 . 12 For t h i s reason, the d i s c u s s i o n of the r e l a t i v e "success" or " f a i l u r e " of the Monarchy as an economic e n t i t y i s l a c k i n g i n c l a r i t y . While i t i s c l e a r from present-day experience that an "underdeveloped" country must have an i n d u s t r i a l growth r a t e s i g n i f i c a n t l y l a r g e r than those of the i n d u s t r i a l i z e d c o u n t r i e s i f i t i s ever to a t t a i n t h e i r economic l e v e l , the f a c t t h a t the Monarchy d i d not do so i s not enough to brand i t an economic f a i l u r e . Cf. Oscar J a s z i , The D i s s o l u t i o n of  the Habsburg Monarchy (Chicago, 1966 ), pp. 208-12. See a l s o Edward Marz, "Some Economic Aspects of the N a t i o n a l i t y C o n f l i c t i n the Habsburg Empire," JCEA, X I I I (1953-4), passim. C e r t a i n l y n a t i o n a l i t y c o n f l i c t i n the economic sphere complicated the Monarchy's growth prob-lems, and indeed, helped slow the pace of economic development. Without a comparison of the socio-economic p o s i t i o n of each of the Monarchy's peoples at the beginning and end of the p e r i o d , however, i t would appear to be s i m p l i s t i c to define the Monarchy as a f a i l u r e . Indeed, such a comparison would probably show that i t was n e i t h e r , f o r the b e n e f i t s and d e f i c i t s tended to balance each other. 13 Herbert M a t i s , " N a t i o n a l i t a t e n f r a g e und W i r t s c h a f t i n der Habsburgermonarchie," Der Donauraum, XV (1970), p. 181. This i s another f a c t o r which needs c o n s i d e r a t i o n i n any d i s c u s s i o n of the economic success or f a i l u r e of the Monarchy. 14 Wilhelm W i n k l e r , S t a t i s t i s c h e s Handbuch f u r das gesamte  Deutschtum ( B e r l i n , 1927), p. 16. Percentages c a l c u l a t e d from f i g u r e s i n i b i d . , pp. 15-17. K a r l Heinz Werner, "Oster r e i c h s I n d u s t r i e - und Aussenhandels-p o l i t i k 1848 b i s 1948," Hundert Jahre b s t e r r e i c h l s c h e r W i r t s c h a f t s - entwicklung, ed. Hans Mayer (Vienna, 1949), p. 369. May, The Hapsburg Monarchy, p. 223. 18 Whiteside, A u s t r i a n N a t i o n a l S o c i a l i s m before 1918, p. 27. 19 Figures quoted i n Hertha F i r n b e r g , "Wesen und Wandel der S o z i a l s c h i c h t u n g O s t e r r e i c h s , " O s t e r r e i c h s W i r t s c h a f t s s t r u k t u r , ed. Wilhelm Weber ( B e r l i n , 1961), I I , p. 841. 20 S t a t i s t i s c h e n Landesbureau des Kbnigreiches Bohmen, S t a t i s - t i s c h e s Handbuch des Kbnigreiches Bbhmen (Prague, 1913), p. 35. Between 1890 and 1914 Vienna grew by 45 per cent, Prague by 23, and Budapest by 74 per cent. Cf. K b n i g l i c h e Ungarische S t a t i s t i s c h e n Zentralamt, Ungarisches S t a t i s t i s c h e s Jahrbuch, Neue Folge XXI (1913), p. 10. Figures on which c a l c u l a t i o n s f o r Vienna were based are i n F i r n b e r g , p. 841. D i s t o r t i o n s due to changes i n c i t y boundaries are i n e v i t a b l e , but the f i g u r e s do give a rough i d e a of growth r a t e s . 4 8 21 Winkler, p. 169. C i t i e s of 25,000 po p u l a t i o n and over. 22 I b i d . 23 For f i g u r e s on Prague and P i l s e n see S t a t i s t i s c h e s Handbuch  des Kbnigreiches Bbhmen (1913), pp. 30-3. On Budweis see k. k. S t a t i s -t i s c h e n Central-Commission, S p e c i a l Orts-Repertorien der im o s t e r r e i c h i - schen Reichsrathe vertretenen Kbnigreiche und Lander (Vienna, 1893), IX, Bbhmen, p. 73, and Winkler, p. 188. On Briinn, which maintained i t s German m a j o r i t y t i l l 1918, see S p e c i a l Orts-Repertorien, X, Mahren, p. 1, and A l f r e d Bohmann, Das Sudetendeutschtum i n Zahlen (Munich, 1959), p. 32. There were 102,974 Czechs i n Vienna i n 1900. Cf. Monika G l e t t l e r , Die Wiener Tschechen urn 1900 (Munich, 1972), p. 54. This was the o f f i c i a l f i g u r e . G l e t t l e r says that i n 1910 one-quarter of Vienna's p o p u l a t i o n was of Czech o r i g i n , although only one-tenth was n a t i o n a l l y conscious. Cf. G l e t t l e r , Sokol- und A r b e i t e r t u r n v e r e i n e  der Wiener Tschechen (Munich, 1972), p. 13. A f t e r the c o l l a p s e of the Monarchy, claims t h a t there were 500,000 to 1 m i l l i o n Czechs i n Vienna were made. Cf. Wilhelm W i n k l e r , "Die Tschechen i n Wien," F l u g s c h r i f t e n  f u r Deutschbsterreichs Recht, XXXIX (1919), pp. 20, 29. 24 This i s not to suggest that the German p o s i t i o n d i s i n t e g r a t e d before 1914. The Germans remained the l e a d i n g n a t i o n a l i t y i n the Mon-archy, both p o l i t i c a l l y and economically. In 1910, f o r example, they p a i d 63 per cent of a l l taxes i n C i s l e i t h a n i a , though they were only 35 per cent of the p o p u l a t i o n . See J a s z i , pp. 278-9. In c o n t r a s t , only 3.04 per cent of the p o p u l a t i o n of G a l i c i a — w h i c h had almost 29 per cent of the p o p u l a t i o n — p a i d taxes i n 1910. I t i s important to note a l s o , that the Czech migrations i n t o i n d u s t r i a l German Bohemia d e c l i n e d as i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n began to a c c e l -erate i n Czech Bohemia a f t e r 1880. The Czech migrations have been seen as one of the major reasons f o r the r i s e of " n a t i o n a l s o c i a l i s m " i n German Bohemia. The t h r e a t was more apparent, i n t h i s case, than i t was r e a l . 25 Depending on the Crown Land, the Landtag was d i v i d e d i n t o three or four c u r i a e . The f i r s t was f o r the great landowners (as w e l l as some of the higher c l e r g y and the r e c t o r s s of the u n i v e r s i t i e s ) , and the second f o r the Chambers of Commerce and Industry. The t h i r d and f o u r t h c u r i a e were f o r . t h e c i t i e s and the r u r a l areas. By no means a l l of the people could vote. In Vienna, f o r example, one had to pay 20 gulden i n annual taxes to q u a l i f y as a voter i n the t h i r d c u r i a . Cf. C a r l y l e A. Macartney, The Habsburg Empire 1790-1918 (London, 1969), p. 514. 26 Law of 21 December 1867, A r t i c l e s 13, 11c, Die o s t e r r e i c h i s c h e n  Verfassungsgesetze, ed. Edmund Bern a t z i k , ( V i e n n a , 1911), pp. 398, 395. 2 7 Law of 25 J u l y 1867, A r t i c l e 1, i b i d . , pp. 371-2. 49 2 8 Law of 21 December 1867, A r t i c l e 5, i b i d . , p. 436. 29 I b i d . , A r t i c l e 14, p. 399. 30 F r i e d r i c h Walter, O s t e r r e i c h i s c h e Verfassungs- und Verwaltungs- geschichte 1500-1955 (Vienna, 1972), p. 230. S i g n i f i c a n t l y , according to the law of 15 November 1867 on A s s o c i a t i o n s , women and f o r e i g n e r s were not permitted to belong to p o l i t i c a l a s s o c i a t i o n s . B e r n a t z i k , p. 386 ( A r t i c l e 30). This r e s t r i c t i o n on women's r i g h t s was to be one of the main issues f o r the women's movement w i t h i n C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s m a f t e r 1890. 31 Law of 15 November 1867, A r t i c l e 33, B e r n a t z i k , p. 386. 32 I b i d . , A r t i c l e 20, pp. 389-90. See a l s o Walter, p. 233. 33 Law of 21 December 1867, A r t i c l e 19, B e r n a t z i k , p. 426. 34 This i n c l u d e d R u s s i a , P r u s s i a , Belgium, S w i t z e r l a n d and Hungary. In the l a t t e r case a l i b e r a l n a t i o n a l i t i e s ' law was adopted, but was never adhered t o . 35 Ernst C. H e l l b l i n g , O s t e r r e i c h i s c h e Verfassungs- und Verwaltungs- geschichte (Vienna, 1956), p. 375. 36 Walter, p. 350. This added f i v e m i l l i o n new voters to the l i s t s . 37 F r i e d r i c h P r i n z , "Die bohmischen Lander von 1848 b i s 1948," Handbuch der Geschichte der bohmischen Lander, ed. K a r l B o s l , I I I ( S t u t t g a r t , 1968), pp. 174-5. 38 Charles A. G u l i c k , A u s t r i a from Habsburg to H i t l e r (Berkeley-Los Angeles, 1948), I , p. 16. See a l s o E m i l S t r a u s s , Geschichte der  deutschen Sozialdemokratie Bohmens (Prague, 1925-6), I , p. 38. 39 Wilhelm Weber, "Die s o z i a l p o l i t i s c h e und s o z i a l r e c h t l i c h e Entwicklung i n Osterreich, 1848 b i s 1948," Hundert J.ahre . . . , p. 578. 40 J u l i u s Deutsch, Geschichte der o s t e r r e i c h i s c h e n Gewerkschafts- bewegung (Vienna, 1929, 1932), I , p. 22. 41 G u l i c k , I , p. 18. 42 Deutsch, Gewerkschaftsbewegung, I , p. 42. See a l s o G. Herman, " K a r l Marx i n Wien," Der Kampf, I (1907-8), pp. 266-71. 43 On t h i s s u r p r i s i n g occurrence, which appears to have been overlooked by the a u t h o r i t i e s , see K l a u s j l i r g e n Miersch, Die A r b e i t e r - presse der Jahre 1869 b i s 1889 a l s Kampfmittel der o s t e r r e i c h i s c h e n  Sozialdemokratie (Vienna, 1969), pp. 27-8. Hereafter A r b e i t e r p r e s s e . 50 J i r i " K o r a l k a , Uber d i e Anfange der s o z i a l i s t i s c h e n A r b e i t e r -bewegung i n der Tschechoslowakei," ZfG, IX (1961), p. 137. 45 Ludwig B r i i g e l , Geschichte der b s t e r r e i c h i s c h e n Sozialdemo- k r a t i e (Vienna, 1922-1925), I , pp. 85-7. 46 Text of the programme r e p r i n t e d i n J u l i u s Bunzel, Eine amtliche D a r s t e l l u n g der Anfange der b s t e r r e i c h i s c h e n Arbeiterbewegung," VSWG, X I I (1914), p. 291. 47 Text of the Manifesto, which was l a t e r p u b l i s h e d i n the major C i s l e i t h a n i a n languages, i n Demokratisches Wochenblatt ( L e i p z i g ) , 25 J u l y 1868. 48 I b i d . , 7 August 1869. An i n d i c a t i o n of the c o n t i n u i n g Gross- deutsch f e e l i n g among C i s l e i t h a n i a n German s o c i a l i s t s was pointed out by Jan Bavorsky, one of the Czech s o c i a l i s t s i n Prague. He noted that at the meeting which accepted the manifesto on the n a t i o n a l question and agreed to p u b l i s h i t i n the major C i s l e i t h a n i a n languages, the speaker's p l a t f o r m was draped w i t h the Reich-German n a t i o n a l c o l o u r s ! Cf. J i r i * K o r a l k a , "Tschechische B r i e f e aus Dresden und Braunschweig 1870-1871," ASg,- V (1965), pp. 327-8. 49 The f i v e delegates from C i s l e i t h a n i a represented the major German region s , not j u s t Vienna. They i n c l u d e d one from Reichenberg (Bohemia) , one from Briinn (Moravia), one from Wiener Neustadt (Lower A u s t r i a ) , and two from Vienna. P r o t o k o l l uber die Verhandlungen des  Allgemeinen Deutschen sozial-demokratischen Arbeiterkongresses zu  Eisenach am 7., 8. und 9. August 1869 ( B e r l i n , 1969. Reprint of the o r i g i n a l e d i t i o n , L e i p z i g , 1869), pp. 76-82. Hereafter P r o t o k o l l , w i t h p l a c e and date. I b i d . , pp. 59-61. I t never became o p e r a t i v e . 51 — " J i r i K o r a l k a , "Die d e u t s c h - b s t e r r e i c h i s c h e n a t i o n a l e Frage i n den Anfangen der sozialdemokratischen P a r t e i , " H i s t o r i c a , I I I (1961), p. 148. 52 Der V o l k s s t a a t ( L e i p z i g ) , 18 December 1869. 53 H e i n r i c h Oberwinder, Die Arbeiterbewegung i n O e s t e r r e i c h (Vienna, 1875), p. 50. The o v e r o p t i m i s t i c V o l k s s t a a t reported 50,000 demonstrators. Per V o l k s s t a a t , 18 December 1869. 54 B r i i g e l , Geschichte, I , p. 188. 55 56 H e i n r i c h Scheu, Erinnerungen (Vienna, 1912), p. 23. Der Wiener Hochverratsprozess, ed. H e i n r i c h Scheu (Vienna, 1911), pp. 820-1. This work contains the t r a n s c r i p t s of the t r i a l . Johann Most (1846-1907) l a t e r became prominent i n the German s o c i a l i s t movement, and a f t e r 1879 was one of the l e a d i n g a n a r c h i s t s . 51 ^ Oberwinder, p. 30. I t s e d i t o r , German-born Hermann Hartung, f l e d Vienna p r i o r to the a r r e s t s . 58 Hochverratsprozess, pp. 334, 410. 59 On the development of the Czech s o c i a l i s t movement see below, section i v . ^ Zdenek S o l l e , Internacionala a Rakousko. I. Internacionala  a Pocatky S o c i a l i s t i c k e h o Hnuti v Zemich Byvale Habsburske Monarchie (Prague, 1966), p. 269. I have used the German summary, "Die Inter-nationale und Osterreich. Die I. Internationale und die Anfange der s o z i a l i s t i s c h e n Bewegung i n den Landern der ehemaligen habsburgischen Monarchie," hereafter "Die Internationale und Osterreich." 61 See below, section i v . Oberwinder, p. 20, Zdenek S o l l e , "Die I. Internationale und Osterreich," H i s t o r i c a , X (1965), pp. 280. Herbert Steiner, Die Arbeiter- bewegung Osterreichs 1867-1889 (Vienna, 1964), pp. 61ff. 6 3 .. Richard Charmatz, Lebensbilder aus der Geschichte Osterreichs (Vienna, 1947), p. 100, i s an example of those who c a l l e d Scheu a Marxist. Albert Fuchs was probably more accurate when he argued that Scheu was influenced by Marxism. Fuchs, Geistige Stromungen i n Osterreich 1867- 1918 (Vienna, 1949), p. 86. 64 Steiner, Arbeiterbewegung, p. 35. The f i r s t contact with the I n t e r n a t i o n a l was made by a group i n Asch, Bohemia i n 1864-5. See Zdenek S o l l e , "Die ersten Anhanger der Internationalen A r b e i t e r -Assoziation i n Bohmen," H i s t o r i c a , VII (1963), p. 169. That the government of C i s l e i t h a n i a thought that the Inter-n a t i o n a l was dangerous i s evident from a report of the M i n i s t e r i a l r a t of the M i n i s t r y of the I n t e r i o r , Schmidt-Zabierow, of 1872 i n which the r o l e of the In t e r n a t i o n a l was discussed. I t was c a l l e d " i n a few words . . . the r e a l motor of the whole [ s o c i a l i s t ] movement." Quoted i n Briigel, Geschichte, I I , p. 145. The appearance was, of course, more important than the r e a l i t y . 65 •* S o l l e , "Die Internationale und Osterreich," p. 222. 66 For Scheu's explanation of the s p l i t see Scheu to Wilhelm Liebknecht, 8 June 1873, reprinted i n Herbert Steiner, Die Gebruder  Scheu (Vienna, 1968), pp. 59-60. See also Der Volksstaat, 15 March 1873, and Scheu, Urnsturzkeime (Vienna, 1923), passim, and I I , p. 109. S i g n i f i c a n t l y , Scheu made no reference to in t e r n a t i o n a l i s m or the n a t i o n a l i t y question i n h i s memoirs. Perhaps the s i t u a t i o n at the time he wrote was such as to cause him to f e e l that the question of Czech-German r e l a t i o n s was no longer relevant. For Oberwinder's response, which was a b i t t e r personal attack on Scheu, see Oberwinder, pp. 74-5, and Der Volksstaat, Beilage zu Nr. 26, 29 March 1873. He had to pay to have t h i s attack printed i n the paper. 52 6 7 Deutsch, Gewerkschaftsbewegung, I , pp. 135-6. 68 Miersch, A r b e i t e r p r e s s e , p. 124. When the f a c t s of the Krach and i t s causes began to come out, much of the blame was placed upon l i b e r a l p o l i t i c i a n s and Jewish c a p i t a l i s t s . This was one of the causes of the r i s e of anti-Semitism and the d e c l i n e of l i b e r a l i s m among the Germans. Cf. Pe t e r G. J . P u l z e r , The Rise of P o l i t i c a l A n t i - Semitism i n Germany and A u s t r i a (New York, 1964), pp. 25, 135. 69 70 S t e i n e r , Arbeiterbewegung, pp. 82-3. Der V o l k s s t a a t , 24 A p r i l 1874. 71 Zdenek S o l l e , "Die Sozialdemokratie i n der Habsburger Mon-ar c h i e und d i e tschechische Frage," ASg, VI-VII (1966-7), p. 323. The foundation of nation-wide s o c i a l i s t p a r t i e s had not, as y e t , been attempted i n e i t h e r Belgium or Sw i t z e r l a n d . 72 Erinnerungen und Erbrterungen von K a r l Kautsky, ed. Benedikt Kautsky (The Hague, 1960), pp. 324-5. 73 Quoted i n B r i i g e l , Geschichte, I I , p. 292. See a l s o Der  V o l k s s t a a t , 3 September 1876. 74 Der V o l k s s t a a t , 3 September 1876. 7^ I t i s not c l e a r p r e c i s e l y why the Czech s o c i a l i s t s were not i n v i t e d . Der V o l k s s t a a t ' s report of the Congress noted that i n v i t a t i o n s had been sent to Czech s o c i a l i s t s , but they had not responded. Der  V o l k s s t a a t , 3 September 1876. Hans Mommsen, i n Die Sozialdemokratie  und die N a t i o n a l i t a t e n f r a g e im habsburgischen V i e l v b l k e r s t a a t (Vienna, 1963), p. 88 ( h e r e a f t e r S o z i a l d e m o k r a t i e ) , says that the i n v i t a t i o n s were sent to the wrong Czech s o c i a l i s t paper, one which was opposed to any t i e s w i t h the Germans. I t i s not c l e a r whether or not t h i s was i n t e n t i o n a l . 7^ The only p o s i t i v e steps taken w i t h regard to the Czechs were the r e c o g n i t i o n of the Czech s o c i a l i s t paper Budoucnost (Future) as a pa r t y organ, and the d e c i s i o n to p u b l i s h party pamphlets i n Czech as w e l l as German. Der V o l k s s t a a t , 3 September 1876. 7 7 S t e i n e r , Arbeiterbewegung, p. 134. 78 Quoted i n K o r a l k a , "Uber die Anfange der s o z i a l i s t i s c h e n Arbeiterbewegung," p. 142. 79 Kautsky, Erinnerungen, p. 352. O f t K a r l Kautsky, "Johann Most," Die G e s e l l s c h a f t , I (1924), p. 549. 53 81 Quoted from a p o l i c e report r e p r i n t e d i n B r i i g e l , Geschichte, I I I , p. 310. 82 Mier s c h , A r b e i t e r p r e s s e , p. 167. Ad l e r to K a r l Kautsky, 21 August 1886, V i c t o r A d l e r , B r i e f - wechsel mit August Bebel und K a r l Kautsky, ed. F r i e d r i c h A d l e r (Vienna, 1954), p. 14. He r e a f t e r , A d l e r , B r i e f w e c h s e l . 84 Gustav Kolmer, Parlament und Verfassung i n Oes t e r r e i c h (Vienna, 1900-1914), IV, pp. 337-8. 85 Rudolf Wierer, "Das n a t i o n a l e Problem i n den Anfangen der tschechischen Arbeiterbewegung," Bohemia, I I I (1962), pp. 518-9. Quoted i n K o r a l k a , "Tschechische B r i e f e , " pp. 327-8. See a l s o K o r a l k a , "Die de u t s c h - o s t e r r e i c h i s c h e n a t i o n a l e Frage," p. 132. 87 Der V o l k s s t a a t , 21 May 1870. S o c i a l i s t s from the major centres i n C i s l e i t h a n i a (and even from Saxony), as w e l l as represen-t a t i v e s of the Czech n a t i o n a l i s t movement p a r t i c i p a t e d . 88 One h i s t o r i a n claims that the i n f l u e n c e of the P a r i s Commune was the stron g e s t impulse f o r the c r e a t i o n of an independent Czech s o c i a l i s t movement. Cf. S o l l e , "Die I . I n t e r n a t i o n a l e und O s t e r r e i c h , " p. 271. See a l s o K o r a l k a , "Uber die Anfange der s o z i a l i s t i s c h e n Arbeiterbewegung, p. 133. 89 Quoted i n E m i l S t r a u s s , "Die n a t i o n a l e Frage i n der F r u h z e i t der tschechischen Arbeiterbewegung," Der Kampf, XIV (1921), p. 255. 90 Cestmir J e s i n a , "Czech S o c i a l Democracy, I t s O r i g i n s and Nature? (unpublished Ph.D. d i s s e r t a t i o n , George Washington U n i v e r s i t y , 1970), p. 168. 9 1 K a r e l K r e i b i c h , Pocatky CeskeTio Delnickgho T i s k u (The H i s t o r y  of the Czech Worker's Press) (Prague, 1951), p. 28. 92 Mommsen, Sozialdemokratie , p. 89; St r a u s s , Geschichte, I , p. 145. 93 Mommsen, Sozialdemokratie , p. 90. 94 S t e i n e r , Arbeiterbewegung, p. 146. CHAPTER I I " ASPECTS OF CISLEITHANIAN SOCIALIST PARTY PROGRAMMES Between 1867 and 1901 C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s adopted e i g h t major programmes. Each was d i v i d e d i n t o two p a r t s ; an i d e o l o g i c a l preamble which o u t l i n e d the ul t i m a t e goals of the s o c i a l i s t movement, and a l i s t of "immediate" or "minimum" demands appended to i t . The i d e o l o g i c a l preambles i l l u s t r a t e the e v o l u t i o n of s o c i a l i s t ideology i n C i s l e i t h a n i a , w h i l e the immediate demands i n d i c a t e the pro g r e s s i v e and democratic nature of the s o c i a l i s t s ' concern f o r the w e l f a r e of the e x p l o i t e d p a r t of the p o p u l a t i o n . Changes i n the immediate demands p o i n t out the growing s o p h i s t i c a t i o n i n the s o c i a l i s t movement, as w e l l as the progress, or la c k of i t , i n ac h i e v i n g the reforms c a l l e d f o r . One aspect of C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t programmes was d i f f e r e n t from those adopted elsewhere. This was the concern w i t h the n a t i o n a l i t y question i n C i s l e i t h a n i a . I t was expressed i n one form or another i n every programme, and i n 1899 a separate programme, e n t i r e l y devoted to the n a t i o n a l i t y q u e s t i o n , was accepted. i ) "Immediate" Demands i n C i s l e i t h a n i a n S o c i a l i s t Programmes a) Democratic Aspects The immediate demands made by s o c i a l i s t s i n t h e i r p a r ty pro-grammes can be d i v i d e d i n t o two p a r t s . The democratic s e c t i o n s were 54 55 those which were intended to b r i n g about the democratization of the s o c i e t y . The " s o c i a l " aspects were those which concerned the c o n d i t i o n of the working c l a s s . R e a l i z a t i o n of the former would provide the s o c i a l i s t s w i t h the l e g a l r i g h t to carry on t h e i r s t r u g g l e s . The accep-tance of the l a t t e r would enable workers t o have both the time and the energy to devote themselves to the s o c i a l i s t movement, provided they could f i r s t be aroused. Despite the apparent l i b e r a l i t y of the c o n s t i t u t i o n of 186 7, many of the r i g h t s guaranteed to the p o p u l a t i o n were not i n p r a c t i c e a v a i l a b l e to s o c i a l i s t s . As a r e s u l t , C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s were concerned w i t h fundamental democratic r i g h t s i n a l l of t h e i r programmes. From the f i r s t programme i n 1868 to the l a s t i n 1901 demands f o r freedom of a s s o c i a t i o n and assembly, a free p r e s s , and the r i g h t to form c o a l i -t i o n s were s t r o n g l y emphasized. These demands were c e r t a i n l y not unique to the s o c i a l i s t s , f o r they were also prominent i n the programmes of 2 the l i b e r a l p a r t i e s and groups of the p e r i o d . Unique to the s o c i a l i s t s , however, was the c a l l f o r the a b o l i t i o n of the standing army and i t s replacement w i t h e i t h e r a people's army 3 or an armed p o p u l a t i o n . E q u a l l y r a d i c a l was the d e c i s i o n of the 1901 Congress that only the people's r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s should decide on peace . 4 and war. Beginning w i t h the Neudbrfl programme of 1874 the s o c i a l i s t s expanded t h e i r democratic demands to i n c l u d e the se p a r a t i o n of church and s t a t e . They a l s o c a l l e d f o r the removal of education from church c o n t r o l , and pressed f o r o b l i g a t o r y , f r e e education."' The demand f o r 56 e d u c a t i o n a l r i g h t s was taken almost word-for-word from the German party's Eisenach programme of 1869. The Neudbrfl Congress a l s o introduced a c a l l f o r the r e p l a c e -ment of i n d i r e c t t a x a t i o n by a pro g r e s s i v e or graduated income tax. In a d d i t i o n , there was to be a p r o g r e s s i v e tax on i n h e r i t e d w e a l t h . 7 Another reform i n s i s t e d upon at Neudbrfl and maintained i n va r y i n g forms i n a l l l a t e r programmes was a r a d i c a l change i n the l e g a l -j u d i c i a l system i n c l u d i n g independent c o u r t s , e l e c t i o n of judges, and g free proceedings. A l l programmes a f t e r Wiener Neustadt (1876) c a l l e d f o r e l e c t i o n of j u r i e s as w e l l . New i n 1901 was a demand f o r the end of c a p i t a l punishment.^ The most important of the democratic demands introduced by C i s -l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s , and c e r t a i n l y i d e o l o g i c a l l y the most s i g n i f i c a n t , was the c a l l f o r u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e . This l i b e r a l and L a s s a l l e a n p o i n t was probably the most r a d i c a l of the d i r e c t demands intro d u c e d by the 1868 programme, i n view of the f a c t t h a t e l e c t i o n s to the Re i c h s r a t were not even d i r e c t u n t i l 1873."^ Not u n t i l 1874 d i d a l i b e r a l party adopt u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e as p a r t of i t s p l a t f o r m , and even then i t was considered a r a d i c a l move. In the e a r l y 1880's, as the s o c i a l i s t party s p l i t i n t o two warring f a c t i o n s , the m a j o r i t y r e j e c t e d parliamentarism, b e l i e v i n g i n s t e a d i n d i r e c t i n d i v i d u a l t e r r o r i s t a c t i o n as the s o l e means of b r i n g i n g on the r e v o l u t i o n . The moderate m i n o r i t y , whose Briinn programme of 1882 ex-pressed t h e i r views, clung to u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e as an important weapon, 12 and even as an end i n i t s e l f . 57 The H a i n f e l d Congress of 1888/9, w h i l e accepting u n i v e r s a l s u f f -rage as one of i t s primary goals, q u a l i f i e d t h i s by adding that s o c i a l i s t s would not: delude themselves about the worth of parliamentarism, a form of modern c l a s s rule.13 In 1891 the demand f o r the f r a n c h i s e , already p a r t of the o f f i -c i a l programme, was added to that f o r the eigh t hour day at the May Day demonstrations, and i n 1893 the party committed i t s e l f to a s e r i e s of mass meetings and demonstrations to force i t s demand f o r the vote on parliament.''"^' With i n t e r r u p t i o n s , the s o c i a l i s t s t r u g g l e f o r u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e l a s t e d t i l l the middle of the f i r s t decade of the twentieth century, when the party's e f f o r t s were crowned w i t h success. The i n -c r e a s i n g emphasis on t h i s s t r u g g l e moved the pa r t y , to the r i g h t , and i n the d i r e c t i o n of r e f o r m i s t parliamentarism, the same way the German party was going. I n t i m a t e l y t i e d to the su f f r a g e question was that of r i g h t s f o r women. The f i r s t reference to women i n a C i s l e i t h a n i a n programme had been i n the Brunn p l a t f o r m of 1882. There i t was s t a t e d that the l i b e r a -16 t i o n of the working c l a s s was to occur "without d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n by sex." Only i n 1892, however, was t h i s general statement made s p e c i f i c . To the demand f o r u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e was added the view that i t should be introduced "without d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n by sex." In a d d i t i o n , the p l a t f o r m declared that the party condemned not only n a t i o n a l p r i v i l e g e s , but also those of s e x . 1 7 Not u n t i l the 1901 Congress, however, d i d the party adopt a separate statement which condemned sexual i n e q u a l i t y of any k i n d . 58 The C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t movement c l e a r l y represented the vanguard of democratic thought i n the western h a l f of the Monarchy a f t e r 1867. Many of the r a d i c a l democratic demands made by the s o c i a l i s t s d i d not become acceptable to l i b e r a l s (and others) u n t i l l a t e i n the century, i f at a l l . Although s o c i a l i s t s never formed a government i n C i s l e i t h a n i a , t h e i r t i r e l e s s e f f o r t s to achieve the democratization of the s t a t e , p a r t i c u l a r l y i n the case of u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e , were a potent f a c t o r i n the gradual democratization that a c t u a l l y occurred. b) S o c i a l Aspects Whereas democratic demands were intended to apply to the e n t i r e p o p u l a t i o n of C i s l e i t h a n i a , the s o c i a l aspects of the platforms were those which concerned the working c l a s s , and c a l l e d f o r an improvement i n i t s c o n d i t i o n . Apart from a few ve s t i g e s of Josephinian l e g i s l a t i o n l i m i t i n g c h i l d labour, and some l e g i s l a t i o n dating from the 1840's r e g u l a t i n g 19 female and c h i l d labour, there were v i r t u a l l y no laws governing working c o n d i t i o n s and other aspects of work i n the new i n d u s t r i e s i n C i s l e i -t h a n i a when the s o c i a l i s t movement began i n the 1860's. Granted only a l i m i t e d r i g h t to form c o a l i t i o n s (unions) and to s t r i k e i n 1870, workers i n i n d u s t r y and s m a l l business were v i r t u a l l y defenceless against t h e i r employers, as w e l l as the s t a t e . The f i r s t programme to deal w i t h these problems was adopted at the N e u d b r f l Congress of 1874. I t proposed a s t a t u t o r y l i m i t a t i o n on the number of hours of work, the e l i m i n a t i o n of c h i l d labour, and the 59 r e s t r i c t i o n of female labour i n f a c t o r i e s and i n d u s t r i a l workplaces. The i n t r o d u c t i o n of a system of f a c t o r y i n s p e c t i o n was a l s o demanded, as was the a b o l i t i o n of c o n v i c t labour i n so f a r as i t competed w i t h free labour. S e v e r a l refinements of these p o i n t s were added at the Wiener Neustadt Congress of 1876, many echoing those adopted at the German party's Gotha Congress the year b e f o r e . The Wiener Neustadt programme demanded a l e g a l 10 hour day, and introduced a c a l l f o r the eigh t hour day i n mines and i n dangerous occupations, as w e l l as f o r women and f o r c h i l d r e n between the ages of 14 and 18. C h i l d labour was to be 21 p r o h i b i t e d f o r those under age fourteen. The demand f o r f a c t o r y i n s p e c t i o n was expanded to cover non-factory workplaces as w e l l , i n 22 a s i m i l a r sense to that expressed at Gotha. The i n s i s t e n c e upon l i m i -t a t i o n s on c o n v i c t labour was r e t a i n e d . E n t i r e l y new were demands f o r worker c o n t r o l of t h e i r own bene-23 volent a s s o c i a t i o n s . A f i r s t attempt was a l s o made to propose p r o t e c -t i o n f o r the h e a l t h of workers, against both sickness and accident. This d i d not represent a c a l l f o r sickness and accident insurance. Rather, the employer was to be re s p o n s i b l e f o r compensating workers i n j u r e d on the j o b , provided the f a u l t l a y w i t h the employer, and not w i t h the worker. In the area of h e a l t h care the programme asked only that a law be passed r e q u i r i n g the employer to ensure a health y work , 2 4 environment. In a b i d to broaden the appeal of the programme to other groups i n s o c i e t y , the Wiener Neustadt Congress a l s o passed a r e s o l u t i o n 60 suggesting that the r e g u l a t i o n s a p p l y i n g to servants be ab o l i s h e d , and that a l l farm labourers and domestic servants be t r a n s f e r r e d to the 25 p r o v i s i o n s of the general labour code. whereas the demand f o r u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e was almost unique to the s o c i a l i s t s , and hence very r a d i c a l f o r i t s time, the s o c i a l aspects of the s o c i a l i s t programmes of the 1870's were n e i t h e r unique nor p a r t i c u l a r l y r a d i c a l . Toward the end of the decade various non-s o c i a l i s t groups, w i t h d i f f e r i n g motives, began to th i n k along s i m i l a r 26 l i n e s . When the Taaffe government took o f f i c e i n 1879 i t was com-27 mitted to s o c i a l reform, despite i t s conservative nature. The d r i v e f o r s o c i a l l e g i s l a t i o n was given added impetus by the r i s e of the r a d i -c a l f a c t i o n i n the s o c i a l i s t movement and the bloody "deeds" which began to occur. One authors goes so f a r as to suggest that the main impulse f o r s o c i a l l e g i s l a t i o n was f e a r of these "deeds," and indeed, of s o c i a l 2 8 r e v o l u t i o n . At the same time, however, one of the major f a c t o r s f o r many of the l e g i s l a t o r s was simple humanitarian concern at the obvious 29 s u f f e r i n g of so l a r g e a p a r t of the p o p u l a t i o n . Beginning i n 1883 laws were passed which a l l e v i a t e d some of the s u f f e r i n g . Health and accident insurance f o r i n d u s t r i a l workers and some workers i n a g r i c u l t u r e were e s t a b l i s h e d . A maximum working day of eleven hours i n . f a c t o r i e s and ten hours i n mines was l e g i s l a t e d , as w e l l as a day of r e s t on Sunday. L i m i t s were placed on female and c h i l d l a b o u r — c h i l d r e n under twelve years of age were p r o h i b i t e d from working. A beginning was a l s o made i n the p r o v i s i o n of laws r e g u l a t i n g f a c t o r y s a f e t y . Among other t h i n g s , the s o c i a l i s t demand f o r f a c t o r y i n s p e c t i o n was s a t i s f i e d . 61 I n s p i r e d i n p a r t by Bismarck's attempt to defuse the s o c i a l i s t movement i n Germany, the s o c i a l reform l e g i s l a t i o n adopted i n C i s l e i -t hania was among the most advanced i n Europe i n the 1880's. In s p i t e of t h i s , however, i t d i d not please the s o c i a l i s t s . At the H a i n f e l d Congress of 1888/9 a r e s o l u t i o n on the govern-ment's l e g i s l a t i o n was adopted. S t r e s s i n g that the government had i n -troduced the reforms because i t feared "the growing str e n g t h of the p r o l e t a r i a n movement," because i t wished to convince workers of the "good w i l l " of the possessing c l a s s e s , and s i n c e i t was w o r r i e d about the p o s s i b l e d e c l i n e i n h e a l t h of r e c r u i t s to the armed f o r c e s , the r e s o l u t i o n announced that r e a l s o c i a l reform could only be c a r r i e d out by the " e x p l o i t e d . " I t a l s o emphasized that insurance of workers " i n no way reaches to the heart of the s o c i a l problem." The government's s o c i a l reform would not stop the conti n u i n g d e c l i n e of l i v i n g standards 31 f o r the mass of the p o p u l a t i o n . The s o c i a l i s t c r i t i q u e was p e r t i n e n t , f o r many were excluded from the new l e g i s l a t i o n , p a r t i c u l a r l y a g r i c u l t u r a l workers. The f a c t o r y i n s p e c t i o n system was w o e f u l l y inadequate; as l a t e as 1908 there were 32 only 85 i n s p e c t o r s . To compound the problems, many of the new laws 33 simply were not adhered t o . As a r e s u l t of the new l e g i s l a t i o n C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s had to adopt an e n t i r e l y new s o c i a l programme. Since the s o c i a l aspects of the programmes adopted at H a i n f e l d and Vienna (1901) were so s i m i l a r , they can be considered together. At the head of both programmes was a demand f o r the r i g h t to form c o a l i t i o n s , e s p e c i a l l y trade unions. 62 The Vienna p l a t f o r m dropped the view that wage agreements should be l e g a l l y recognized. Reminiscent of the Wiener Neustadt programme, and i n d i c a t i v e of the f a i l u r e to i n c l u d e many a g r i c u l t u r a l workers i n the reforms of the 1880's, was the 1901 c a l l f o r the i n c l u s i o n of a g r i c u l t u r a l workers under the i n d u s t r i a l labour code. The eleven hour work day e s t a b l i s h e d by the s o c i a l l e g i s l a t i o n was to be reduced to e i g h t hours, without exception. A new proposal was f o r the a b o l i t i o n of n i g h t work (except where the t e c h n i c a l nature of the operation made t h i s i m p o s s i b l e ) . In 1901 t h i s was expanded to i n c l u d e the complete e l i m i n a t i o n of n i g h t work f o r women and c h i l d r e n . In a d d i t i o n , female labour which might prove "damaging to the female organism" was to be forbidden. The formal p r o h i b i t i o n of c h i l d labour before age twelve was to be r a i s e d to fourteen. At the Vienna Congress the s t r i c t enforce-ment of t h i s law and of the law p r o v i d i n g f o r a day of r e s t on Sunday . . . ,35 was enjoined. The s o c i a l aspects of the s o c i a l i s t programme were to apply at a l l l e v e l s of i n d u s t r y , not j u s t i n f a c t o r i e s , and p u n i t i v e sentences were to be provided f o r those who disobeyed the laws. The 1901 Congress s p e c i f i c a l l y expanded t h i s p o i n t to i n c l u d e workers i n a g r i c u l t u r e and f o r e s t r y . These requirements n e c e s s i t a t e d more i n s p e c t o r s , w i t h greater power. At both congresses worker p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of the s o c i a l l e g i s l a t i o n was c a l l e d f o r . In 1901 as w e l l , a thorough reform of the insurance system was demanded. I t was to be expanded to cover the aged arid the permanently d i s a b l e d , as w e l l as widows and orphans. 63 One question r a i s e d at the 1901 Congress which had not been de a l t w i t h i n any d e t a i l a t previous C i s l e i t h a n i a n congresses was the land or peasant question. At the 1898 L i n z Congress of the Austro-German s o c i a l i s t p a r t y a commission had been e s t a b l i s h e d to develop 36 a r e s o l u t i o n on a g i t a t i o n i n the countryside. At the 1900 Graz Con-gress of the German party t h i s r e s o l u t i o n was adopted, i n s p i t e of 37 V i c t o r Adler's o p p o s i t i o n . This was the proposal presented to the 1901 Congress of the C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r t y . Although the r e s o l u t i o n was seen only as p r o v i s i o n a l , and i n -deed was not adopted at the Congress, i t s content i s s i g n i f i c a n t , f o r 38 i t reveals the s o c i a l i s t a t t i t u d e to the land question. The r e s o l u -t i o n argued that the purpose of s o c i a l i s t a g i t a t i o n i n the countryside was to make the s o c i a l i s t i d e a a v a i l a b l e to the peasantry, p a r t i c u l a r l y a g r i c u l t u r a l workers and poorer peasants (Kleinbauern). The s o c i a l i s t s would support reforms which would lea d to the " s o c i a l " o r g a n i z a t i o n of the production and d i s t r i b u t i o n of food. This i n c l u d e d the s o c i a l i z a t i o n of f o r e s t s , p a s t u r e s , and water-power. Expansion of p u b l i c ownership of land was a l s o to be encouraged, although a g r i c u l t u r a l co-operatives were supported. A l l t r a d i t i o n a l p r i v i l e g e s connected w i t h land ownership were to be a b o l i s h e d , i n c l u d i n g entailment of e s t a t e s , and hunting and f i s h i n g r i g h t s . L e g i s l a t i o n which would lea d to the improvement of a g r i c u l t u r e and cheaper production of b a s i c n e c e s s i t i e s was to be encouraged. In a d d i t i o n , the s o c i a l i s t s stood f o r anything which would improve the p h y s i c a l and s p i r i t u a l c o n d i t i o n of a g r i c u l t u r a l workers. 64 S o c i a l i s t s were thus seeking support from both l a n d l e s s labourers i n the c o u n t r y s i d e , as w e l l as peasants w i t h s m a l l h o l d i n g s . Based l a r g e l y 39 on the programme adopted by the F i r s t I n t e r n a t i o n a l at B a s e l i n 1869, as w e l l as on the experience of other s o c i a l i s t p a r t i e s i n the 1890!s, the programme d i d not s t a t e the u l t i m a t e goals of s o c i a l i s t ideology 40 i n the countryside. In h i s speech to the Graz Congress, however, Wilhelm Ellenbogen made i t c l e a r that the purpose of the programme was to sp-read the i d e a of c o l l e c t i v i s m among the peasantry, i n so f a r as i t 41 d i d not already e x i s t . In summary, the s o c i a l aspects of C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t pro-grammes f a l l i n t o two p e r i o d s , separated from each other by the Taaffe government's s o c i a l l e g i s l a t i o n . The f i r s t programmes, l a r g e l y based on the Eisenach and Gotha programmes of the German p a r t y , marked the i n i t i a l steps i n the development of a s o c i a l i s t programme f o r the b e t t e r -ment of the working c l a s s i n the immediate s i t u a t i o n . The l a t e r pro-grammes, developed i n r e l a t i o n to the governmental reforms, were an attempt to expand those reforms and to strengthen the Kampffahigkeit of the urban p r o l e t a r i a t . Reduced working hours wouldvprovide workers w i t h more l e i s u r e time i n which they c o u l d achieve both a human e x i s -tence and the a b i l i t y to absorb the s o c i a l i s t view of the world. B e t t e r working c o n d i t i o n s , h i g h e r pay, and h e a l t h and accident insurance would carry t h i s a step f u r t h e r by p r o v i d i n g u n s k i l l e d workers w i t h the phy-s i c a l and moral wherewithal to a r i s e from t h e i r apathy and organize to create a b e t t e r world. The a g r i c u l t u r a l programme, although not adopted, provided f o r the i n c l u s i o n of a g r i c u l t u r a l labourers and s m a l l peasants i n t h i s v i s i o n . 65 i i ) Ends and Means: I d e o l o g i c a l Aspects of C i s l e i t h a n i a n Programmes Democratic and s o c i a l demands were l a r g e l y intended to be achieved w i t h i n the e x i s t i n g s o c i e t y , but the i d e o l o g i c a l preambles to C i s l e i -thanian s o c i a l i s t programmes envisaged a fare, more r a d i c a l transformation of the s o c i a l order. S o c i a l i s t s i ' d e o l o g y i n C i s l e i t h a n i a - ' d i d not, however, move d i r e c t l y and c l e a r l y from t h e ' s e l f = h e l p " philosophy of Schulze-D e l i t z s c h to the " s t a t e - h e l p " views of L a s s a l l e and from thence to the r e v o l u t i o n a r y M a r x i s t d o c t r i n e . Imported d i r e c t l y from Germany—Schulze-D e l i t z s c h , L a s s a l l e , Marx and Engels were a l l G e r m a n s — s o c i a l i s t ideology i n C i s l e i t h a n i a r e f l e c t e d the i d e o l o g i c a l confusion and c o n f l i c t i n the German movement, as w e l l as the l a c k of c l a r i t y i n the thought of C i s l e i -thanian s o c i a l i s t s themselves. Fo l l o w i n g the c o l l a p s e of the s o c i a l i s t movement i n "1884 and~1885 a new l e a d e r s h i p emerged, committed to the M a r x i s t ideology. P a r t l y middle c l a s s i n o r i g i n — A d l e r , Kautsky, and Ellenbogen a l l . h a d u n i v e r -s i t y d e g r e e s — t h e new leadership r e c o n c i l e d the f a c t i o n s , and at H a i n f e l d a new p a r ty was created. The programme adopted at H a i n f e l d was M a r x i s t i n i n s p i r a t i o n and content. The i d e o l o g i c a l c l a r i t y of the Marxism enshrined i n the H a i n f e l d programme began to break down i n the 1890's, however, as the p r a c t i c e of the p a r ty became i n c r e a s i n g l y r e f o r m i s t . The Vienna programme of 1901 i n d i c a t e d the r e t r e a t from, but not the abandonment of the r e v o l u t i o n a r y M a r x i s t d o c t r i n e , at the same time as i t i l l u s t r a t e d an i n c r e a s i n g acceptance of the parliamentary road to s o c i a l i s m . In other words, i d e o l o g i c a l development i n C i s l e i t h a n i a n 66 socialism p a r a l l e l e d the German experience, although Cisleithanian so-cialism was not a mere r e f l e c t i o n of German s o c i a l i s t ideology. The f i r s t programme, that of the Ninth (Vienna) Worker's Assembly of 1868, was a c l a s s i c statement of Lassalleanism. Proclaiming as the goal the complete equality of a l l c i t i z e n s , p o l i t i c a l l y through the introduction of universal suffrage, and s o c i a l l y by the creation of productive associations sponsored by the "free state," the framer of the programme envisioned a r a d i c a l transformation of society without a bloody revolution. Instead, the change was to be carried out "solely 42 through the power of public persuasion." The second programme, adopted at the Neudbrfl founding Congress of the Cisleithanian party, was a mixture of Marxist and Lassallean 43 views, as was i t s model, the Eisenach programme of the German party. Though i t was not e x p l i c i t l y stated, the victory of the Scheu faction which Neudbrfl represented, marked the organizational separation of the s o c i a l i s t movement from the middle class parties. In place of the 1868 demand for equality was that for the: li b e r a t i o n of working people from wage labour and class rule through the elimination of modern private ownership of the means of production. In i t s place [the party] strive s for the communal, state-organized production of goods.44 This mixture of Marxism and Lassalleanism was confirmed by the reten-t i o n of the demand for state support of productive associations. The Neudbrfl programme dropped the reliance on "public persuasion," and replaced i t with the statement that the democratic and s o c i a l aspects of the programme were: partly for the r e a l i z a t i o n of [the party's] principles and partly for the purpose of agitation for them. 45 67 There was no t r a c e of a concept of c l a s s s t r u g g l e or of revo-l u t i o n a r y a c t i o n as a means to achieve the party's goals. Perhaps what was not s a i d was more important than what was a c t u a l l y put i n t o the p l a t f o r m . C e r t a i n l y the framers of the Wiener Neustadt programme drew t h i s c o n c l u s i o n . They r e j e c t e d "any p l a y i n g w i t h r e v o l u t i o n . " By i m p l i -c a t i o n the programme adopted at Wiener Neustadt condemned the abandonment of " p u b l i c persuasion" at N e u d b r f l . As the party organ, G l e i c h h e i t , s t a t e d a f t e r the 1876 Congress: Those who s t r u g g l e f o r the cause of the s u f f e r i n g people have reorganized themselves and . . . have p u b l i c l y and candidly submitted themselves to the law . . . W i t h i n these l e g a l l i m i t s [the p a r t y ] w i l l c a r r y out the l i v e l i e s t a g i t a t i o n f o r i t s p r i n c i p l e s . . .46 The r e t r e a t i n t o s o c i a l reformism at Wiener Neustadt was perhaps t a c t i c a l l y sound. C e r t a i n l y "Staatsgef " a h r l i c h k e i t " — t h e N e u d b r f l party and i t s programme had been outlawed—had not helped the s o c i a l i s t move-ment, and i n the miserable economic s i t u a t i o n some form of retrenchment and u n i t y was necessary. The reunion w i t h p a r t of the Oberwinder f a c t i o n expressed t h i s , as d i d the attempt to broaden the party's appeal by 47 d i r e c t i n g the programme to people other than workers. Opposition to the new programme was, however, widespread, and at a congress i n 1877, K a l e r - R e i n t h a l and h i s programme were r e j e c t e d . A r e t u r n to the p r i n c i p l e s of Eisenach and N e u d b r f l was decided upon. The a c t u a l c r e a t i o n of a new p l a t f o r m was postponed t i l l 1882, and only occurred a f t e r the party had s p l i t i n t o two w a r r i n g f a c t i o n s over the t a c t i c s to be used to b r i n g on the millenium. Though the Brunn 68 programme of 1882 represented the views of the m i n o r i t y , i t l e d d i r e c t l y to the H a i n f e l d programme. The Briinn programme was, i n f a c t , the f i r s t " M a r x i s t " programme to be adopted by a C e n t r a l European s o c i a l i s t party.' I t can be c a l l e d " M a r x i s t " f o r a very simple reason: Kautsky's d r a f t of the programme was merely a German t r a n s l a t i o n of Marx's 1880 pro-gramme f o r the French s o c i a l i s t s , modified to f i t the s i t u a t i o n i n C i s -49 l e i t h a n i a ! As had N e u d b r f l , the programme c a l l e d f o r the l i b e r a t i o n of the working c l a s s through the t r a n s f e r of the means of production i n t o common possession. The t r a n s f e r could only come about, however, as the r e s u l t of the p o l i t i c a l a c t i v i t y of the working c l a s s , organized as an independent p o l i t i c a l p a r t y . T h i s party would use a l l means which c o i n c i d e d w i t h the people's sense of j u s t i c e , i n c l u d i n g u n i v e r s a l s u f f -rage, to a r r i v e at i t s g o a l . S t i l l i n c l u d e d i n the programme was the o l d L a s s a l l e a n demand f o r s t a t e support of co-operative e n t e r p r i s e s . The M a r x i s t view i n c o r p o r a t e d i n the programme d i d not mean that the moderates had suddenly gone over i n a body to Marxism, but d i d i n d i -cate that the process was under way, as i t was i n Germany. Kautsky had become a Ma r x i s t at the end of the 1870's, and h i s i n t e l l e c t u a l development both s t i m u l a t e d and r e f l e c t e d t h i s . At the same time, however, the use of the term " M a r x i s t " to c h a r a c t e r i z e the Briinn programme needs to be q u a l i f i e d . The " m o d i f i -c a t i o n s " Kautsky spoke of were q u i t e d r a s t i c . The " p o l i t i c a l " a c t i -v i t y of the working c l a s s had been the " r e v o l u t i o n a r y " a c t i v i t y i n the o r i g i n a l , and the d e f i n i t i o n of the means to be used as those "which 69 c o i n c i d e d w i t h the people's sense of j u s t i c e " had been "with any means" i n Marx's d r a f t . T h e s e a d d i t i o n s and omissions c e r t a i n l y d etracted from the Mar x i s t nature of the programme. This does not n e c e s s a r i l y mean that the moderates were not Mar-x i s t s i n 1882, however. The use of the aforementioned terms, p a r t i -c u l a r l y " r e v o l u t i o n a r y , " would have l e d to the outlawing of the programme 52 i n C i s l e i t h a n i a and hence i t s u n s u i t a b i l i t y as a t o o l f o r a g i t a t i o n . This i s one of the reasons why the terms " r e v o l u t i o n a r y " and " r e v o l u t i o n " never appeared i n a C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t programme. I t was the H a i n f e l d programme of 1888/9 which r e a l l y marked the formal enshrinement of the M a r x i s t ideology i n the s o c i a l i s t programme. 54 W r i t t e n by A d l e r , r e v i s e d by Kautsky, and based on the 1882 programme, i t i s a c l a s s i c statement of the M a r x i s t ideology. P i c t u r i n g a s o c i e t y i n which the means of production were be-coming more and more concentrated i n the hands of fewer and fewer c a p i -t a l i s t s , and i n which the mass of the p o p u l a t i o n was s i n k i n g i n t o misery, s o c i a l i s t s argued that the t r a n s f e r of the means of production i n t o the common possession of the working p o p u l a t i o n was not only the means of l i b e r a t i o n , but a l s o the f u l f i l l m e n t of a h i s t o r i c a l l y necessary 55 task. From t h i s M a r x i s t vantage p o i n t they viewed the s t a t e as the expression of the p o l i t i c a l and economic r u l e of the c a p i t a l i s t c l a s s . Adapting the phrase used at the 1882 Brunn Congress, the new programme argued that the workers would use a l l " a p p r o p r i a t e " means which c o i n c i d e d w i t h the people's " n a t u r a l " sense of j u s t i c e to a t t a i n t h e i r ends. This compromise r e s o l u t i o n pleased the former r a d i c a l s . The 70 moderates a l s o r e c e i v e d an o l i v e branch, f o r t h e i r b e l i e f i n the e f f i -cacy of u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e was a l s o expressed, though i t too was l i m i t e d : Without deluding ourselves about the value of parliamentarism, a form of modern c l a s s r u l e , [we] s t r i v e f o r u n i v e r s a l , equal andodirect s u f f r a g e f o r a l l r e p r e s e n t a t i v e bodies . . . as ^ one of the most important means of a g i t a t i o n and o r g a n i z a t i o n . The " R e s o l u t i o n on P o l i t i c a l R i g h t s , " appended to the main "De-c l a r a t i o n of P r i n c i p l e s , " used the term " c l a s s s t r u g g l e " f o r the f i r s t time i n a C i s l e i t h a n i a n socialist^programme, as~the-party r e l a t e d the t r a n s -formation of the economic order, the " w o r l d - h i s t o r i c a l task of the pro-l e t a r i a t , " to the demand f o r democratic r i g h t s . They were seen as a means to i n h i b i t the c a p i t a l i s t s ' attempts to undermine the c l a s s s t r u g g l e — the a c t u a l l e v e r f o r change. Despite the r a d i c a l phraseology, the programme was a l s o t a i n t e d w i t h what came to be c a l l e d reformism. The " r e v o l u t i o n , " the u l t i m a t e transformation of s o c i e t y , was not mentioned i n the programme, nor was there any statement of how the s e i z u r e of power would a c t u a l l y occur. Instead, the party's " a c t u a l programme" was: to organize the p r o l e t a r i a t , to i n s p i r e i t w i t h an awareness of i t s p o s i t i o n and i t s t a s k s , [and] to e s t a b l i s h and main-t a i n i t s s p i r i t u a l and p h y s i c a l capacity to s t r u g g l e d The r e v o l u t i o n was thus postponed u n t i l the d i s t a n t f u t u r e . In the meantime the s o c i a l i s t s had to concentrate t h e i r energies on the r e a l i -z a t i o n of t h e i r democratic and s o c i a l demands. In theory, t h i s r e f o r m i s t a c t i v i t y could be seen as p e r f e c t l y c o n s i s t e n t w i t h the p a rty's t h e o r e t i c a l r e v o l u t i o n i s m . In p r a c t i c e , however, the campaign f o r reform, p a r t i c u l a r l y the s t r u g g l e f o r u n i -v e r s a l s u f f r a g e , drove the party to the r i g h t . V i c t o r A d l e r had seen 71 5 8 the p a r t y at a "dead end" i n 1891. Worried that n a t i o n a l i s m or l e f t 59 wing r a d i c a l i s m might d i s r u p t i t , he decided to throw the party i n t o 60 a m i l i t a n t campaign f o r u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e . Aside from the b u i l d i n g of an o r g a n i z a t i o n and the i n c r e a s i n g concern w i t h the n a t i o n a l i t y ques-t i o n , t h i s s t r u g g l e f o r u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e remained the major preoccu-p a t i o n of the s o c i a l i s t movement from 1893—when the campaign a c t u a l l y began:-r-to 1905. As time passed, the s u f f r a g e became i d e n t i f i e d w i t h the u l t i m a t e end, and was seen i n c r e a s i n g l y as the means of c a r r y i n g out the r e v o l u t i o n a r y transformation of s o c i e t y . The i n c r e a s i n g gap between the r a d i c a l theory and the r e f o r m i s t p r a c t i c e of the p a r t y was, however, narrowed by the r e v i s i o n of the 61 H a i n f e l d programme at the 1901 party Congress. This r e v i s i o n marked a c l e a r r e t r e a t from the r a d i c a l p r i n c i p l e s expressed at H a i n f e l d , a l -though i t d i d not s i g n i f y the formal abandonment of the M a r x i s t ideology. While the g o a l , the a c t u a l programme, and the means to achieve the goal remained, the " h i s t o r i c a l n e c e s s i t y " f o r the t r a n s f e r of the means of production to common ownership became merely the "necessary" task of the p r o l e t a r i a t . Obviously under the i n f l u e n c e of Eduard Bernstein's r e v i s i o n i s t arguments, the conception of the i n c r e a s i n g misery of the 62 p r o l e t a r i a t was dropped. Gone also was the r a d i c a l language of the H a i n f e l d programme. Workers were no longer the " s l a v e s " of the c a p i -t a l i s t , but were "dependent" upon him. These changes were, i n a sense, s t y l i s t i c , but they c l e a r l y i n d i c a t e d a r e t r e a t from the i n t r a n s i g e n c e of the o l d programme.^ The most dramatic changes i n the programme were i n the a t t i t u d e s towards the f r a n c h i s e and to parliamentarism. The statement that the 72 party should not delude i t s e l f about the value of parliamentarism, a modern form of c l a s s r u l e , which preceded the demand f o r the f r a n c h i s e 64 at H a i n f e l d , vanished from the Vienna programme. As a r e s u l t , both the f r a n c h i s e and parliamentarism became acceptable i n t h e i r own r i g h t ! Furthermore, the democratic demands, p a r t i c u l a r l y u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e , were no longer seen as necessary to a i d i n the development of the worker's c l a s s consciousness; r a t h e r , the preamble to the democratic demands now denounced l i m i t a t i o n s on freedom per se! S i m i l a r l y , the H a i n f e l d s t a t e -ment that " r e a l " s o c i a l reform could only be brought about by workers themselves, was dropped from the programme. Even a cursory reading and comparison of the two programmes makes i t p a t e n t l y obvious that the s o c i a l i s t s had r e t r e a t e d from the r i n g i n g denunciation of the c a p i t a l i s t s o c i a l order at H a i n f e l d . They had c e r t a i n l y not abandoned t h e i r commitment to the Marxist i d e o l o g y , but they had brought t h e i r theory, at l e a s t as expressed i n t h e i r p u b l i c programme, more i n t o l i n e w i t h t h e i r p r a x i s . For s e v e r a l reasons, t h i s r e t r e a t from r a d i c a l Marxism i s of the utmost s i g n i f i c a n c e . For one t h i n g , i t represented a break i n the development of the s o c i a l i s t ideology a f t e r 186 7. That development had tended towards an i n c r e a s i n g l y r a d i c a l c r i t i q u e of the c a p i t a l i s t system and an e q u a l l y r a d i c a l s o l u t i o n to that system's problems. In s p i t e of the moderate elements i n the H a i n f e l d programme, that tendency had been confirmed at H a i n f e l d . The 1901 programme saw the moderate elements of H a i n f e l d gain the upper hand, and i n t h i s sense, i t represented a break w i t h t r a d i t i o n . 73 Of equal importance was the f a c t that the party now had an i d e -ology which r e f l e c t e d i t s p r a c t i c e . This i s not to suggest that both the theory and p r a c t i c e of the party were e n t i r e l y r e f o r m i s t . The 1901 programme s t i l l contained a r a d i c a l c r i t i q u e of c a p i t a l i s t s o c i e t y , and the party i t s e l f was s t i l l capable of r a d i c a l a c t i o n . The c o n t r a s t w i t h the German party i s i n s t r u c t i v e . The SPD d i d not r e v i s e i t s programme before 1914. As a r e s u l t , i t s t h e o r e t i c a l commitment to r e v o l u t i o n remained unchanged i n a p e r i o d when i t s p r a c t i c e was even more r e f o r m i s t than that of C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s . The d i f f e r e n c e between the p r a c t i c e of the two p a r t i e s ' ^ emerged as e a r l y as 1890. In s p i t e of t h e i r obvious weakness, C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s c a l l e d a one day general s t r i k e to ce l e b r a t e the f i r s t May Day. The much more powerful German o r g a n i z a t i o n took the Sunday nearest May 1st 65 as i t s " h o l i d a y . " Indeed, throughout the p e r i o d a f t e r 1890 C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s were more w i l l i n g than the German leadership to use such weapons as s t r i k e s and demonstrations. I n s p i r e d by the Russian r e v o l u -t i o n of 1905 C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s decided to use the general or "mass" s t r i k e as a weapon i n t h e i r s t r u g g l e f o r u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e . ^ In c o n t r a s t , the party and trade union leadership i n Germany attempted to curb t h e i r members' enthusiasm f o r the general s t r i k e , an enthusiasm which ran extremely high i n 1905. For a time the German p a r t y and trade union leadership d i d not r e s t r a i n t h i s enthusiasm. Only when i t threatened 6 7 to get out of hand d i d they apply the brakes. C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s d i d not u l t i m a t e l y use the mass s t r i k e , f o r demonstrations, work slow-downs and the threat of the mass s t r i k e were weapons enough. The 74 s i g n i f i c a n t p o i n t i s that these a c t i o n s were c a r r i e d out w i t h the ap-6 8 p r o v a l of both party and trade union l e a d e r s h i p ! In other words, C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t leaders were more w i l l i n g to use r a d i c a l , means to a t t a i n r e f o r m i s t ends than were those i n the German movement. The means used tended to s a t i s f y t h e i r more r a d i c a l members, w h i l e the goal f o r which the s t r u g g l e was c a r r i e d out pleased the moderates. The party's a c t i v i t y thus gave the impression of m o n o l i t h i c i d e o l o g i c a l u n i t y . I t a l s o made the party appear more r a d i c a l than i t a c t u a l l y was. In Germany, of course, the c o n t r a d i c t i o n between the party's i n c r e a s i n g reformism (and t i m i d i t y ) and i t s r a d i c a l theory was one of the major reasons f o r the r i s e of a r a d i c a l wing i n the p a r t y , and f o r the u l t i m a t e d e s t r u c t i o n of the u n i t y of the s o c i a l i s t movement during the F i r s t World War. In C i s l e i t h a n i a t h i s d i d not occur. P a r t of the reason f o r t h i s was the s m a l l e r gap between theory and p r a c t i c e . The growing commitment of the C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i a l i s t move-ment to u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e as the means to the end, was i n a sense naive. C e r t a i n l y i f the s o c i a l i s t s were to o b t a i n a m a j o r i t y i n parliament, they could t h e o r e t i c a l l y carry out t h e i r r e v o l u t i o n . At.the same time, however, developments i n Germany i n d i c a t e d the d i r e c t i o n s governmental response to the growth of the s o c i a l i s t vote could take; l o c a l governments 69 simply r e s t r i c t e d the f r a n c h i s e . In a d d i t i o n , i f the s o c i a l i s t s were indeed every to form a government, they would then face the same problem German s o c i a l i s t s had p o t e n t i a l l y faced s i n c e 1867: the m i n i s t e r - p r e s i d e n t and h i s cabinet were r e s p o n s i b l e , not to parliament, but to the emperor, who was the u l t i m a t e a r b i t e r . Even a m a j o r i t y i n parliament d i d not 75 guarantee that the s o c i a l i s t s would take power. At the same time, a party which based i t s e l f on one c l a s s d i v i d e d among s e v e r a l n a t i o n a l i t i e s could not hope to o b t a i n i t s goals through the e l e c t o r a l system, at l e a s t i n the immediate s i t u a t i o n . This i s why the f a i l u r e to adopt the a g r i c u l t u r a l r e s o l u t i o n at the 1901 Congress was so s i g n i f i c a n t . In a country i n which the m a j o r i t y of the p o p u l a t i o n was r u r a l , any party which d i d not attempt to appeal to that m a j o r i t y had no hope of winning power. In Russia, Lenin d i d not make the same mistake. In order to win over the m a j o r i t y of the p o p u l a t i o n , he attempted to appeal d i r e c t l y to the p e a s a n t r y — i n s p i t e of the f a c t that he d i d not look upon par-liamentarism as the means of achieving power. In these senses, the C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t view of the f r a n -chise per se as the means to the end was n a i v e . A d l e r , the p r a c t i c a l p o l i t i c i a n , was aware of t h i s . He once s a i d t h a t : We need the r i g h t to vote f o r a l l peoples, f o r a l l c l a s s e s ; we a l s o need i t , f i n a l l y , f o r the s t a t e . But we a l s o need i t f o r a completely d i f f e r e n t reason. We need the r i g h t to vote so that we can f i n a l l y be r i d of i t . ^ Then, and only then, could the party go on to achieve the reforms i t d e s i r e d so deeply, by p u t t i n g pressure on the government through the party's e l e c t e d r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . The i d e o l o g i c a l aspects of C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t programmes thus i n d i c a t e the growing commitment to the f r a n c h i s e and to r e f o r m i s t parliamentarism i n the s o c i a l i s t movement. The constant emphasis on u n i v e r s a l , equal, and d i r e c t s u f f r a g e i n the party programmes a f t e r 1867, e i t h e r as one weapon among many, or as the u l t i m a t e weapon, was f i n a l l y i n s t i t u t i o n a l i z e d i n the 1901 programme, the l a s t adopted before the War of 1914. 76 i i i ) The Programmatic D i s c u s s i o n of the N a t i o n a l i t y Question C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s m ' s main c o n t r i b u t i o n to the development of s o c i a l i s t thought i n the l a t e nineteenth century was the attempt to propose a s o l u t i o n to the problem of n a t i o n a l i t y c o n f l i c t i n a m u l t i -n a t i o n a l s t a t e . The Briinn programme of 1899 was the f i r s t s o c i a l i s t programme devoted e n t i r e l y to the r e s o l u t i o n of n a t i o n a l i t y c o n f l i c t . N a t u r a l l y enough, the programme drew on many sources. As e a r l y as 1848 proposals which would grant e q u a l i t y to the eleven major n a t i o n a l i t i e s i n the Monarchy had been p u b l i c l y discussed. 7"'' The Ausgl e i c h w i t h Hungary and the gran t i n g of v i r t u a l "home r u l e " to the Poles i n G a l i c i a were o f f i c i a l attempts to solv e part of the problem. In the c o n s t i t u t i o n a l e r a a f t e r 186 7 each of the major p o l i t i c a l p a r t i e s among the n a t i o n a l i t i e s i n C i s l e i t h a n i a had i t s own s o l u t i o n to the problem. The e a r l y M a r x i s t s had d e a l t w i t h the n a t i o n a l q u e s t i o n , but they had not taken i t s e r i o u s l y , f o r n a t i o n a l i s m (and n a t i o n a l i t y ) , so 72 they b e l i e v e d , would "wither away" w i t h the development of c a p i t a l i s m . In a d d i t i o n , t h e i r b e l i e f i n the o v e r r i d i n g importance of the West Euro-pean and German r e v o l u t i o n s as the key to the r e v o l u t i o n a r y t r a n s f o r -mation of Europe precluded a systematic d i s c u s s i o n of the n a t i o n a l i t y q u e s t i o n , and indeed, of the nature of n a t i o n a l i s m i t s e l f . The backward m u l t i - n a t i o n a l s t a t e s of Eastern Europe were seen as e n t i r e l y p e r i p h e r a l to the West European r e v o l u t i o n , except i n so f a r as they might have a negative impact upon i t . . T H E HABSBURG EMPIRE 1867-1918 I GERMANS MM RUMANIANS 12 million (24%) 3lj million (6%) | MAGYARS ITALIANS l O million <20%> V million OV/o) £ C i t iM with larga Jowl»h population* ^ 2 million Jawi In all (4%)  Figure 2. 78 Yet C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s d i d have some experience of t h e i r own to draw upon. As e a r l y as the Second (Vienna) Worker's Assembly of 1868 an i n i t i a l statement on the n a t i o n a l i t y question was adopted. I t was decided that the n a t i o n a l question was secondary to the s o c i a l q u e s t i o n , and that e q u a l i t y of the various n a t i o n a l i t i e s would sol v e 73 the problem. This s i m p l i s t i c view was elaborated on at the F i f t h Assembly, which approved a manifesto con'the n a t i o n a l (and s o c i a l ) problem. The manifesto announced that the: age of separate n a t i o n a l i t i e s i s over. The n a t i o n a l i t y p r i n -c i p l e i s today only on the agenda of r e a c t i o n a r i e s . The labour market recognizes no n a t i o n a l borders.74 The views expressed at these two Assemblies are s i g n i f i c a n t , f o r they t y p i f y the s o c i a l i s t view of n a t i o n a l i s m and the n a t i o n a l i t y question during the nineteenth century. N a t i o n a l i s m was seen as a r e a c t i o n a r y phenomenon, which only impeded the s t r u g g l e f o r economic and s o c i a l l i b e r a t i o n . U l t i m a t e l y the development of c a p i t a l i s m would destroy n a t i o n a l d i f f e r e n c e s as a world market and a world language emerged. The Ninthh Worker's Assembly c a r r i e d the d i s c u s s i o n a l i t t l e .furth f o r i t r a f s e d i t h e question o f - J t h e " r i g h t " of n a t i o n a l s e l f - d e t e r m i n a t i o n . " One h i s t o r i a n warns, however, that t h i s concept was seen as a democratic 76 r i g h t , and not s p e c i f i c a l l y as a n a t i o n a l r i g h t to sece s s i o n . The N e u d o r f l Congress of 1874 r e t a i n e d t h i s concept, without c l a r i f y i n g i t s meaning. The Congress was s i g n i f i c a n t , however, f o r i n e s t a b l i s h i n g the f i r s t s o c i a l i s t p a r t y i n Europe to c o n s i s t of more than one n a t i o n a l i t y (or language group), i t removed the d i s c u s s i o n of the n a t i o n a l i t y question from the t h e o r e t i c a l plane, and made i t a 79 problem of p r a c t i c a l p o l i t i c s . 7 7 A systematic a n a l y s i s of the subje c t was postponed, however, f o r the Wiener Neustadt Congress of 1876 aban-doned the i d e a of a nation-wide o r g a n i z a t i o n . In the absence of the Czech s o c i a l i s t s , the Congress returned the d i s c u s s i o n to the stage i t had reached i n the l a t e 1860's when i t was declared t h a t : We are separated by no a r t i f i c i a l d i f f e r e n c e s , and by no p o l i t i c a l animosity. To us the word n a t i o n a l i t y i s a meaning-l e s s sound which dies away unheard i n the face of the common i n t e r e s t s which b i n d us together.78 When the Czech s o c i a l i s t s founded t h e i r own party at the.Brevnov Congress of 1878 they renewed the debate on the n a t i o n a l i t y question. In f a c t , the founding of a separate Czech party was i n i t s e l f a s i g n i -f i c a n t statement, f o r i t represented the r e a l i z a t i o n t h a t separate n a t i o n a l 79 o r g a n i z a t i o n s were necessary, i f only f o r purposes of a g i t a t i o n . I t was a l s o , of course, a r e f l e c t i o n of the existence of n a t i o n a l f e e l i n g i n the s o c i a l i s t movement, and emphasized that the n a t i o n a l i t y question was not merely a concern of " r e a c t i o n a r i e s , " but a r e a l problem which would have to be d e a l t w i t h e v e n t u a l l y . In the programme adopted at the Congress? the Czechs r e a f f i r m e d the p r i n c i p l e of s e l f - d e t e r m i n a t i o n of n a t i o n s , but once more i t was not defined. To j u s t i f y the establishment of the "Czechoslav" party the programme s t a t e d t h a t : [The Czechoslav S o c i a l i s t P a r t y ] recognizes that each party must be organized by n a t i o n a l i t y before the merger of working people without regard to n a t i o n a l i t y or r e l i g i o n can be c a r r i e d o u t . ^ This view was accepted by the C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r t y , but before a r e a l d i s c u s s i o n of the n a t i o n a l i t y question could begin, the s o c i a l i s t movement d i s i n t e g r a t e d i n t o - f a c t i o n s . 80 As a r e s u l t , i t was not u n t i l 1887 that f u r t h e r d i s c u s s i o n of 81 the n a t i o n a l question occurred. At the Brunn Congress of 1887, which r e u n i t e d Czech r a d i c a l and moderate s o c i a l i s t s , a r e s o l u t i o n on the n a t i o n a l i t y question was adopted. The s o l u t i o n to the problem was the i n t r o d u c t i o n of e q u a l i t y f o r a l l languages: [ S ] o c i a l democratic workers are the one and only [group] who can b r i n g about e q u a l i t y f o r the Czechoslav language among the other languages, because s o c i a l and p o l i t i c a l e q u a l i t y must precede language [ e q u a l i t y ] . 8 2 The r e s o l u t i o n then went on to argue that the r i g h t of s e l f - d e t e r m i n a t i o n must be given to the people, f o r t h i s was the way i n which the process of a s s i m i l a t i o n to other n a t i o n a l i t i e s could be stopped. C l e a r l y , the s t r e s s on the n a t i o n a l i t y question at the Brunn Congress was not as heavy as i t had p r e v i o u s l y been. The r e t r e a t from the p r i n c i p l e s expressed at the Czech party's Brevnov Congress of 1878 i s e a s i l y e x p l i c a b l e . A d l e r and Josef Hybes (1850-1921), the most prominent Czech s o c i a l i s t at the time, had taken great pains to woo the more n a t i o n a l i s t Czech s o c i a l i s t s i n Prague over to the i d e a of a new i n t e r n a t i o n a l p a r t y , which would u n i t e both Czech 83 and German r a d i c a l s and moderates. As a r e s u l t , the Brunn Congress was more concerned w i t h the re-establishment of the u n i t y of the Czech s o c i a l i s t movement than w i t h the n a t i o n a l i t y question. The same was true of the H a i n f e l d Congress of 1888/9, which r e u n i t e d r a d i c a l s and moderates of both n a t i o n a l i t i e s and adopted a 84 new programme. The n a t i o n a l i t y question was not an i s s u e at H a i n f e l d , and the new programme merely r e s t a t e d that the party s t r o v e f o r the l i b e r a t i o n of everyone, without d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n by n a t i o n a l i t y . I t 81 r e i t e r a t e d that the party was i n t e r n a t i o n a l , and condemned any n a t i o n a l • 85 p r i v i l e g e s . I n the 1890's, however, the s o c i a l i s t s f i n a l l y found themselves fo r c e d to take a comprehensive p o s i t i o n on the n a t i o n a l i t y question. As long as the s o c i a l i s t movement was merely a "sect or a gang of 86 r u f f i a n s , " as A d l e r so p i c t u r e s q u e l y put i t , the n a t i o n a l i t y question was not a s e r i o u s problem. Without d i r e c t r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n parliament, and without a r e a l nation-wide o r g a n i z a t i o n , s o c i a l i s t s of the various n a t i o n a l i t i e s could a f f o r d to ignore i t . A f t e r 1890, however, the s o c i a l i s t movement developed a mass f o l l o w i n g among the peoples of C i s -l e i t h a n i a . In 1897 the party o r g a n i z a t i o n was f e d e r a l i z e d i n an attempt 87 to s o l v e the n a t i o n a l i t y question w i t h i n the s o c i a l i s t s ' own ranks. In the same year the f i r s t s o c i a l i s t s were e l e c t e d to parliament, j u s t i n time to p a r t i c i p a t e i n the c r i s i s which marked the v i r t u a l end of parliamentary government i n C i s l e i t h a n i a . Parliament was d i s a b l e d by o b s t r u c t i o n f o l l o w i n g the i n t r o d u c t i o n of decrees making the Czech and German languages equal i n the p u b l i c a d m i n i s t r a t i o n of Bohemia and Moravia. The Germans saw the decrees as a t h r e a t to the German p o s i t i o n i n the Bohemian Lands, and reacted v i o l e n t l y . The Czechssresponded i n k i n d . As a r e s u l t , r i o t i n g i n the s t r e e t s , and i n parliament, p o l i t i c i z e d the n a t i o n a l i t y question to an u n p a r a l l e l e d extent. For the next 88 s e v e r a l years both s t a t e and parliament were p o l i t i c a l l y p a ralyzed. This created a twofold problem f o r the s o c i a l i s t s . For one t h i n g , n a t i o n a l i t y c o n f l i c t d e f l e c t e d a t t e n t i o n away from the s o c i a l 89 s t r u g g l e s of the working c l a s s . At the same time, o b s t r u c t i o n i n 82 parliament c r i p p l e d the i n s t i t u t i o n which the s o c i a l i s t s i n c r e a s i n g l y saw as the medium f o r the transformation of s o c i e t y once true u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e was r e a l i z e d . A d l e r was o r g i n a l l y opposed to the i d e a of a s o c i a l i s t n a t i o n a l i t y programme, but when Kautsky published an a r t i c l e on the question i n Neue Z e i t i n 1898 debate became general among the 90 s o c i a l i s t s , and A d l e r was forced to give way. At the 1899 Brunn Congress of the C i s l e i t h a n i a n party a com-mitt e e , composed of n a t i o n a l party r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s on the Gesamtpartei (or C i s l e i t h a n i a n party) executive i n Vienna, presented a proposal. This d r a f t programme argued that n a t i o n a l c o n f l i c t i n C i s l e i t h a n i a was a r e s u l t of the p o l i t i c a l backwardness of p u b l i c i n s f itutzions, and that i t was one of the means the r u l i n g c l a s s e s used to secure t h e i r p o s i t i o n . The f i n a l settlement of the n a t i o n a l i t y (and language) question was seen as "above a l l a c u l t u r a l demand," which could only be obtained i n a t r u l y democratic community, based on u n i v e r s a l , equal and d i r e c t s u f f r a g e . Only i n such a community, i n which a l l f e u d a l p r i v i l e g e s were e l i m i n a t e d , could the working c l a s s e s , the r e a l upholders of s t a t e and s o c i e t y , be heard. Each n a t i o n a l i t y had the r i g h t of exi s t e n c e and development, but the peoples had to l i v e i n clo s e s o l i d a r i t y w i t h one another, and s o c i a l i s t s of a l l tongues had to carry out t h e i r p o l i -91 t i c a l and trade union s t r u g g l e s together. On the b a s i s of these p r i n c i p l e s a f i v e p o i n t " p r a c t i c a l " pro-gramme was proposed. C i s l e i t h a n i a could only be a democratic n a t i o n a l i t y 92 s t a t e . This f e d e r a l s t a t e would be composed of autonomous n a t i o n a l a d m i n i s t r a t i v e areas, which would be based as f a r as p o s s i b l e on language 83 borders. The a d m i n i s t r a t i v e areas of each n a t i o n thus created would together c o n s t i t u t e a n a t i o n a l u n i t . In complete autonomy, the popu-l a t i o n of each u n i t would deal w i t h i t s n a t i o n a l c o n c e r n s — d e f i n e d as c u l t u r a l and l i n g u i s t i c . N a t i o n a l m i n o r i t i e s i n mixed areas would r e -ceive l e g a l p r o t e c t i o n . The f i f t h p o i n t c a l l e d f o r the r e j e c t i o n of any o f f i c i a l s t a t e language, but recommended German as the "language 9 3 of communication." The proposal was defended by Josef S e l i g e r , a Bohemian German. He argued that workers were the ones who s u f f e r e d most from n a t i o n a l i t y c o n f l i c t ; hence i t was necessary f o r s o c i a l i s t s to develop a s o l u t i o n to the problem. The n a t i o n a l i t y question i n C i s l e i t h a n i a was a c u l t u r a l problem, and not a question of power (Machtfrage). The removal of c u l -t u r a l matters from the c e n t r a l parliament's j u r i s d i c t i o n would d e p o l i -t i c i z e and defuse i t . He concluded: S o c i a l democracy i n [ C i s l e i t h a n i a ] must produce a s o l u t i o n to t h i s problem, and must do i t s utmost to c a r r y i t out. We are concerned w i t h f i n d i n g theobasis on which i t i s p o s s i b l e f o r the peoples i n t h i s s t a t e to l i v e together. Only i n t h i s way can 'pure' c l a s s s t r u g g l e replace n a t i o n a l i t y con-f l i c t . 9 4 Both t hev.commission's p r o p o s a l , and S e l i g e r ' s defence of i t , c o nsiderably underestimated the seriousness of the n a t i o n a l i t y question i n C i s l e i t h a n i a . I t was by no means merely a c u l t u r a l matter. More than anything e l s e , n a t i o n a l s t r i f e i n C i s l e i t h a n i a was becoming a p o l i t i c a l s t r u g g l e , concerned not w i t h c u l t u r a l - U n g u i s t i c r i g h t s , but w i t h power i n the s t a t e . Even though the Badeni controversy was out-wardly c u l t u r a l - l i n g u i s t i c i n content, Czech and German n a t i o n a l i s t s had no i l l u s i o n s that i t r e a l l y represented the l e a d i n g edge of the 84 b a t t l e f o r c o n t r o l of Bohemia, and u l t i m a t e l y of the Monarchy. What Czech n a t i o n a l i s t s r e a l l y wanted was a n a t i o n a l t e r r i t o r y of t h e i r own, 95 i n other words, a Czech s t a t e w i t h i n the Monarchy. This was the r e a l meaning of the Young Czech demand f o r the r e a l i z a t i o n of Bohemia's t r a -d i t i o n a l r i g h t s — t h e c o n t r o v e r s i a l Bohemian S t a a t s r e c h t . Although Czech s o c i a l i s t s had apparently given evidence of t h e i r i n t e r n a t i o n a l i s m when they denounced Bohemian Staatsrecht i n parliament 96 i n 1897, i t was c l e a r from t h e i r response to the commission's pro-p o s a l that they stood on the same ground as t h e i r n a t i o n a l i s t movement. The responses of s o c i a l i s t s of other n a t i o n a l i t i e s i n d i c a t e d t h e i r r e -l a t i o n s h i p s w i t h t h e i r n a t i o n a l movements. Antonin Nemec, a lead i n g Czech s o c i a l i s t , was the f i r s t to respond. In r e j e c t i n g the f i v e p o i n t p r o p o s a l , Nemec argued that the n a t i o n a l i t y question was not merely a c u l t u r a l problem. Economic, s o c i a l and other f a c t o r s were i n t e g r a l p a r t s of i t . The commission's r e s o l u t i o n was a f a i l u r e , because i t would only i n t e n s i f y n a t i o n a l i t y c o n f l i c t , not e l i -minate i t . Bohemia was a case i n p o i n t . I f the province were to be p a r t i t i o n e d , n a t i o n a l i t y s t r u g g l e s would be c a r r i e d i n t o the sma l l e s t 97 v i l l a g e . Another Czech s o c i a l i s t c a r r i e d t h i s l a t t e r p o i n t even f u r t h e r . K a r l Vanek s a i d that C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s were being premature i n t h e i r attempt to deal w i t h C i s l e i t h a n i a ' s f u t u r e , f o r : i f we wish to e s t a b l i s h n a t i o n a l t e r r i t o r i e s , we must set up new borders. I t has already been pointed out, however, . . . that the f l u c t u a t i o n process has not yet ended; =u[jas a a r e s u l t ] i t can e a s i l y happen that a m i n o r i t y can suddenly become a m a j o r i t y , and then the borders would have to be adjusted.98 This " f l u c t u a t i o n process" was described by Nemec i n an a r t i c l e p u b l i s h e d i n the Czech s o c i a l i s t press p r i o r to the Congress. He pointed 85 out that economic necessity was causing the r u r a l population i n the Czech regions of Bohemia to migrate i n t o the i n d u s t r i a l German areas of the "mixed-language" regions. Even though t h i s caused n a t i o n a l i t y c o n f l i c t , Nemec f e l t that the most important aspect of this population movement was the f a c t that i t had not yet ended. On the contrary, i t was only i n i t s beginning stages. At the same time as Czechs were wandering i n t o German regions, however, German c a p i t a l was moving into Czech d i s t r i c t s . This too created n a t i o n a l i t y struggle. In s p i t e of t h i s , however, this process must be permitted to continue i n nationally-mixed areas such as the "Sudeten Lands and also Lower A u s t r i a " ! ! I f we were to speak out i n favour of the d i v i s i o n of the [Crown] Lands in t o n a t i o n a l t e r r i t o r i e s before the current movement of population ends, we would only^anticipate development without ending n a t i o n a l c o n f l i c t . 9 9 Clearly Czech s o c i a l i s t s wished to postpone the d e f i n i t i o n of n a t i o n a l t e r r i t o r i e s i n C i s l e i t h a n i a u n t i l the movement of population was complete, or, i n other words, u n t i l Bohemia was completely Czech!. Indeed, the reference to Lower A u s t r i a as a "mixed-nationality" area indicates that Czech s o c i a l i s t s went f a r beyond the Young Czechs and t h e i r c a l l f o r a Bohemian state, f o r , by i m p l i c a t i o n Nemec was claiming that population migration would ultimately bring lower A u s t r i a and Vienna i n t o the Czech f o l d ! This was p o l i t i c a l nationalism of the f i r s t order. The P o l i s h s o c i a l i s t s ' ..response to the proposal r e f l e c t e d t h e i r p o l i t i c a l s i t u a t i o n . Ignaz Daszynski emphasized that repressed peoples everywhere were s t r i v i n g for t h e i r own states. Though the Poles i n the Monarchy would continue to work with t h e i r comrades, the d i v i s i o n 86 of the P o l i s h people among three s t a t e s could not be f o r g o t t e n . P o l i s h s o c i a l i s t s intended to work w i t h Poles i n Russia and P r u s s i a so that one day the u n i t e d P o l i s h people could take i t s place i n the f a m i l y of nations.?"*^ ^ With these q u a l i f i c a t i o n s i n mind the Poles were q u i t e w i l l i n g to accept the proposal. U n l i k e the other non-German n a t i o n a l i t i e s , however, the Poles d i d not r e j e c t German as the "language of communication." Daszynski merely s a i d that t h i s question would be decided by what a c t u a l l y oc-curred."'"^"'" As a f e l l o w " r u l i n g n a t i o n a l i t y , " i n a d i s t a n t p r o v i n c e , Poles had few c o n f l i c t s w i t h the Germans, and the proposal of German as the"language 1 of communication" was not a t h r e a t to the p r e s t i g e of t h e i r movement, as i t was f o r the Czechs and others. The Ruthene, or U k r a i n i a n , s o c i a l democrats expressed t h e i r views through ther s o l i t a r y r e p r e s e n t a t i v e at the Congress, V i c t o r Hankiewicz. While agreeing w i t h the p r o p o s a l , Hankiewicz s t i p u l a t e d that the "Ruthene" popu l a t i o n of the Monarchy was a p a r t of the great " U k r a i n i a n " n a t i o n , ,_. n- . - . , 102 which must one day be u n i t e d . Slovene s o c i a l i s t s , representing one of the weaker peoples i n the Monarchy, r e p l i e d to the commission's proposal by i n t r o d u c i n g one of t h e i r own. R e j e c t i n g the t e r r i t o r i a l p r i n c i p l e of o r g a n i z a t i o n , they c a l l e d f o r each n a t i o n a l i t y to be organized as a union of persons, not t e r r i t o r y . This r e f l e c t e d t h e i r view t h a t i t would be impossible to 103 disentangle the n a t i o n a l i t i e s i n the L i t t o r a l . The I t a l i a n delegate, Antonio Gerin from T r i e s t e , agreed w i t h the Slovenes about the problem of the L i t t o r a l , though he d i d note that the I t a l i a n s of the T i r o l formed 87 a compact group which could be organized t e r r i t o r i a l l y . Nevertheless, he r e j e c t e d both pro p o s a l s , arguing i n s t e a d that i t was too soon to deal w i t h the n a t i o n a l i t y q u e s t i o n , and that s o c i a l i s t s should concentrate t h e i r energies on c l a s s s t r u g g l e . In t h e i r i n i t i a l statement to the Congress, Czech s o c i a l i s t s had proposed that the d r a f t programme be withdrawn and a commission e s t a b l i s h e d to draw up a new one. A f t e r each n a t i o n a l group had had a chance to speak to the o r i g i n a l r e s o l u t i o n , t h i s was agreed to. The commission r e d r a f t e d the f i v e p o i n t s of the o r i g i n a l . C i s -l e i t h a n i a was s t i l l to be a democratic n a t i o n a l i t y s t a t e , but the word " f e d e r a l " had been added d i r e c t l y to the de s i g n a t i o n . The autonomous n a t i o n a l a d m i n i s t r a t i v e areas were more s p e c i f i c a l l y defined. They would replace the h i s t o r i c Crown Lands, and t h e i r a d m i n i s t r a t i o n and l e g i s -l a t i o n would be c a r r i e d out by " n a t i o n a l chambers," e l e c t e d by u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e . Together these would form a n a t i o n a l u n i t , which would carry out i t s n a t i o n a l concerns i n complete autonomy. These " n a t i o n a l concerns" were no longer defined as l i n g u i s t i c and c u l t u r a l . The statement about l e g a l p r o t e c t i o n f o r m i n o r i t i e s i n mixed areas was a l s o made more s p e c i f i c . Now a l l m i n o r i t i e s would be pro-t e c t e d by a law to be drawn up by the I m p e r i a l parliament. P r e d i c t -a b l y , the statement i n favour of German as a "language of communication" was dropped. Instead, i n so f a r as one was necessary, i t would be decided by the I m p e r i a l parliament. Even though the new proposal was adopted unanimously, i t i s obvious from the r e a c t i o n s of the various n a t i o n a l p a r t i e s to the — 88 o r i g i n a l d r a f t , that the programme was the broadest p o s s i b l e compro-mise among s i x groups w i t h very d i f f e r e n t n a t i o n a l i n t e r e s t s . For at l e a s t two of the n a t i o n a l i t i e s represented at the Congress, the Poles and Ruthenes, the programme was only of p e r i p h e r a l i n t e r e s t . C e r t a i n l y i t s r e a l i z a t i o n would b r i n g d i s t i n c t advantages to the Ruthenes, who s u f f e r e d under P o l i s h r u l e i n G a l i c i a . At the same time, however, the primary i n t e r e s t of these peoples was i n union w i t h t h e i r co-n a t i o n a l s over the borders. For Czech s o c i a l i s t s , whose i n t e r e s t s l a y w i t h i n C i s l e i t h a n i a and obviously w i t h the achievement of as much i n f l u e n c e as they could p o s s i b l y win, the r e s o l u t i o n was a l s o acceptable. Even though the f i v e p o i n t s were meant as a " p r a c t i c a l programme," i t would be a long time before they were r e a l i z e d . At the same time, the Czechs s t i l l f e l t that they needed the support of the German pa r t y . As a r e s u l t they were 106 not w i l l i n g to ca r r y t h e i r o p p o s i t i o n too f a r . U l t i m a t e l y , the Brunn programme r e f l e c t e d the " n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n " of the va r i o u s n a t i o n a l i t y groups w i t h i n the s o c i a l i s t movement. This was p a r t i c u l a r l y true i n the case of the Czech s o c i a l i s t s , but a p p l i e d no l e s s - t o the other n a t i o n a l i t i e s , i n c l u d i n g the Germans. ^Nationalism among Austro-German s o c i a l i s t s was, of course, much more s u b t l e and more d i f f i c u l t to i d e n t i f y . One of the reasons f o r t h i s was the f a c t that Germans i n the s o c i a l i s t movement, l i k e Germans i n C i s l e i t h a n i a as a whole, were a " r u l i n g n a t i o n a l i t y . " As a r e s u l t , they d i d not have to l i b e r a t e themselves from a l i e n r u l e i n e i t h e r s t a t e or p a r t y . Even t h e i r " c l a s s enemy," the bo u r g e o i s i e i n C i s l e i t h a n i a , spoke the same language. 89 A c e r t a i n amount of German n a t i o n a l i s m was, however, i n d i c a t e d by the proposal that German be adopted as the language of communication. As A d l e r noted, the Germans could agree to the abandonment of t h i s p o i n t , because German was the language of communication i n any case, as the Congress i t s e l f i n d i c a t e d . ^ 7 This was c e r t a i n l y t r u e , of course, but i t d i d i n d i c a t e a f a i l u r e to understand the depth of ( p a r t i c u l a r l y ) Czech s e n s i t i v i t y to s l i g h t s , r e a l or imagined, to the p r e s t i g e of the Czech n a t i o n a l i t y . The major weakness of the Br'unn programme was the f a i l u r e to t r e a t the n a t i o n a l i t y question i n C i s l e i t h a n i a as a p o l i t i c a l problem. C e r t a i n l y the f i n a l d r a f t of the programme was much more " p o l i t i c a l " i n o r i e n t a t i o n than the o r i g i n a l , and indeed, represented a q u a l i f i e d acceptance of the i d e a of f e d e r a l i z a t i o n of the Monarchy along e t h n i c l i n e s . At the same time, however, the new programme s t i l l r e f e r r e d to the n a t i o n a l i t y question as a " c u l t u r a l " problem, and d i d not under-take a thoroughgoing a n a l y s i s of the nature of n a t i o n a l i t y c o n f l i c t . The primary reason f o r t h i s was, of course, the r a d i c a l l y divergent i n t e r e s t s of the various n a t i o n a l i t i e s i n v o l v e d i n i t s c r e a t i o n . One t h i n g these divergent i n t e r e s t s i n d i c a t e d was that s o c i a l i s t s i n C i s l e i t h a n i a were no l e s s n a t i o n a l i s t than t h e i r co-nationals i n the v a r i o u s n a t i o n a l i s t movements. U l t i m a t e l y the u n i v e r s a l i t y of n a t i o n a l f e e l i n g was to prove stronger than the t h e o r e t i c a l u n i v e r -s a l i t y of c l a s s i n t e r e s t . In t h i s sense the n a t i o n a l i t y question was a p o l i t i c a l problem. As such i t r e f e r r e d to each people's d e s i r e to r u l e i t s e l f . 90 The outstanding feature of the Brunn programme was the s p e c i f i c commitment to the p r e s e r v a t i o n of the Habsburg s t a t e contained i n i t . This was a r a d i c a l departure from the t r a d i t i o n a l s o c i a l i s t view of the Monarchy. From L a s s a l l e to Kautsky, s o c i a l i s t t h i n k e r s had seen the Monarchy as a r e a c t i o n a r y , doomed e d i f i c e , which would c o l l a p s e 108 w i t h the success of the s o c i a l i s t r e v o l u t i o n . Yet this...commitment i s understandable. None of the peoples i n the Monarchy, i n c l u d i n g those represented i n the s o c i a l i s t movement, thought s e r i o u s l y i n terms of the Monarchy's d i s s o l u t i o n i n 1899. Although Czech s o c i a l i s t s r e f l e c t e d t h e i r n a t i o n a l i s t movement's d e s i r e f o r a Czech s t a t e , that s t a t e was conceived of as e x i s t i n g w i t h i n the Habsburg Monarchy, and not as an independent s t a t e . The r e a l s i g n f i c a n c e of the Brunn n a t i o n a l i t i e s ' programme re s t s i n the f a c t that i t was an extremely important c o n t r i b u t i o n to the debate on n a t i o n a l i s m and the n a t i o n a l i t i e s ' question i n the European s o c i a l i s t movement a f t e r 1900. I t s e l a b o r a t i o n by Otto Bauer and K a r l Renner helped to e s t a b l i s h the context i n which the debate was c a r r i e d out. I t was of course, p a r t i c u l a r l y r e l e v a n t — i n a negative or a p o s i t i v e s e n s e — t o the s o c i a l i s t movements i n other m u l t i - n a t i o n a l s t a t e s i n Europe. In summary, the h i s t o r y of C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t programmes i n d i c a t e s the e a r l y r e l i a n c e upon the German model, w i t h the exception of those aspects which d e a l t w i t h the n a t i o n a l i t y question. By the end of the nineteenth century, however, C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s were s t r i k i n g out on t h e i r own. This was i n d i c a t e d by the Brunn programme 9 1 o f 1 8 9 9 a n d t h e V i e n n a p l a t f o r m o f 1 9 0 1 , b o t h o f w h i c h p l a c e d h e a v y r e l i a n c e o n t h e e l e c t o r a l p r o c e s s a s t h e m e a n s t o s o c i a l i s m . W h i l e t h i s w a s n o t p a r t i c u l a r l y d i f f e r e n t f r o m t h e G e r m a n p a r t y ' s p r a c t i c e , t h e G e r m a n p a r t y d i d n o t r e v i s e i t s t h e o r y i n t h i s d i r e c t i o n . W h a t w a s o c c u r r i n g i n C i s l e i t h a n i a w a s t h e p r o g r e s s i v e a d a p t a t i o n o f t h e s o c i a l i s t i d e o l o g y t o t h e r e a l i t i e s a n d t r a d i t i o n s o f t h e c o u n t r y , o r a t l e a s t t o t h e r e a l i t y t h e s o c i a l i s t l e a d e r s p e r c e i v e d . T h e B r i i n n p r o g r a m m e o f 1 8 9 9 w a s a c l a s s i c e x a m p l e o f t h i s , f o r i t c a n b e f i t t e d i n t o t h e C i s l e i t h a n i a n f e d e r a l i s t t r a d i t i o n , d e v e l o p e d d u r i n g t h e r e v o l u t i o n o f 1 8 4 8 a n d e l a b o r a t e d u p o n t h e r e a f t e r . o NOTES - CHAPTER I I See Appendix I f o r a l i s t of the major party congresses. The 1901 programme was the l a s t adopted before the F i r s t World War. 2 The Young Czech Party adopted these demands i n i t s f i r s t pro-gramme i n 1874. Cf. Stanley B. Winters, "The Young Czech Party (1874-1914): An A p p r a i s a l , " SR., XXVIII (1969), pp. 434, 438. The 1882 L i n z Programme of the German n a t i o n a l i s t l i b e r a l s a l s o contained the same proposals. Reprinted i n Klaus B e r c h t o l d (ed.), O s t e r r e i c h i s c h e P a r t e i - programme 1868-1966 (Munich 1967), pp. 198-203. 3 The Wiener Neustadt Congress of 1876, which marked a temporary r e t r e a t to a more moderate p o s i t i o n , reduced t h i s demand to a reduction of the standing army's s i z e , and the eventual c r e a t i o n of a people's army. Text i n Der V o l k s s t a a t , 6 September 1876. The Czech s o c i a l i s t s ' Briinn programme of 1887 d i d not mention the armed f o r c e s , but t h i s was because they decided that only a C i s l e i t h a n i a n party congress could e s t a b l i s h a programme i n d e t a i l , and not because of a s p e c i f i c d e c i s i o n to exclude i t . Text i n B r i i g e l , Geschichte, I I I , pp. 388-90. 4 P r o t o k o l l (Vienna), 1901, p. 4. The pr e r o g a t i v e was the emperor's. See above, Chapter I , s e c t i o n i i . ^ For the t e x t of the Neudbrfl programme see Der V o l k s s t a a t , 24 A p r i l 1874. For a s l i g h t l y d i f f e r e n t v e r s i o n see S t e i n e r , A r b e i t e r - bewegung, pp. 99r-100. The Briinn Congress of 1882 was the only one to give an age l i m i t to which education should be compulsory (fourteen y e a r s ) . Reprinted i n B e r c h t o l d , pp. 129-30. ^ Demokratisches Wochenblatt, 14 August 1869. 7 Both p o i n t s were taken from the Eisenach programme. The Hain-f e l d programme dropped both proposals, but the former was r e s t o r e d to the programme i n 1892, and the l a t t e r i n 1901. See P r o t o k o l l ( H a i n f e l d ) , 1888/9, pp. 3-4; P r o t o k o l l (Vienna), 1892, p. 107;. P r o t o k o l l (Vienna), 1901, p. 4. g Der V o l k s s t a a t , 24 A p r i l 1874. Once again the p o i n t was taken almost d i r e c t l y from the Eisenach programme. 9 P r o t o k o l l (Vienna), 1901, p. 4. See the German party's E r f u r t programme, P r o t o k o l l ( E r f u r t ) , 1891, p. 4. 1 0 Cf. Bunzel, " D a r s t e l l u n g , " p. 291. The f u l l e r d e f i n i t i o n of t h i s p o i n t at the Ne u d b r f l Congress of 1874 was based on the Eisenach programme. See Der V o l k s s t a a t , 24 A p r i l 1874; Demokratisches Wochen- b l a t t , 14 August 1869. 92 93 Once again, the party was the Young Czech P a r t y . Winters, "The Young Czech P a r t y , " p. 436. Even the r a d i c a l p l a t f o r m of the German n a t i o n a l i s t l i b e r a l s of 1882 d i d not d i r e c t l y c a l l f o r u n i v e r s a l s u f f -rage. Cf. B e r c h t o l d , pp. 199-200. U n i v e r s a l suffrage was not s e r i o u s l y r a i s e d i n parliament t i l l a f t e r 1890. 12 A statement of r a d i c a l views i s contained i n a p o l i c e report r e p r i n t e d i n B r i i g e l , Geschichte, I I I , p. 310. See als o the r a d i c a l pamphlet r e p r i n t e d i n B e r c h t o l d , pp. 125-9. 13 P r o t o k o l l ( H a i n f e l d ) , 1888/9, p. 3. This phrase was adopted i n p a r t to please the former r a d i c a l s . I t was a l s o a statement of the Mar x i s t view of parliamentarism and the s t a t e . 14 I n t e r e s t i n g l y , the 1893 campaign s t a r t e d a f t e r the Young Czech Party introduced a r e s o l u t i o n proposing u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e i n t o parliament. A r b e i t e r - Z e i t u n g , 24 March 189 3. A d l e r immediately sup-ported the Young Czech p r o p o s a l — f r o m outside p a r l i a m e n t — a n d m o b i l i z e d the party's f o r c e s . One party leader noted that between 1 May and 15 September there were over 400 assemblies and demonstrations, i n c l u d i n g 20 w i t h more than 10,000 p a r t i c i p a n t s . Wilhelm Ellenbogen, "Der Kampf urn das allgemeine Wahlrecht und die p o l i t i s c h e n P a r t e i e n i n O e s t e r r e i c h , " NZ, XII:1 (1893-4), p. 55. Ellenbogen r e f e r r e d to the Young Czechs as Mie "most pro g r e s s i v e of a l l the parliamentary p a r t i e s . " I b i d . , p. 87. Cf. P e t e r Gay, The Dilemma of Democratic S o c i a l i s m (New York, 1962 ), p. 62; and G.D.H. Cole, A H i s t o r y of S o c i a l i s t Thought (London, 1953-60), I I , pp. 42 7-36. 16 B e r c h t o l d , p. 129. Women had, of course, been r e f e r r e d to much e a r l i e r i n the s o c i a l aspects of the programmes. 1 7 P r o t o k o l l (Vienna), 1892, pp. 107-9. As e a r l y as 1875 Wilhelm Liebknecht and August Bebel had r a i s e d the question of a s p e c i f i c s t a t e -ment about the vote f o r women—at the German party's Gotha Congress. U l t i m a t e l y i t was decided that the use of the term " c i t i z e n s " r a t h e r than "men" would carry the same i m p l i c a t i o n — w h i c h of course i t d i d n o t — but the debate about votes f o r women at the Congress, p a r t i c u l a r l y Bebel and Liebknecht's arguments, t y p i f y r a d i c a l and progressive thought on the woman question i n t h i s e r a and beyond. See Der V o l k s s t a a t , 30 May, 2 June 1875. Although women were l e g a l l y forbidden to belong to p o l i t i c a l a s s o c i a t i o n s (see above, Chapter I , note 30), they were f r e e to attend meetings, and they began to do t h i s i n sm a l l numbers a f t e r H a i n f e l d . In 1890 women workers circumvented the 186 7 law by forming n o n - p o l i t i c a l e d u c a t i o n a l a s s o c i a t i o n s ( A r b e i t e r - Z e i t u n g , 11 J u l y 1890), and at the end of 1891 the p u b l i c a t i o n of the f i r s t s o c i a l i s t women's paper, the Vienna A r b e i t e r i n n e n - Z e i t u n g , was announced. A r b e i t e r - Z e i t u n g , 18 December 1891. Needless to say, many men were h o s t i l e to the i n c l u s i o n of women i n the movement, and r e g u l a r l y a f t e r 1891 r e s o l u t i o n s were 94 introduced at party congresses c a l l i n g f o r the end of the independent p u b l i c a t i o n of the women's paper. Cf. f o r example, Protoko11 (Vienna), 1897, pp. 177, 186-9. The f i r s t women appeared at a party congress i n 1891, though t h e i r presence t h e r e a f t e r was e r r a t i c . See Adelheid Dworak-Popp's appeal f o r support f o r women at the 1891 Congress, P r o t o k o l l (Vienna), 1891, pp. 39-41. 18 P r o t o k o l l (Vienna), 1901, p. 4. The Reich-German party had adopted a s i m i l a r p o i n t back i n 1891. P r o t o k o l l ( E r f u r t ) , 1891, p. 5. At the 1899 C i s l e i t h a n i a n party Congress, however, the d i s s a t i s f i e d women delegates pointed out the gap between the party's theory, as ex-pressed i n the pa r t y programmes, and i t s p r a c t i c e . As Betty Krapka, a Vienna Czech, put i t : "At a l l congresses . . . r e s o l u t i o n s have been passed concerning the woman question. When i t i s a question of i n s t i -t u t i n g e q u a l i t y i n p r a c t i c e , however, everything i s f o r g o t t e n . " P r o t o k o l l (Brunn), 1899, p. 132. 19 Macartney, The Habsburg Empire 1790-1918, p. 275. 20 Der V o l k s s t a a t , 24 A p r i l 1874. The l a t t e r two demands were an advance over the Eisenach programme. 21 I b i d . , 6 September 1876. The Gotha programme d i d not mention a s p e c i f i c number of hours. Text i n i b i d . , 28 May 1875. 22 I b i d . , 6 September 1876. The Gotha programme demanded i n addi-t i o n the e l e c t i o n of f a c t o r y i n s p e c t o r s by workers. 23 I b i d . This was a l s o s i m i l a r to demands made at Gotha. 24 I b i d . The Gotha programme was vague on t h i s question. 25 I b i d . The o r i g i n a l reads: "Aufhebung a l l e r Gesindeordnungen und U n t e r s t e l l u n g der Knechte und Dienstboten unter die allgemeinen A r b e i t e r g e s e t z e . " 26 The L i n z programme of the German n a t i o n a l i s t l i b e r a l s was an example of one such group's views. 27 W i l l i a m A. Jenks, A u s t r i a under the Iron Ring 1879-189 3 ( C h a r l o t t e s v i l l e , 1965), p. 179. 2 8 Kolmer, Parlament und Verfassung i n O e s t e r r e i c h , I I I , p. 370. 29 Ludwig B r i i g e l , S o z i a l e Gesetzgebung i n O s t e r r e i c h von 1848  b i s 1918 (Vi e n n a - L e i p z i g , 1919), pp. 110-3; Jenks, A u s t r i a under the Iron Ring, p. 218. 30 On the s o c i a l reform of the 1880's see B r i i g e l , S o z i a l e Gesetz- gebung, pp. 109-51; Jenks, pp. 179-220; and Kolmer, I I I , pp. 370-8. 95 3 1 P r o t o k o l l ( H a i n f e l d ) , 1888/9, p. 4. 32 May, The Hapsburg Monarchy 1867-1914, p. 224. 33 Macartney, The Habsburg Empire 1790-1918, p. 633. 34 The p o i n t was reminiscent of the Gotha programme of 1875. 3 5 P r o t o k o l l ( H a i n f e l d ) , 1888/9, p. 4; P r o t o k o l l (Vienna), 1901, p. 5. The H a i n f e l d programme a l s o c a l l e d f o r Sunday as a day of r e s t . P r o t e c t i v e laws f o r apprentices.and young workers were proposed at the 1901 Congress. 36 P r o t o k o l l (Graz), 1900, p. 106. The t e x t i s i n i b i d . , pp. 104-5. On the o r i g i n s and development of the "German S o c i a l Democratic Worker's Party i n A u s t r i a , " see below Chapter I I I . 37 P r o t o k o l l (Graz), 1900, pp. 128-9. Adler f e l t that the adop-t i o n of the r e s o l u t i o n would cause the party to d i v e r t too much a t t e n -t i o n to the peasants, and would thus harm i t s a g i t a t i o n among workers. Wilhelm Ellenbogen, who d r a f t e d the r e s o l u t i o n , used some very convincing arguments i n favour of i t , arguments which might have been taken more s e r i o u s l y , c o n s i d e r i n g the party's i n c r e a s i n g commitment to u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e . He p o i n t e d out the l i m i t e d s i z e of the i n d u s t r i a l working c l a s s i n C i s l e i t h a n i a , and the even s m a l l e r numbers organized i n trade unions, and contrasted t h i s w i t h the s i z e of the a g r i c u l t u r a l p o p u l a t i o n . Though he d i d not e x p l i c i t l y say so, the i m p l i c a t i o n was that i f the s o c i a l i s t s sought to win power using u n i v e r s a l s u f f r a g e as the means, they had b e t t e r look to the a g r i c u l t u r a l p o p u l a t i o n f o r support. This view i s confirmed by Ellenbogen's d i s c u s s i o n of the e l e c t o r a l system. The seventy-two c o n s t i t u e n c i e s i n the f i f t h (or u n i v e r s a l suffrage) c u r i a were mostly very l a r g e , and i n c l u d e d urban and r u r a l areas. I f the s o c i a l i s t s wished to expand t h e i r r e p r e s e n t a t i o n i n parliament under the e x i s t i n g system, they had to appeal to the r u r a l p o p u l a t i o n . Thus a r e s o l u t i o n to a i d i n a g i t a t i o n among the peasants was necessary. I b i d . , p. 106. 38 Because the "laws of development i n the a g r i c u l t u r a l economy were not yet completely c l e a r , " the r e s o l u t i o n could only be seen as p r o v i s i o n a l . P r o t o k o l l (Graz), 1900, p. 127 (Ellenbogen's speech). At the 1901 Congress, Ellenbogen added that the commission r e s p o n s i b l e f o r the r e s o l u t i o n d i d not wish to see i t adopted as p a r t of the party programme, but r a t h e r as a r e s o l u t i o n . P r o t o k o l l (Vienna), 1901, p. 132. The r e s o l u t i o n was not r e j e c t e d by the Congress, but was simply not i n c l u d e d as a r e s o l u t i o n when the programme was voted on. I b i d . , p. 196. As he had i n 1900, A d l e r argued that the s o c i a l i s t s should w a i t u n t i l the peasants came over to the s o c i a l i s t s of t h e i r own accord, r a t h e r than wasting energy on attempting to win them over. A l l that s o c i a l i s t s had to do was to emphasize that workers and peasants had s i m i l a r i n t e r e s t s . In any case, s o c i a l i s t s had so much to do i n a g i t a t i n g among workers, that a l l t h e i r energies should be concentrated there. I b i d . , p. .9 7. 96 39 40 41 42 P r o t o k o l l (Graz), 1900, p. 112 (Ellenbogen's speech) I b i d . , pp. 110-112. I b i d . , pp. I l l , 113. Bunzel, " D a r s t e l l u n g , " p. 291. The programme was w r i t t e n by Hermann Hartung, a German-born s o c i a l i s t . 43 At Neudbrfl Andreas Scheu r e j e c t e d the 1868 programme as " u n s o c i a l democratic," and.-.advocated the Eisenach programme. Herbert S t e i n e r , "Neudbrfelsky s j e z d Rakouske Socialne Demokraticke delnicke Strany" ("The N e u d b r f l Congress of the A u s t r i a n S o c i a l Democratic ? Party") , Prispevky k dejinamnKSC,• N oL6 - .(1959). p. 118. The a r t i c l e contains a p a r t i a l stenographic report of the Congress. With thanks to P r o f e s s o r Marketa Goetz Stankiewicz of the German depart-ment. 44 Der V o l k s s t a a t , 24 A p r i l 1874. The terminology i s c l e a r l y reminiscent of the Eisenach programme, which i t s e l f was p a r t l y based on the "General Rules" of the F i r s t I n t e r n a t i o n a l . These are r e p r i n t e d i n J u l i u s Braunthal, H i s t o r y of the I n t e r n a t i o n a l 1864-1943 (New York, 1966, 1967), I , Appendix I , pp. 357-60. 45 Der V o l k s s t a a t , 24 A p r i l 1'8.74. 46 Quoted i n Miersch, A r b e i t e r p r e s s e , p. 106. 47 The programme suggested that lower o f f i c i a l s , s m a l l l a n d -owners and a g r i c u l t u r a l workers had a common i n t e r e s t w i t h the working c l a s s . Der V o l k s s t a a t , 6 September 1876. 48 The German party d i d not r e v i s e the 1875 Gotha programme t i l l i t s E r f u r t Congress of 1891. This placed the SPD on a f u l l y M a r x i s t b a s i s . 49 Kautsky, Erinnerungen, pp. 508-9. See also Kautsky, " V i c t o r A d l e r . E r i n n e r u n g s b l a t t e r zu seinem 60. Geburtstag," NZ, XXX:2 (1911-12), pp. 421-2. For the t e x t of the French programme see Dokumente des  Sozialismus (ed. Eduard B e r n s t e i n ) , I (1905), pp. 84-5. B e r c h t o l d , p. 129. "Independent" meant independent of a l l other p a r t i e s . Marx had f e l t t hat the s o c i a l i s t s should co-operate w i t h the p r o g r e s s i v e wing of the bourgeois p a r t i e s , but that.they should not j o i n them. This had been Scheu's standpoint i n the e a r l y 1870's. Dokumente des Sozialismus, p. 84. In a d d i t i o n , the d i r e c t reference i n Marx's programme to the " p o l i t i c a l and economic e x p r o p r i -a t i o n of the c a p i t a l i s t c l a s s " was completely expunged. 97 52 Kautsky, Erinnerungen, p. 508. Kautsky noted that he r e -placed the term "with any means" because he wanted to s t r e s s the moderates' o p p o s i t i o n to t e r r o r i s t i c "deeds." I b i d . , p. 509. 5 3 As Josef Hannieh put i t at H a i n f e l d : ". . .we base ourselves f u l l y on the M a r x i s t standpoint . . . of the m a t e r i a l i s t conception of h i s t o r y . " P r o t o k o l l ( H a i n f e l d ) , 1888/9, p. 8. 54 Braunt h a l , H i s t o r y of the I n t e r n a t i o n a l , I , p. 216; S t e i n e r , Arbeiterbewegung, p. 275. For the f i r s t time there was no German pro-gramme f o r C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s to adapt. Kautsky's p a r t i c i p a t i o n and the clo s e t i e s w i t h the German party were evidence of a contin u i n g Reich-German i n f l u e n c e . Kautsky had emigrated to Germany i n 1883. 5 5 P r o t o k o l l ( H a i n f e l d ) , 1888/9, p. 3. The " D e c l a r a t i o n of P r i n c i p l e s " i s reproduced i n Appendix I I . 56 I b i d . , p. 4. S i x t y - n i n e delegates voted f o r the programme, 3 a g a i n s t , and 1 abstained. I b i d . , p. 26. 57 58 I b i d . , p. 3. Ad l e r to Engels, 29 December 1891, V i c t o r A d l e r . Aufsatze, Reden und B r i e f e , ed. F r i e d r i c h A d l e r , Gustav P o l l a t s c h e k (Vienna, 1922-9), Heft 1, p. 31. H e r e a f t e r A d l e r , Aufsatze. See al s o A d l e r to Engels, 19 March 1894, i b i d . , p. 91. 59 Pa r t y u n i t y was threatened by Czech n a t i o n a l i s m i n 1891 and by l e f t wing r a d i c a l i s m i n 1892, although the people i n v o l v e d represented a t i n y m i n o r i t y i n each case. P r o t o k o l l (Vienna), 1891, pp. 33-41, 161-9; P r o t o k o l l (Vienna), 1892, pp. 13-33, 64-6. The f r a n c h i s e s t r u g g l e o f f e r e d an i s s u e which could d i v e r t a t t e n t i o n away from these kinds of problems. See Mommsen, Sozialdemokratie, pp. 164-6. 60 A d l e r was convinced that the party must i n v o l v e i t s e l f i n the d i s c u s s i o n of reforms without becoming op p o r t u n i s t . A d l e r to Engels, 22 June 1891, A d l e r , Aufsatze, I , p. 25. ^ Ad l e r argued that the r e v i s i o n of the programme was necessary, not because of a change i n the movement's b a s i c theory, nor because of Bernstein's work, but r a t h e r , f o r " a e s t h e t i c " reasons. P r o t o k o l l (Vienna), 1901, pp. 96-7; A r b e i t e r - Z e i t u n g , 22 September 1901. He a l s o f e l t that the separate r e s o l u t i o n s appended to the H a i n f e l d programme should be combined w i t h the D e c l a r a t i o n of P r i n c i p l e s . A d l e r to Kautsky, 1 June 1901, A d l e r , B r i e f w e c h s e l , p. 353. 62 A d l e r denied t h i s , of course, and argued that Engels had already recognized t h i s long before B e r n s t e i n d i d . Bernstein's work was thus superfluous! P r o t o k o l l (Vienna), 1901, p. 101. Kautsky, the c h i e f defender of orthodox Marxism i n the c o n f l i c t w i t h B e r n s t e i n , gave the " o f f i c i a l " s e a l of approval to the programme when he declared that he could f i n d no evidence of "Bernsteinism." I b i d . , p. 122. 98 The i d e o l o g i c a l preamble to the programme i s reproduced i n Appendix I I I . A comparison of the d r a f t of the programme presented to the Congress w i t h the programme adopted makes t h i s obvious. (The d r a f t i s reproduced i n Appendix I V ) . Drawn up by a committee composed of A d l e r , Ellenbogen and Franz Schuhmeier of the German party^ Josef S t e i n e r f o r the Czechs, and Ignaz Daszynski f o r the P o l e s , i t can be c o n s i d e r e d — i n the absence of evidence to the c o n t r a r y — a s r e p r e s e n t a t i v e of the leadership's views. The major i n f l u e n c e was, of course, A d l e r ' s . The d r a f t began by changing the name of the p a r t y . I t dropped the word "Worker's" from the t i t l e . The " d i s g r a c e f u l " c o n d i t i o n s workers l i v e d i n , as expressed both at H a i n f e l d and i n the f i n a l d r a f t , were merely "present" c o n d i t i o n s . The "oppressive" dependency of the worker on the c a p i t a l i s t was merely the " i n c r e a s i n g " dependency (as opposed to the use of the term " s l a v e " at H a i n f e l d ! ) . The reference to the "con-quest of p o l i t i c a l power" i n the programme was not even i n the d r a f t . The phrase, the party s t r u g g l e s f o r the "greatest p o s s i b l e " i n f l u e n c e i n a l l areas of p u b l i c l i f e , was o r i g i n a l l y only a "proper" i n f l u e n c e . A r b e i t e r - Z e i t u n g , 25 August 1901, P r o t o k o l l (Vienna), 1901, pp. 50-2^ The proposal was b i t t e r l y attacked at the Congress. Anton Nemec, one of the Czech l e a d e r s , opposed the r e v i s i o n i n the f i r s t p l a c e , as d i d the Slovene, E t b i n K r i s t a n . I b i d . , pp. 124, 133. Kautsky had pub-l i s h e d a d e t a i l e d c r i t i q u e of the p r o p o s a l , and s e v e r a l l e a d i n g C i s l e i -thanian German s o c i a l i s t s had attacked i t i n the pages of the A r b e i t e r - Zeitung. Cf. Kautsky, "Die R e v i s i o n des Programmes der Sozialdemokratie i n O e s t e r r e i c h , " NZ, XX:1 (1901-2), pp. 68-82. At the SPD's LUbeck Congress B e r n s t e i n approved at l e a s t parts of the d r a f t programme. A r b e i t e r - Z e i t u n g , 27 September 1901. Unfortunately the views of the r a n k - a n d - f i l e delegates to the convention were not heard, so i t i s d i f f i c u l t to judge the general f e e l i n g about the d r a f t . I t i s c l e a r , however, that s e v e r a l prominent party members were s t r o n g l y opposed to various parts of i t , p a r t i c u l a r l y the abandonment of " i n c r e a s i n g misery." U l t i m a t e l y a new commission (with 12 members, i n c l u d i n g the o r i g i n a l 5) was chosen to r e - d r a f t i t . The new proposal was adopted unanimously. P r o t o k o l l (Vienna), 1901, pp. 137, 198. I t i s d i f f i c u l t to determine why Adler's f i r s t d r a f t of the programme was so conservative. Perhaps i t t r u l y r e f l e c t e d h i s views. I t may, however, have been d e l i b e r a t e . A d l e r s a i d i n a l e t t e r to Kautsky that the debate on the p r o p o s a l before the Congress had even occurred had pleased him immensely, "because f i n a l l y we have serious d i s c u s s i o n i n our swamp [ s i c ] once again." In t h i s way the "tendencies to softness ( S c h l a p p i g k e i t ) , which had been s e c r e t l y growing among us, can best be stopped." A d l e r to Kautsky, 22 October 1901, A d l e r , B r i e f w e c h s e l , p. 374. ^ In j u s t i f y i n g t h i s change A d l e r argued that the s o c i a l i s t view of the f r a n c h i s e and of parliament had not changed very much. He then added, however, that "we i n C i s l e i t h a n i a have l i t t l e reason to over-value parliament, but we must . . . maintain t h i s p arliament, be-cause i f we destroy i t , i t i s out of the question that anything more 99 reasonable would f o l l o w i t . . . . E a r l i e r the r a d i c a l s accused the moderates of only being i n t e r e s t e d i n g e t t i n g e l e c t e d , and of seeing i n p arliamentarism the only means to the goal . . . Today we no longer overvalue parliamentarism, and t h e r e f o r e a defence against t h i s view, although i t was necessary at H a i n f e l d , i s completely s u p e r f l u o u s . " P r o t o k o l l (Vienna), 1901, p. 99. ^ Cf. J u l i u s B r aunthai, V i c t o r und F r i e d r i c h A d l e r (Vienna, 1965), pp. 68-73. As l a t e as 1905 the SPD's r e s o l u t i o n on the May Day s t r i k e was ambivalent. Under pressure from the trade union leadership the SPD adopted a r e s o l u t i o n c a l l i n g f o r a work stoppage on 1 May "whereever t h i s i s p o s s i b l e . " Cf. Gay, Dilemma, pp. 237-8. See a l s o C a r l E. Schorske, German S o c i a l Democracy 1905-1917 (New York, 1955), pp. 91-7. fifi P r o t o k o l l (Vienna), 1905, pp. 68-9, 137. The Russian revo-l u t i o n was of enormous importance, p a r t i c u l a r l y i n C i s l e i t h a n i a . I t r e v i v e d the f l a g g i n g enthusiasm among German s o c i a l i s t s f o r the campaign f o r the f r a n c h i s e , and r a d i c a l i z e d the movement. As Franz Schuhmeier put i t at the 1905 party Congress: "We have s a i d enough. A f t e r the news from Russia, our p l a c e i s no longer here, but i n the s t r e e t s of Vienna." I b i d . , p. 122. 6 7 Richard W. Reichard, "The German Working Class and the Russian Revolution of 1905," JCEA, X I I I (1953-4), pp. 146, 149-50. See a l s o Harvey M i t c h e l l , "Labor and the O r i g i n s of S o c i a l Democracy i n B r i t a i n , France and Germany 1890-1914," Workers and P r o t e s t , Harvey M i t c h e l l and P e t e r N. Stearns ( I t a s c a , 1971), pp. 92-100; and Gay, Dilemma, pp. 238-41. 6 8 The government agreed to change the s u f f r a g e , but d e l a y i n g t a c t i c s by opponents i n parliament caused the d i s c u s s i o n to drag on. The s o c i a l i s t p a r t y executive warned that unless a c t i o n was forthcoming, a three day mass s t r i k e would occur i n Vienna. On 14 June 1906 a s o c i a l i s t conference began preparations f o r i t . A committee, composed of both party and trade union l e a d e r s , was e s t a b l i s h e d f o r t h i s purpose. The opponents of e l e c t o r a l reform gave up t h e i r o p p o s i t i o n , and w i t h i n a short time u n i v e r s a l manhood s u f f r a g e became the law of the land. See Deutsch, Gewerkschaftsbewegung, I , pp. 428-35. On the i d e o l o g i c a l d i f f e r e n c e s between the German and C i s l e i t h a n i a n trade union movements see below, Chapter IV. 69 70 Schorske, German S o c i a l Democracy, pp. 45-6. P r o t o k o l l . ( V i e n n a ) , 1905, p. 130. 71 - "Gf.--Robert A. Kann, The M u l t i n a t i o n a l Empire (New York, 1964 ), I I , pp. 3-39. 72 K a r l Marx and F r i e d r i c h Engels, "Manifest der Kommunistischen P a r t e i , " K a r l Marx, F r i e d e r i c h Engels, Werke, p u b l i s h e d under the 100 auspices of the I n s t i t u t f l i r Marxismus-Leninismus beim ZK der SED ( B e r l i n , 195 7- ) , IV, p. 479. The Werke are c i t e d h e r e a f t e r as Ma-rx-Engels Werke. 73 B r i i g e l , Geschichte, I , p. 92. 74 Demokratisches Wochenblatt, 25 J u l y 1868. This statement d i d not imply f a m i l i a r i t y w i t h the Marxi s t view, f o r the manifesto argued that the P o l i s h d e s i r e to r e - e s t a b l i s h an independent P o l i s h s t a t e was r e a c t i o n a r y . The prog r e s s i v e nature of P o l i s h n a t i o n a l i s m was one of the fundamental views h e l d by Engels. See Engels, "Was hat die A r b e i t e r k l a s s e mit Polen zu tun?", Marx-Engels, Werke, XVI, pp. 153-63 [ o r i g i n a l l y p u b l i s h e d i n E n g l i s h i n The Commonwealth, 24 March, 31 March, 5 May, 1866]. 7 5 Bunzel, " D a r s t e l l u n g , " p. 291. 76 Mommsen, Sozialdemokratie, pp. 51-2. 7 7 The B e l g i a n Labour Part y was not e s t a b l i s h e d u n t i l 1885, and a nation-wide Swiss party not ..until. 1888. Cole, S o c i a l i s t Thought, I I , pp. 426, 436; Braunt h a l , H i s t o r y of the I n t e r n a t i o n a l , I , p. 209. The Russian party was not founded t i l l even l a t e r . 78 Der V o l k s s t a a t , 6 September 1876. 79 The N e u d b r f l Congress had als o recognized the p r i n c i p l e of separate o r g a n i z a t i o n s f o r Czechs and Germans. I b i d . , 24 A p r i l 1874. 80 B r i i g e l , Geschichte, I I I , p. 82. 81 At the 1882 Briinn Congress of the moderate f a c t i o n , Czech and German s o c i a l i s t s s p l i t over the n a t i o n a l i t y question. Kautsky's programme contained no reference to i t , and Czech s o c i a l i s t s demanded that t h i s be changed. For some reason the Germans refused, and the Czechs r e j e c t e d the programme. Cf. Mommsen, Sozialdemokratie, p. 95; Be r c h t o l d , pp. 129-30. The Reich-German party o r g a n s i n - e x i l e p u b l i s h e d a t a c t f u l and misleading report of the Congress: "The di s c u s s i o n s a t the Congress were c a r r i e d on i n the German and Czech languages. There was no t r a c e of n a t i o n a l r i v a l r y , but because the t r a n s l a t i o n of speeches conside r a b l y lengthened the debates, i t was decided that from henceforth Czechs and Germans would only h o l d common congresses when they wished to a l t e r the programme." Der Sozialdemokrat ( Z i i r i c h ) , 26 October 1882. 82 Quoted i n S o l l e , "Die Sozialdemokratie i n der Habsburger Monarchie und die tschechische Frage," p. 334. 83 Cf. Mommsen, Sozialdemokratie, pp. 136-42. 84 Only Josef Hannich, /a Bohemian German, complained about the l a c k of a t t e n t i o n to the n a t i o n a l i t y question at H a i n f e l d . Even then, 101 he only argued that the I n t e r n a t i o n a l standpoint of the party had been i n s u f f i c i e n t l y expressed. P r o t o k o l l ( H a i n f e l d ) , 1888 /9 , p. 8. 85 86 87 88 I b i d . , p. 3. A d l e r to Engels, 22 June 1891, A d l e r , Aufsatze, I , p. 25. See below, Chapter I I I . A r t h u r G. Kogan, "The S o c i a l Democrats and the C o n f l i c t of N a t i o n a l i t i e s i n the Habsburg Monarchy," J M , XXI ( 1949 ) , p. 205. 89 Mommsen quotes a governmental report of 1899 i n which i t was noted that s o c i a l democratic a g i t a t i o n had been pushed i n t o the background by n a t i o n a l s t r u g g l e i n Bohemia. Mommsen, Sozialdemokratie, p. 294, note. 2.7 90 I b i d . , pp. 306 -13 . See a l s o A d l e r to Kautsky, 21 J u l y 189 7, A d l e r , B r i e f w e c h s e l , p. 233 ; Kautsky to A d l e r , 5 August 1897, i b i d . , p. 236. See a l s o below, Chapter V, s e c t i o n i i . 91 P r o t o k o l l (Brunn), 1899, pp. x i v - x v . 92 In parentheses f o l l o w i n g t h i s statement was the expression " N a t i o n a l i t a t e n - B u n d e s s t a a f . " I b i d . , p. x i v . 93 I b i d . The " f i v e p o i n t s " are reproduced i n Appendix V. 94 I b i d . , pp. 75 -8 . 95 Only one German delegate recognized t h i s . Engelbert Perner-s t o r f e r argued that s o c i a l i s t s must d i s t i n g u i s h between the language question and the n a t i o n a l i t y question. The only way to secure the e x i s -tence of each people was to define a s p e c i f i c t e r r i t o r y f o r i t . "Cer-t a i n l y we Germans . . . could say that i t i s n ' t so necessary f o r us. But the Czech people have no s t a t e , and i t i s t h e r e f o r e p e r f e c t l y under-standable that t h e i r middle c l a s s p a r t i e s have made demands f o r such a s t a t e . Czech s o c i a l democrats . . . i n so f a r as they f e e l themselves to be a n a t i o n , have i n t h e i r i n t e r e s t the establishment of a c o n s o l i -dated s t a t e . " I b i d . , p. 87. 96 Extreme n a t i o n a l i s t Czech s o c i a l i s t s saw the d e c l a r a t i o n as "treachery," and proceeded to found a "Czech N a t i o n a l S o c i a l i s t P a r t y " i n 1898. J a r o s l a v P o l a c h , "The Beginnings of Trade Unionism among the Slavs of the A u s t r i a n Empire," SR, XIV. (1955), p. 246, Edouard Benes, "Le mouvement o u v r i e r tchecoslovaque," Le Monde Slave, I ( 1918 ) , pp. 4 5 8 - 9 . The N a t i o n a l S o c i a l i s t s were a r e a l t h r e a t to Czech s o c i a l demo-cracy. In the 1901 I m p e r i a l e l e c t i o n s they won 5 seats i n Bohemia, w h i l e Czech s o c i a l i s t s l o s t both t h e i r s e a t s . In 1911 they won 17 seats to the s o c i a l i s t s ' 26 . The o r i g i n a l purpose of the d e c l a r a t i o n was to 102 break a l l t i e s w i t h the Young Czech p a r t y . P r o t o k o l l (Brunn), 1899, p. 79 (Nemec's speech). Mommsen argues that the Czechs r e j e c t e d the Sta a t s r e c h t because i t meant the abandonment of the Czech m i n o r i t i e s i n Vienna and Lower A u s t r i a . Mommsen, Sozialdemokratie, p. 406. 9 7 P r o t o k o l l (Brunn), 1899, pp. 79-80. 98 I b i d . , p. 93. 99 A r b e i t e r - Z e i t u n g , 24 September 1899. The a r t i c l e was o r i g i -n a l l y p u b l i s h e d i n Pravo L i d u , the Czech party organ, but was t r a n s l a t e d and r e p r i n t e d i n the A r b e i t e r - Z e i t u n g . The migration of Czechs i n t o German Bohemia was of profound s i g n i f i c a n c e . The apparent t h r e a t to the s u r v i v a l of the German n a t i o n a l i t y i n the p r o v i n c e * — a s Czech Bohemia i n d u s t r i a l i z e d the migrations slowed to a t r i c k l e a f t e r about 1880 or 1890—deeply a f f e c t e d the consciousness of both Czechs and Germans. To many Germans i t was the outstanding example of the beleagured p o s i t i o n of the Germans i n the Monarchy. To the Czechs i t was symbolic of the emancipation of t h e i r people, and t h e i r t e r r i t o r y , from a l i e n r u l e , and hence had an e x h i l a r a t i n g e f f e c t on the Czech n a t i o n a l i s t movement. The impact of the Czech migrations on German workers i n Bohemia was one of the reasons f o r the b i r t h of a N a t i o n a l S o c i a l i s t German Worker's movement i n the province. I t s l i n k s w i t h Nazism are explored by Whiteside i n h i s A u s t r i a n N a t i o n a l S o c i a l i s m before 1918. In cont r a s t to Ithe Czech N a t i o n a l S o c i a l i s t P a r t y , the "German Worker's P a r t y " d i d not become s i g n i f i c a n t before 1914. 100: P r o t o k o l l (Brunn), 1899, pp. 82-4, 108. 101 I b i d . , p. 84. 102 I b i d . , pp. 84-5. 103 I b i d . , pp. xv, 85. 104 I b i d . , p. 86. 105 I b i d . , pp. x v - x v i . The r e v i s e d " f i v e p o i n t s " are reproduced i n Appendix VI. Mommsen, Sozialdemokratie , p. 332. ^ 7 P r o t o k o l l (Brunn), 1899, p. 82. Some German delegates were not so s u b t l e . Robert P r e u s s l e r , f o r example, argued that the few Czechs i n L i n z should not have the r i g h t to e s t a b l i s h t h e i r own e l e c t o r a l d i s -t r i c t o r g a n i z a t i o n and send delegates to the Congress. Both K a r l Vanek and Josef Krapka responded a n g r i l y to t h i s suggestion. I b i d . , pp. 92-3. 10 8 See below, Chapter V. CHAPTER I I I SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY ORGANIZATION IN CISLEITHANIA The development of s o c i a l i s t party o r g a n i z a t i o n i n C i s l e i t h a n i a was complicated by the nature of i n d u s t r i a l development and the m u l t i -n a t i o n a l character of the s t a t e . E a r l i e r i t was noted that i n d u s t r i a l -i z a t i o n began i n the German and Czech-speaking north-western s e c t i o n of the Monarchy. As a r e s u l t , when the s o c i a l i s t movement began i t was l a r g e l y German and Czech i n composition. As i n d u s t r i a l i z a t i o n spread from west to east i n the Monarchy, however, the s o c i a l i s t movement became e t h n i c a l l y and l i n g u i s t i c a l l y more and more complex. Beginning w i t h the foundation of the C i s l i e t h a n i a n party i n 1874, Czech and German s o c i a l i s t s agreedtthat Czech s o c i a l i s t s should have t h e i r own n a t i o n a l o r g a n i z a t i o n w i t h i n the C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r t y . For s e v e r a l reasons, however, when i t became p o s s i b l e to e s t a b l i s h a d e f i n i t e party o r g a n i z a t i o n i n 1892, t h i s t r a d i t i o n was at f i r s t ignored. A cen-t r a l i s t i c p a r t y o r g a n i z a t i o n , i n s p i r e d by the Reich-German model, was adopted. InnaamuMi-tnational s o c i a l i s t movement t h i s model proved to be inadequate. Under pressure from Czech s o c i a l i s t s i n p a r t i c u l a r , the pre-dominant German element i n the party was forced to the r e a l i z a t i o n that party o r g a n i z a t i o n would have to take account of the m u l t i - e t h n i c i t y of the movement. As a r e s u l t , C i s l i e t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t s developed a form of party o r g a n i z a t i o n which was unique i n Europe. 103 104 i ) P a r t y Organization 1867-1891 The new laws of 1867, g r a n t i n g workers the r i g h t to form l o c a l n o n - p o l i t i c a l a s s o c i a t i o n s , l e d to an upswing i n a c t i v i t y among workers. E d u c a t i o n a l ^ a s s o c i a t i o r i s wereC fo rmedn i nb-theamajofniindus'trial ' eGe f f tres ; t h e i r a c t i v i t y soon became p o l i t i c a l , and contacts among them began to expand. Attempts to e s t a b l i s h bodies which could co-ordinate a c t i v i t y and propaganda among the various o r g a n i z a t i o n s — a prominent example was the Vienna " A g i t a t i o n Committee" of 1868—were p r o h i b i t e d by the a u t h o r i t i e s . The premature and perhaps i l l - c o n s i d e r e d move to organize Austro-German s o c i a l i s t s as p a r t of the Eisenach party a l s o foundered on the r e s i s t a n c e of the government. Following the Eisenach f i a s c o and the establishment of the German Empire i n 1871, Austro-German s o c i a l i s t s turned t h e i r a t t e n t i o n away from Germany, and began to t h i n k of the c r e a t i o n of a C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t p a r t y . As p r e v i o u s l y noted, the experience of the Franco-Prussian War and the P a r i s Commune had brought Czech s o c i a l i s t s around to the same view, and had considerably modified t h e i r o r i g i n a l l y c r i t i c a l a t t i t u d e towards Austro-German s o c i a l i s t s . As a r e s u l t , when a C i s l e i t h a n i a n party was founded at the Neud o r f l Congress of 1874, i t was b i - n a t i o n a l i n compo-s i t i o n . Although the Neudorfl Congress e s t a b l i s h e d a c e n t r a l l e a d e r s h i p f o r the p a r t y — w i t h i t s seat at G r a z — i t i s not s u r p r i s i n g that no de-t a i l e d o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e was adopted. The government had ex-pressed i t s a t t i t u d e to the ide a of a s o c i a l i s t party by f o r b i d d i n g the congress i n the f i r s t p l a c e , and i t was c l e a r that f u r t h e r government 105 a c t i o n would be forthcoming. At the same time, e x i s t i n g l e g a l r e s t r i c -t i o n s made i t v i r t u a l l y impossible to s p e c i f y the forms of o r g a n i z a t i o n . The l i m i t e d s c a l e of the s o c i a l i s t movement was a l s o a f a c t o r . 1 The most important, and indeed, the unique aspect of the N e u d o r f l Congress was the d e f i n i t i o n of the r e l a t i o n s h i p between Czechs and Germans i n the new p a r t y . As the programme put i t : [The p a r t y ] sees . . . no o b s t a c l e to [our] common s t r u g g l e f o r m a t e r i a l l i b e r a t i o n i n the o r g a n i z a t i o n of our comrades by n a t i o n a l i t y . On the c o n t r a r y , i t recognizes that the only guarantee of success i s a b r o t h e r l y co-operation i n which ^ a l l n a t i o n a l working cl a s s e s have equal r i g h t s and d u t i e s . The s o c i a l i s t s intended to define the r e l a t i o n s h i p between Czechs and Germans i n more d e t a i l at t h e i r next congress. S h o r t l y a f t e r the N e u d b r f l Congress, however, the new executive of the party was a r r e s t e d , and the programme outlawed. In t h i s s i t u a t i o n the s o c i a l i s t s decided to h o l d another i l l e g a l congress i n Hungary. This time, however, the governments of the two halves of the Monarchy co-operated w i t h each other, and the congress was broken up by p o l i c e . By the time of the Wiener Neustadt Congress of 1876 German s o c i a l i s t s had v i r t u a l l y abandoned the i d e a of a C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r t y , as w e l l as 3 any r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h Czech s o c i a l i s t s . P a r t l y as a r e s u l t of t h i s , Czech s o c i a l i s t s founded t h e i r own party i n 1878, although they emphasized that i t was an i n t e g r a l p a r t 4 of the C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r t y . S h o r t l y a f t e r the Congress, which was h e l d i n s e c r e t , the p o l i c e discovered a l i s t of the p a r t i c i p a n t s , and they were a l l arrested."' The a r r e s t s symbolized the d i f f i c u l t i e s faced by s o c i a l i s t s i n C i s l e i t h a n i a i n t h i s p e r i o d . For the movement to h o l d an i l l e g a l 106 congress was to i n v i t e arrest and t r i a l f o r treasonous a c t i v i t y . To hold a l e g a l congress was to be so r e s t r i c t e d by p o l i c e . interference that i t served l i t t l e purpose. I t was at le a s t possible to e s t a b l i s h a party leadership, provided that the leaders were w i l l i n g to spend most of t h e i r time i n j a i l . In face of the association laws, and the way i n which the government applied them'JtoosociaMststtife£wasufut:i0.eoto attempt to define a s p e c i f i c organization. I t i s not s u r p r i s i n g , therefore, that many s o c i a l i s t s l o s t patience with the system at the end of the 1870's. In 1882 the s o c i a l i s t movement s p l i t into two h o s t i l e f a c t i o n s , the r a d i c a l s and the moderates. The former argued that any concept of a p u b l i c , open party was r i d i c u l o u s i n the s i t u a t i o n which existed, while the l a t t e r maintained that the previous arrangement should be retained. The c o n f l i c t began to be resolved when a serie s of murders and other t e r r o r i s t acts i n 1883 and 1884 led to the p r o s c r i p t i o n of the s o c i a l i s t movement, and i t s v i r t u a l disappearance from p u b l i c view. Ultimately, the suppression of the s o c i a l i s t "party" d i s c r e d i t e d the r a d i c a l s , and when the factions re-united at Hainfeld there was no question that henceforth the party would be a p u b l i c , mass organization which rejected acts of t e r r o r . This became evident as early as 1886 when several new s o c i a l i s t newspapers were founded, among them V i c t o r Adler's G l e i c h h e i t i n Vienna. Adler developed good r e l a t i o n s with a former Czech r a d i c a l , Josef Hybes, and as time passed a move to unity developed. This found expression i n the f i r s t p u b l i c s o c i a l i s t party congress since 1882, the Czech Unity Congress i n Brunn, held i n 1887. At t h i s 107 Congress the only o r g a n i z a t i o n a l content was a r e i t e r a t i o n of a s t a t e -ment f i r s t made at Brevnov i n 1878. The Czech s o c i a l i s t movement was a "part of the [ C i s l e i t h a n i a n ] s o c i a l democratic p a r t y , but has i t s . „. „6 own o r g a n i z a t i o n . A f t e r the s u c c e s s f u l r e c o n c i l i a t i o n of the Czech f a c t i o n s , a C i s l e i t h a n i a n Unity Congress was h e l d i n H a i n f e l d at the end of 1888. As there was as yet no p a r t y , both l e g a l l y and i n p r a c t i c e , the congress was c a l l e d by the le a d i n g s o c i a l i s t newspapers. O r g a n i z a t i o n a l d e c i -sions made at H a i n f e l d were ra t h e r l i m i t e d . A programme was adopted, however, and a r e s o l u t i o n supporting the trade union movement was passed. The u n i t y of the two former f a c t i o n s was announced, but because the e x c e p t i o n a l laws and the a n t i - a n a r c h i s t laws were s t i l l i n f o r c e , no concrete party o r g a n i z a t i o n was e s t a b l i s h e d . 7 As a r e s u l t , the st a t u s of the Czech o r g a n i z a t i o n was not c l a r i f i e d . I t was unclear whether or not i t was merely a p r o v i n c i a l branch of the H a i n f e l d p a r t y , or a f u l l -g f l e d g ed Czech s o c i a l i s t p a r t y w i t h i n the C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r t y . Although i t was obvious who the le a d i n g f i g u r e s i n the party were, no c e n t r a l l e a d e r s h i p body was e s t a b l i s h e d , and no lea d e r s h i p e l e c t e d . A f t e r the H a i n f e l d Congress the party remained a loose grouping of independent a s s o c i a t i o n s and unions, although the tendency f o r the more prominent f i g u r e s to concentrate i n the e d i t o r i a l committees of the various p a r t y papers was strengthened. The only r e a l u n i f y i n g f a c t o r was the H a i n f e l d programme. The c e n t r a l i z a t i o n of l e a d e r s h i p i n the e d i t o r i a l committees of the party newspapers was given formal expression i n r e s o l u t i o n s 108 9 passed at the 1891 C i s l e i t h a n i a n party Congress. The c e n t r a l party organs were now the A r b e i t e r - Z e i t u n g f o r the Germans, and Rovnost ( E q u a l i t y ) f o r the Czechs."^ In a d d i t i o n , the 1891 Congress began the process of d e f i n i n g the party's o r g a n i z a t i o n , i f only i n a l i m i t e d way. A member of the party was i n t e r p r e t e d as one who "acknowledges the p r i n c i p l e s of H a i n f e l d . M o r e o v e r , i t was recommended that p o l i -t i c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s be founded, where p o s s i b l e to cover e n t i r e p r o v i n -12 ces. i i ) The Move to a Federal Organization 1892-1897 In June of 1891 an event of s i g n a l importance f o r the develop-ment of s o c i a l i s t p a r t y o r g a n i z a t i o n occurred. For s e v e r a l years the government had faced l i b e r a l o p p o s i t i o n i n parliament to the s t a t e of m a r t i a l law (Ausnahmezustand) i n the Vienna r e g i o n , and to the a n t i -a n a r c h i s t laws. When the l e g i s l a t i o n came up f o r renewal i n June of 1891 i t was c l e a r that opinion was against the laws, and they were 13 allowed to lapse. In the atmosphere created by t h i s event, A d l e r and the other leaders of the s o c i a l i s t movement s e i z e d t h e i r opportunity, and success-f u l l y proceeded to e s t a b l i s h a d e f i n i t e party o r g a n i z a t i o n . In h i s address to the 1892 party congress, A d l e r pointed out the dangers of doing.;so,but argued that i t was now both p o s s i b l e and necessary: I say to you openly, I don't t h i n k that the r u l e of law i s so secure . . . that we can permit ourselves to do what other p a r t i e s do without t h i n k i n g . I don't know whether or not t h i s executive committee f o r the G e s a m m t p a r t e i— i f you decide to create i t t o d a y — w i l l be a r r e s t e d s h o r t l y t h e r e a f t e r on 109 some p r e t e x t or other. This i s why we have not done t h i s b efore. But I now b e l i e v e that t h i s executive i s neces-sary . . . P r e v i o u s l y we could not r i s k such a t h i n g , but today, even i f they were to lo c k up a l l the leaders of our o r g a n i z a t i o n s , we should only be stopped f o r a week or so, f o r there are hundreds of people behind us who could take up the task again. For these reasons, we can move a step f u r t h e r today, and give ourselves an o r g a n i z a t i o n l i k e other p a r t i e s have.-'-4 The o r g a n i z a t i o n a l forms adopted at the 1892 Congress were p a r t l y based on those of the Reich-German p a r t y . In both co u n t r i e s the party could not b u i l d i t s o r g a n i z a t i o n around the e x i s t i n g p o l i -t i c a l a s s o c i a t i o n s , f o r contacts between and among them were i l l e g a l . As a r e s u l t , a completely new form or o r g a n i z a t i o n was necessary. 1"* At the bottom of the h i e r a r c h y e s t a b l i s h e d by the 1892 Congress were the members of l o c a l s o c i a l i s t a s s o c i a t i o n s . As i n the German pa r t y , these e l e c t e d Vertrauenspersonen, or "persons of co n f i d e n c e . " 1 ^ U n l i k e the German party s t r u c t u r e , i n which there were no bodies i n t e r v e n i n g between the Vertrauenspersonen and the party e x e c u t i v e , there were s e v e r a l l o c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n a l forms i n C i s l e i t h a n i a . In the C i s l e i t h a n i a n party the Vertrauenspersonen i n an area c o n s t i t u t e d the B e z i r k , or " d i s t r i c t , " o r g a n i z a t i o n . This group chose delegates to form the Land, o r p r o v i n c i a l , o r g a n i z a t i o n . This i n turn e l e c t e d an a g i t a t i o n committee, which concerned i t s e l f w i t h a g i t a t i o n and or-gan i z at i onal ' . o m a t t e rsujrihthef'Land. The Land o r g a n i z a t i o n had broad powers. I t c o l l e c t e d money f o r a g i t a t i o n f o r the d i s t r i c t o r g a n i z a t i o n s , and al s o sent funds to the c e n t r a l p a rty executive. I t a l s o was entru s t e d w i t h the task of c a l l i n g Land conferences, which would deal w i t h Land b u s i n e s s . 1 7 In cases 110 where the issues i n the Land concerned the whole of C i s l e i t h a n i a , the Land o r g a n i z a t i o n could send r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s to speak to the party l e a d e r s h i p . The party congress was to meet every two y e a r s , but e x t r a -ordinary congresses could be c a l l e d i f the m a j o r i t y of the Land or-g a n i z a t i o n s agreed. Delegates to the party congresses would be chosen by the l o c a l o r g a n i z a t i o n s , u s u a l l y below the d i s t r i c t l e v e l . The party congress was to be the f i n a l a r b i t e r i n a l l matters. While the Land o r g a n i z a t i o n s could reverse any d e c i s i o n s made by the d i s t r i c t , 18 the party congress could overturn Land r u l i n g s . At the top of the h i e r a r c h y was the party executive. Composed of nine members, i t s purpose was to carry out the business of the party 19 as a whole. In a concession to those who were opposed to the concen-t r a t i o n of power i n the p r e s s , i t was decided that e d i t o r i a l personnel 20 could form only o n e - t h i r d of the party l e a d e r s h i p . This l e a d e r s h i p was to be r e s p o n s i b l e to the party congress, and had to d e l i v e r a report to each congress. As a f u r t h e r l i m i t a t i o n on i t s power a f i v e member C o n t r o l Commission would be chosen to oversee a l l aspects of the c e n t r a l executive's a c t i v i t y , except f o r i t s management of the 21 day-to-day business of the p a r t y . This Commission was to be l o c a t e d i n North Bohemia, w h i l e the party l e a d e r s h i p i t s e l f would be i n 22 Vienna." Although many of the forms of o r g a n i z a t i o n adopted at the 1892 Congress were based on the o r g a n i z a t i o n of the Reich-German p a r t y , the new C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r ty o r g a n i z a t i o n was much more " f e d e r a l i s t i c " I l l than i t s model. Even though the German party's s t r u c t u r e was intended to be " c e n t r a l i s t i c , " the f a i l u r e to e s t a b l i s h o r g a n i z a t i o n a l forms be-tween the party executive and the Vertrauensmanner i n the e l e c t o r a l 23 d i s t r i c t s was a l s o based on the f a c t that there was no uniform asso-c i a t i o n s law i n the Reich, as there was i n C i s l e i t h a n i a . As time passed, s o c i a l i s t s i n the more l i b e r a l German s t a t e s began to develop i n t e r -mediate forms—by 1900, f o r example, Wurttemberg s o c i a l i s t s had estab-24 l i s h e d a Land o r g a n i z a t i o n — b u t , g e n e r a l l y speaking, the German party remained more c e n t r a l i s t i c than i t s C i s l e i t h a n i a n counterpart. Far more s i g n i f i c a n t than the question of whether or not the party was more f e d e r a l i s t i c or c e n t r a l i s t i c , was the f a i l u r e to consider n a t i o n a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n the new o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t a t u t e s . Indeed, when a twelve member committee was chosen to recommend candidates f o r the c e n t r a l e x e c u t i v e , i t named nine members, a l l Germans, although one 25 Czech and one Pole were members of the Committee! The f a i l u r e to in c l u d e a Pole i n the leadership was perhaps understandable, f o r the P o l i s h o r g a n i z a t i o n was s t i l l i n i t s i n f a n c y , and no prominent P o l i s h s o c i a l i s t s l i v e d i n Vienna. In any case, the P o l i s h s o c i a l i s t s declared that t h e i r acceptance of the new o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e could not be as wholehearted as th a t of other n a t i o n a l i t i e s , for'cthey had to consider 26 t h e i r r e l a t i o n s w i t h c o - n a t i o n a l s o u t s i d e the Empire. In a f u r t h e r expression of t h e i r own p a r t i c u l a r p o s i t i o n the Poles suggested that the d e f i n i t i o n of d i s t r i c t ~ o r g a n i z a t i o n s o b e : m o d i f i e d so that they could extend across Crown Land boundaries i f the l i n g u i s t i c / n a t i o n a l s i t u a t i o n 27 made t h i s e s s e n t i a l . The complication t h i s would create f o r the Land o r g a n i z a t i o n s was not considered, although the proposal was adopted. 112 The f a i l u r e to e l e c t a Czech r e p r e s e n t a t i v e to the party executive has been explained by one h i s t o r i a n as p o s s i b l y the r e s u l t of a countermove on Adler's p a r t to the absence of a strong Czech de l e -2 8 g a t i o n to the Congress. This s t i l l does not e x p l a i n , however, why n a t i o n a l d i f f e r e n c e s were not considered when the o r g a n i z a t i o n a l 29 s t a t u t e s were drawn up i n the f i r s t p l a c e . In any case, the Czechs d i d not express any d i s s a t i s f a c t i o n w i t h t h e i r e x c l u s i o n from the cen-t r a l e xecutive. The Czech s o c i a l i s t s had sent only three delegates to the Congress, 30 two of whom were among Adler's strongest supporters. They had deported themselves as guests, t a k i n g only a s m a l l p a r t i n the debate. Their f a i l u r e to appear i n any numbers was explained by Edmund Zelbr from Brunn. He s a i d that the Czechs had j u s t had t h e i r own congress, and didn't f e e l i t necessary to send a l a r g e d e l e g a t i o n . In r e a l i t y , however, the Czechs were emphasizing t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n a l independence from the 32 Germans. As r e c e n t l y as 1887 Czech s o c i a l i s t s had po i n t e d out that they were a par t of the C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r t y , but had t h e i r own o r g a n i z a t i o n . Because of the i n t e r n a t i o n a l i s t i n f l u e n c e of Josef Hybes and the Brunn s o c i a l i s t s i n the Czech movement, however, t h i s idea had not found ex-p r e s s i o n at the H a i n f e l d Congress. This r e t r e a t from the conept of a separate Czech party had been f o r m a l i z e d by the d e c i s i o n of a conference of e d i t o r i a l committees i n Brunn i n August 1890 that the Czechs would no 33 longer h o l d separate party congresses. Many Czech workers were h o s t i l e to the id e a of the disappear-ance of an o r g a n i z a t i o n a l l y - d i s t i n c t Czech p a r t y . In l a t e 1890 a group 113 committed to the re-establishment of a separate Czech party formed i n Prague. The prolonged c o n f l i c t which then began was d i r e c t e d as much against Brunn's primacy i n the Czech s o c i a l i s t movement as i t was against the s t r i c t l y i n t e r n a t i o n a l approach taken by the Brunn lea d e r s . At the 1891 C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r ty Congress the c o n f l i c t erupted i n a f u l l - s c a l e debate among Czech delegates, although i t ended w i t h the 34 defeat of the extreme n a t i o n a l i s t s when they walked out of the Congress. When Czech s o c i a l i s t s set about implementing the 1891 Congress's d e c i -s i o n to f o r m a l l y c e n t r a l i z e l e a dership i n the e d i t o r i a l committees of the p r e s s , however, the Czech movement s p l i t . Czech s o c i a l i s t s i n Vienna, Prague and Brunn a l l claimed the r i g h t to e s t a b l i s h the Czech l e a d e r s h i p 35 i n t h e i r own press. A compromise was arranged, however, and a Czech conference was c a l l e d f o r Christmas 1891 to discuss the matter. This conference, o r i g i n a l l y planned as a Land conference, u l t i -mately became a f u l l - s c a l e congress of Czech s o c i a l democracy, and as such, served n o t i c e on the C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r ty that the Czechs were now beginning to t h i n k i n more n a t i o n a l terms. While the Congress s t i l l adhered to the H a i n f e l d programme, o r g a n i z a t i o n a l l y the Czechs agreed that : The Czechoslav Worker's Part y i s a branch of [ C i s l e i t h a n i a n ] s o c i a l democracy, but i t has i t s own o r g a n i z a t i o n . Each n a t i o n a l must independently create i t s own o r g a n i z a t i o n , but i n face of the common enemy a l l n ations . . . must be united.36 Although the Congress a c t u a l l y agreed that leadership should be c e n t r a l -i z e d i n the s o c i a l i s t p r ess, i t f a i l e d of i t s o r i g i n a l purpose when the 37 North Bohemian de l e g a t i o n walked out. 114 As a consequence of the i n t e r n a t i o n a l i s t s o c i a l i s t s ' r e f u s a l to attend a proposed u n i t y conference i n Prague i n September. 1892, the extreme n a t i o n a l i s t f a c t i o n i n that c i t y l e f t the party and organized on t h e i r own. This weakened the Prague branch of the Czech movement, and r e s u l t e d i n a strengthening of Brunn's p o s i t i o n . Although the new party q u i c k l y d e c l i n e d i n t o i n s i g n i f i c a n c e , the i n t e r n a t i o n a l i s t s among the Czech s o c i a l i s t s had p a i d a p r i c e f o r t h e i r v i c t o r y . In defeating the n a t i o n a l i s t s "they took over the i n h e r i t a n c e of the defeated: the 38 demand f o r g r e a t e r independence." This was i n d i c a t e d by a conference of Vertrauensmanner at Briinn i n November 1892. The delegates adopted a new o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e based on that of the C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r t y , but they emphasized that the Czech party had the r i g h t to decide i t s own s t a t u t e s of o r g a n i z a t i o n , 39 and indeed, i t s own t a c t i c s . This was tantamount to a d e c l a r a t i o n of independence. A congress of Czech or g a n i z a t i o n s was now. necessary to approve the new s t a t u t e s , and to define the r e l a t i o n s h i p w i t h the C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r t y . In December 1893 Czech s o c i a l i s t s met i n Budweis (Ceske Bud-e j o v i c e ) i n Bohemia. With the adoption of the 1892 C i s l e i t h a n i a n or-g a n i z a t i o n a l s t a t u t e s , and the e l e c t i o n of a Czech party e x e c u t i v e , t'he Czechoslav S o c i a l Democratic Worker's Party f o r m a l l y came i n t o e x i s -40 tence. The new Czech party was not to be q u i t e as independent as the Briinn d e c i s i o n on t a c t i c s and o r g a n i z a t i o n had suggested. At the very beginning of the Congress i t was decided that only those who recognized 115 41 the Hainfeld programme would be allowed to p a r t i c i p a t e . Furthermore, the Brunn statement was modified to the s i g n i f i c a n t extent that t a c t i c s would now be decided upon i n agreement with "the German-Austrian com-42 rades." In a further and fundamental concession to internationalism, the new Czechoslav party r e i t e r a t e d that only a C i s l e i t h a n i a n party 43 congress could modify the party programme. These developments among the Czechs, while somewhat reassuring, obviously put pressure on the c e n t r a l party executive i n Vienna to seek accommodation with them. As a r e s u l t , the 1894 C i s l e i t h a n i a n party Congress—at which the Czechs appeared i n s t r e n g t h — t o o k the l i n e of l e a s t resistance, and approved everything the Czechs had done at Bud-44 weis. In so doing, the organizational r e l a t i o n s h i p between the Czechs and the C i s l e i t h a n i a n party was f i n a l l y c l a r i f i e d , on the basis of unity of programme, agreement on t a c t i c s , and independence i n organi-zation. In order to bring the party structure into l i n e with the approval of the decisions of the Budweis Congress, the 1894 Congress replaced the previous Land organization with Kreis organizations. These could consist of whatever part of a Crown Land (or Crown Lands) was deemed necessary by the organization involved. In addition to s a t i s f y i n g the Czechs, i t was hoped, t h i s decision would also enable the P o l i s h or-46 ganization to include both G a l i c i a and the P o l i s h part of S i l e s i a . Ominously, however, t h i s concession, and the expressed inten-t i o n to e l e c t representatives of the n a t i o n a l i t i e s to the c e n t r a l execu-t i v e , did not s a t i s f y the Czechs. In f a c t , t h e i r behaviour at the 116 Congress i n d i c a t e d t h e i r d e s i r e to both emphasize and enlarge t h e i r party's autonomy. At the very beginning of the Congress Josef S t e i n e r suggested that the delegates should vote by n a t i o n a l i t y on important questions. By i m p l i c a t i o n , t h i s meant that they should vote by " n a t i o n a l p a r t y . " V i c t o r A d l e r was able to o b t a i n a compromise, however, when 47 he suggested that t h i s be l i m i t e d to questions of o r g a n i z a t i o n . Never-t h e l e s s , at the beginning of the debate on o r g a n i z a t i o n , Rudolf Smetana (a Vienna Czech) s t a t e d that the Czechs would not take part i n the debate, because they had t h e i r own o r g a n i z a t i o n , and d i d not want to 48 i n f l u e n c e the Germans! This suggested, of course, that the Congress was a German congress. I t a l s o contained the i m p l i c a t i o n that the German "pa r t y " would have to n e g o t i a t e w i t h the Czechs a f t e r the Congress 49 ended. A d l e r f r u s t r a t e d t h i s move by arguing that the Czechs should at l e a s t remain f o r the d i s c u s s i o n . The Czechs, not wanting an open u i • A 5 0 break, acquiesced. Another i n d i c a t i o n of the Czech s o c i a l i s t s ' d e s i r e to emphasize t h e i r autonomy was given at the Congress. They refused to take part i n the e l e c t i o n of an executive which r e f l e c t e d the m u l t i - n a t i o n a l s t r u c t u r e of the p a r t y . This was the most s i g n i f i c a n t aspect of t h e i r behaviour at the Congress, f o r t h i s was the o s t e n s i b l e purpose of the 51 Congress i n the f i r s t p l a c e ! Josef Hybes explained why the Czechs refused to take p a r t . He s a i d that they had t h e i r own o r g a n i z a t i o n 52 i n the p a r t y , and d i d not want to i n f l u e n c e the e l e c t i o n s ! In s p i t e of the Czech r e f u s a l , two Czechs—Smetana and K a r l Vanek—and one Pole 53 (Ignaz Daszynski) were e l e c t e d to the new executive. 117 Adler's a d r o i t manoeuvring c e r t a i n l y helped to f r u s t r a t e the Czech s o c i a l i s t s ' attempts both to demonstrate and to enlarge t h e i r independence at the Congress. Another important f a c t o r , however, was the f a c t that the Poles d i d not support the Czech s t r a t e g y . T h e i r a i d had been expected, e s p e c i a l l y because of the P o l e s ' continued em-phasis t h a t t h e i r s i t u a t i o n was a s p e c i a l one. P o l i s h support was not forthcoming, however, because the weak P o l i s h o r g a n i z a t i o n was o r g a n i z a t i o n a l l y and f i n a n c i a l l y very dependent upon the r e l a t i v e l y wealthy German o r g a n i z a t i o n , and d i d not want to j e o p a r d i z e that i v.- 5 4 r e l a t i o n s h i p . In s p i t e of the f a c t that the Czech s o c i a l i s t s were outmanoeuvred by A d l e r at the Congress, they d i d not r e l e n t . At the next C i s l e i t h a n i a n party Congress, h e l d i n Prague i n A p r i l 1896, they introduced a r e s o l u -t i o n c a l l i n g f o r the r e c o n s t r u c t i o n of the party l e a d e r s h i p . Antonin 55 Nemec, head of the Czech party executive e s t a b l i s h e d i n May 1894, asked that the C i s l e i t h a n i a n party's c e n t r a l l e a d e r s h i p become an execu-t i v e committee, c o n s i s t i n g of the " s e l e c t committees" of the v a r i ous 56 " n a t i o n a l p a r t i e s . " The i m p l i c a t i o n of t h i s suggestion was, of course, that each n a t i o n a l i t y should proceed to f o l l o w theCGzech example, and e s t a b l i s h a n a t i o n a l p arty. This was aimed d i r e c t l y at the German s o c i a l i s t s , who d i d not d i f f e r e n t i a t e between the C i s l e i t h a n i a n party and themselves . "*7 In t h i s s i t u a t i o n V i c t o r A d l e r , as might haverbeen expected of him, arranged a compromise r e s o l u t i o n , sponsored by the German, Czech and P o l i s h l e a d e r s h i p s . The new Gesamtvertretung, or c e n t r a l 118 executive committee of the Cisleithanian party, would be chosen from the various " n a t i o n a l i t i e s " i n the movement. The choice would not be haphazard, however, for the members would be the Executive Committees of the German, Czech and Polish "organizations." The I t a l i a n s and South Slavs would also have representation. The new executive would 58 carry out the business of the Cisleithanian party. The change i n terminology i n the new resolution was s i g n i f i c a n t . By eliminating the term "national parties," Adler was able to evade the question of divorcing the German organization from the Gesamtpartei. Yet the new resolution s a t i s f i e d the Czechs, for i t did reconstruct the leadership i n the sense that they had asked for i n t h e i r o r i g i n a l resolution. The real significance of the Czech resolution was twofold. Merely by presenting i t , they had indicated a change i n t h e i r approach to the Cisleithanian party. Instead of emphasizing the i r autonomy by obstructing congresses, they were now interested i n reconstructing the party so that by combining t h e i r national executive with others, 59 they could have as much rea l power at the centre as was possible. One of the Polish delegates c l e a r l y recognized the implications of t h i s . Josef Frankel said that: We Poles are pleased that the Czech comrades have suggested that the leadership of the Gesammtpartei be established on a f e d e r a l i s t i c basis.60 This was certainly true, although Adler's compromise resolution post-poned i t s r e a l i z a t i o n for another year. When the Congress proceeded to select the new executive, however, the d i f f e r i n g interpretations of the resolution became evident. Polish 119 and Czech s o c i a l i s t s refused to take p a r t i n the e l e c t i o n s , and empha-s i z e d that they must f i r s t e l e c t Executive Committees at t h e i r own 61 party congresses. From the Czech vantage p o i n t t h i s was understand-a b l e , but f o r the Poles to argue i n t h i s f a s h i o n was a new departure. At previous C i s l e i t h a n i a n party congresses they had supported the Ger-mans, but now they switched sides and favoured the Czechs. This change r e f l e c t e d the r a p i d growth of t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n a f t e r 1894, and hence the weakening of t h e i r o r g a n i z a t i o n a l and f i n a n c i a l dependence upon 62 the Germans. U l t i m a t e l y both Czechs and Poles agreed to take p a r t i n the e l e c t i o n s , thought the Czechs noted that the Czech members of the new 63 executive would have to be confirmed by the next Czech p a r t y Congress. Ten Germans, 3 Czechs, 1 P o l e , 1 I t a l i a n and 1 Slovene were e l e c t e d 64 to the new executive. At t h e i r Brunn Congress of May 1896 the Czechs c a r r i e d out the d e c i s i o n s of the Prague Congress, and o f f i c i a l l y e l e c t e d a f i v e member Executive Committee. I t s seat was to be i n Vienna, so that i t could f u n c t i o n as p a r t of the a l l - p a r t y e x e c u t i v e . ^ The Congress a l s o r e -defined K r e i s o r g a n i z a t i o n s as Wahlkreis o r g a n i z a t i o n s by adopting 66 the new e l e c t o r a l d i s t r i c t s created by Badeni's e l e c t o r a l reform. The most important d e c i s i o n made by the Congress, however, was the adoption of a r e s o l u t i o n on the o r g a n i z a t i o n of the C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r t y : The Congress of the Czechoslav S o c i a l Democratic Part y recommends that i t s German-speaking comrades should c a l l t h e i r own party congresses, i n the same way as the Bohe-mian [Czech] and P o l i s h comrades do . . . In t h i s way the 120 Congress of the Gesammtpartei In [ C i s l e i t h a n i a ] would then only d e a l w i t h common questions.67 According to the author of the only s c h o l a r l y work w r i t t e n on the n a t i o n a l i t y question i n the C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t movement i n the l a s t seventy ye a r s , t h i s r e s o l u t i o n l e d d i r e c t l y to the f e d e r a l -i z a t i o n of the s o c i a l i s t movement i n 1897. A d l e r and the party l e a d e r -ship had drawn up an organizationallpaiantj^b.uthwhenhthSzGzecheresolution was passed he immediately dropped h i s p r o p o s a l , and adopted the Czech 68 r e s o l u t i o n . This was not a r e f l e c t i o n of Adler's conversion to f e d e r a l i s m i n the party o r g a n i z a t i o n , but r a t h e r of a f e a r that i f 69 he didi<not adopt the Czech view, the party would d i s i n t e g r a t e . A d l e r s t a t e d h i s personal view of the matter at the 1897 Con-gress. A f t e r p o i n t i n g out that the party executive had developed a proposal which would have preserved the o l d form of o r g a n i z a t i o n — the "mother" o r g a n i z a t i o n as he put i t — h e went on to say that i t was not only the Czechs who wished to "separate the Czech o r g a n i z a t i o n from the German." Many Germans had a l s o expressed a s i m i l a r d e s i r e . He continued: My p e r s o n a l opinion i s d i f f e r e n t from that of many party comrades on t h i s p o i n t . I would have wished that the o l d form could have been maintained f o r a w h i l e longer, be-cause I b e l i e v e that the German comrades s t i l l have a ^ n strong duty to a i d t h e i r comrades who speak other languages. In a d e c l a r a t i o n he presented to the Congress (and which was accepted) he i n c l u d e d what amounted to a p l e a f o r u n i t y : We are conscious that c l a s s c o n t r a d i c t i o n s are stronger and deeper than n a t i o n a l d i f f e r e n c e s . We declare that t h i s o r g a n i z a t i o n i s e x c l u s i v e l y d i r e c t e d towards estab-l i s h i n g the most e f f e c t i v e form i n which . . . s o c i a l democrats o f ' a l l languages can c a r r y out the s t r u g g l e 121 against the e x p l o i t i n g classes of t h e i r own n a t i o n and against [those] of a l l nations.71 The most important event of the 1897 C i s l e i t h a n i a n Congress was thus the se p a r a t i o n of the German o r g a n i z a t i o n from the C i s l e i -thanian. The German d e c l a r a t i o n that they would now form t h e i r own o r g a n i z a t i o n was the key to the s i t u a t i o n , f o r as long as they d i d 72 not do so, the C i s l e i t h a n i a n party was, i n e f f e c t , the German pa r t y . As a r e s u l t of t h i s d e c l a r a t i o n , the C i s l e i t h a n i a n party was t r a n s -formed i n t o a f e d e r a t i o n of independent n a t i o n a l s o c i a l democratic p a r t i e s . The Germans immediately proceeded to adopt an o r g a n i z a t i o n a l s t a t u t e f o r the new German p a r t y . I t c o n s i s t e d of the o l d o r g a n i z a t i o n of the Gesamtpartei, w i t h the exception that the K r e i s o r g a n i z a t i o n s 73 were replaced by Wahlkreis o r g a n i z a t i o n s . The whole Congress then defined the new C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r t y . Every two years there would be a Gesamtparteitag, or C i s l e i t h a n i a n party Congress. Each e l e c t o r a l d i s t r i c t had the r i g h t to send two delegates, and i n d i s t r i c t s of mixed n a t i o n a l i t y the m i n o r i t y could 74 als o send two delegates, i f i t wished. The women's or g a n i z a t i o n s of the various n a t i o n a l groups could a l s o send two r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s . The competence of the C i s l e i t h a n i a n party congress was such that i t alone could change the party programme. I t a l s o decided upon a g i t a t i o n , t a c t i c s and o r g a n i z a t i o n f o r the C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r t y . Questions which d i d not concern the e n t i r e party were to be d e a l t w i t h at the congresses of the separate n a t i o n a l p a r t i e s . 122 The new party was to be l e d by a C i s l e i t h a n i a n party l e a d e r -s h i p , which would c o n s i s t of the leaderships of the various n a t i o n a l p a r t i e s . I t would deal w i t h day-to-day business which concerned the C i s l e i t h a n i a n party. 7"^ As a r e s u l t of the 189 7 Congress the Germans proceeded to estab-l i s h a German party at t h e i r f i r s t separate congress i n 1898. As pre-v i o u s l y noted, the Czechs had r e - e s t a b l i s h e d t h e i r party i n 1893, although Nemec s t a t e d that i t only c o n s t i t u t e d i t s e l f as an "indepen-76 dent n a t i o n a l p a r t y " i n 1896. The G a l i c i a n S o c i a l Democratic Part y had been formed by the Poles i n 1891. I t was intended to i n c l u d e both Jews and Ruthenes as w e l l as P o l e s . In 1894 i t had been extended to i n c l u d e the Poles of A u s t r i a n S i l e s i a . 7 7 As a r e s u l t of the 1897 d e c i -78 s i o n s , i t was r e s t r u c t u r e d as a P o l i s h p a r t y . The few Ruthene-Ukrainian s o c i a l i s t s had been a c t i v e i n the G a l i c i a n p a r t y , but i n 1896 the Ruthene R a d i c a l P a r t y , o r i e n t e d towards the peasantry and w i t h a programme s i m i l a r to that of the s o c i a l i s t s , 79 had been created. Not u n t i l 1899 d i d the l e f t wing of t h i s p a r ty s p l i t o f f and form a Ruthene s o c i a l i s t o r g a n i z a t i o n , a f f i l i a t e d w i t h the Gesamtpartei. The Slovenes had created t h e i r South Slav S o c i a l Democratic Party i n August 1896 as a body separate from the C i s l e i t h a n i a n o r g a n i -z a t i o n , but Slovene delegates appeared at the 1897 Congress', and a 81 Slovene s e c t i o n of the i n t e r n a t i o n a l party was organized. The I t a l i a n s were i n a d i f f i c u l t p o s i t i o n because of the geo-graphic s e p a r a t i o n of t h e i r two settlement areas, the L i t t o r a l and the 123 Trentino. As a r e s u l t , two separate I t a l i a n executives were e s t a b l i s h e d , 82 one f o r the L i t t o r a l i n December 189 7, and the other somewhat l a t e r . i i i ) The Fede r a l Organization a f t e r 1897 The 1899 C i s l e i t h a n i a n party Congress was the f i r s t h e l d under 83 the new r u l e s . Although there were c e r t a i n l y disagreements about the n a t i o n a l i t y q u e s t i o n , the Congress was one of the more s u c c e s s f u l . At the Congress the d e f i n i t i o n of the Gesamtpartei was expanded some-what. A three member C o n t r o l Commission was e s t a b l i s h e d to watch over 84 the c e n t r a l executive. In response to pressure from the newly-founded Women's N a t i o n a l Committee (Frauen-Reichs-Comite), the regu-l a t i o n applying to women delegates was modified. In areas (Wahlkreisen) where there were organized women, a woman delegate could accompany the 85 other delegates. An i n t e r e s t i n g new feature of the 1899 Congress was a c l e a r statement of the means to be adopted to enable the Gesamtpartei to finance i t s e l f . P r e v i o u s l y , of course, i t had had to r e l y on donations from i n d i v i d u a l members, on the income of the s o c i a l i s t p r e s s , on a i d from the trade union movement, and on donations from p r o v i n c i a l o r g a n i -86 z a t i o n s . As a r e s u l t of a d e c i s i o n of the new ex e c u t i v e , the Gesamt- p a r t e i was to be financed by d e f i n i t e c o n t r i b u t i o n s made by each n a t i o n a l party executive. I n a d d i t i o n , funds f o r s p e c i f i c purposes 87 would be c o l l e c t e d by the party press. A f t e r 1898 the i n d i v i d u a l n a t i o n a l p a r t i e s financed themselves by c o l l e c t i n g dues from t h e i r members. u u Formerly they had f e l t too vuln e r a b l e to the a s s o c i a t i o n laws to r i s k doing so. Another new feat u r e at the 1899 Congress was the presence of fourteen s o c i a l i s t members of parliament. At each of the four C i s l e i -thanian party congresses a f t e r 1897 t h i s group was to give a rep o r t 89 to the Congress on t h e i r parliamentary a c t i v i t y . The r o l e of the parliamentary d e l e g a t i o n (and of the debate on t h e i r report) became i n c r e a s i n g l y important as the party transformed i t s e l f i n t o a parliamen-t a r y p a rty i n t e r e s t e d i n the democratic road to s o c i a l i s m . These were the l a s t in-Congress m o d i f i c a t i o n s to the or g a n i -z a t i o n of the C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t p a r t y . Further congresses were h e l d i n 1901, 1903, and 1905, but t h e r e a f t e r the growing c o n f l i c t be-tween Czech and German s o c i a l i s t s made the h o l d i n g of f u r t h e r C i s l e i -thanian congresses impossible. The f e d e r a l i z a t i o n of the s o c i a l i s t p a r t y o r g a n i z a t i o n i n C i s -l e i t h a n i a created a s t r u c t u r e unique i n European s o c i a l i s m . In t h i s i n s t a n c e , the Reich-German party o f f e r e d a negative model. As e a r l y as 1893 P o l i s h s o c i a l i s t s i n P r u s s i a n Poland had l e f t the German party 91 and organized t h e i r own. As l a t e as 1901 the is s u e had not been 92 resolved. Esther Golde, a member of the P o l i s h S o c i a l Democratic P a r t y i n P r u s s i a n Poland, p o i n t e d out the s i g n i f i c a n c e of the C i s l e i t h a n i a n model f o r the peoples of Eastern Europe at the 1901 C i s l e i t h a n i a n party Congress. She argued t h a t : Our party comrades, who are s t r u g g l i n g i n the most d i f f i -c u l t ^ c o n d i t i o n s 7 have^always looked to [ C i s l e i t h a n i a n ] s o c i a l democracy as a model i n Europe of how one can 125 overcome n a t i o n a l d i f f e r e n c e s i n ( s o c i a l democratic) prac-t i c e , and at the same time be able to consider and preserve the r i g h t s of nations.93 In other words, the f e d e r a l i z a t i o n of the C i s l e i t h a n i a n p a r t y , as w e l l as the Brunn n a t i o n a l i t i e s ' programme of 1899, served as a model f o r s o c i a l i s t s among some of the oppressed or m i n o r i t y peoples of Eastern Europe. This was the case i n P r u s s i a n Poland, and, more i m p o r t a n t l y , i n Russia. In 1902 the Jewish Bund, a s o c i a l i s t o r g a n i z a t i o n which claimed to speak f o r the Jewish p r o l e t a r i a t i n Russia, took i s s u e w i t h the Russian s o c i a l i s t party's denunciation of the i d e a of the f e d e r a l -i z a t i o n of the Russian p a r t y : I s k r a wants to assure us that f e d e r a l r e l a t i o n s between the Bund and Russian S o c i a l Democracy are bound to weaken the t i e s between them. We cannot r e f u t e t h e i r o p i n i o n by r e f e r -r i n g to p r a c t i c e i n R u s s i a , f o r the simple reason that Russian S o c i a l Democracy does not e x i s t as a f e d e r a l body. But we can r e f e r to the extremely i n s t r u c t i v e experience of S o c i a l Democracy i n A u s t r i a , which assumed a f e d e r a l c h a r a c - ^ t e r by v i r t u e of the d e c i s i o n of the P a r t y Congress of 1897. Both Lenin and S t a l i n reacted p a r t i c u l a r l y negativelyoto. the constant c i t a t i o n of the C i s l e i t h a n i a n example by s o c i a l i s t s of c e r t a i n m i n o r i t y groups i n Russia. This was e s p e c i a l l y the case a f t e r the c o l l a p s e of the Gesamtpartei and the c e n t r a l i s t i c trade union o r g a n i -95 z a t i o n i n C i s l e i t h a n i a . L i k e the Brunn n a t i o n a l i t i e s ' programme, the f e d e r a l i z a t i o n of the C i s l e i t h a n i a n party o r g a n i z a t i o n i n d i c a t e d the growth of n a t i o n a l i s t f e e l i n g i n the s o c i a l movement. I t occurred l a r g e l y as the r e s u l t of pressure from the Czech s o c i a l i s t s . The p r o g r e s s i v e " n a t i o n a l i z a t i o n " of the Czech s o c i a l i s t movement, i n conjunction w i t h i t s gradual eman-c i p a t i o n from dependence upon the German o r g a n i z a t i o n f o r f i n a n c i a l 126 and o r g a n i z a t i o n a l support, l e d to the Czech party's d r i v e f o r eman-c i p a t i o n . I t i s evident that the r e l a t i v e l y p a i n l e s s t r a n s i t i o n from a c e n t r a l i s t i c to a f e d e r a l i s t i c party o r g a n i z a t i o n occurred l a r g e l y as a r e s u l t of V i c t o r Adler's p r e s t i g e and a u t h o r i t y i n the C i s l e i t h a n i a n s o c i a l i s t movement. His o v e r r i d i n g concern f o r the u n i t y of the s o c i a l i s t movement, and h i s w i l l i n g n e s s to compromise, made i t p o s s i b l e to pre-serve the u n i t e d movement f o r another fourteen y e a r s . 9 ^ i v ) The S o c i a l i s t Press i n C i s l e i t h a n i a 1867-1901 For much of the p e r i o d a f t e r 1867 the s o c i a l i s t press was the r e a l centre of the C i s l e i t h a n i a n worker's movement. As long as i t was l e g a l l y impossible to e s t a b l i s h a party h i e r a r c h y , the leadership of the party was u s u a l l y i d e n t i c a l w i t h the e d i t o r i a l committees of the l e a d i n g s o c i a l i s t papers. The f i r s t worker's papers founded i n C i s l e i t h a n i a i n the 1860's were pu b l i s h e d e i t h e r as supplements to l i b e r a l papers, such as the A r b e i t e r z e i t u n g and A r b e i t e r b l a t t i n Vienna, or were s e c t i o n s of l i b e r a l papers, such as the Narodnl l i s t y ( N a t i o n a l Paper) or Hlas (The Voice) 9 7 among the Czechs. Czech s o c i a l i s t s appear to have been the f i r s t to found a worker^operated paper, Delnik (The Worker) , on 1 December 1867, but u n t i l the mid-1870's, they were plagued w i t h apostasy i n t h e i r press. The f i r s t Viennese German worker's paper published by workers was the Volksstimme, founded on 11 A p r i l 1869. I n d i c a t i v e of the l i m i t e d nature 127 of the s o c i a l i s t movement, however, was the f a c t that a f t e r a few months of operation the paper had achieved a c i r c u l a t i o n f i g u r e of only 1,010— 98 of which 640 were i n Vienna. As the decade ended, other papers were founded i n Prague, Briinn, Graz, Wiener Neustadt and i n North Bohemia as w e l l . In t h i s e a r l y p e r i o d s o c i a l i s t papers were r a t h e r crudely w r i t t e n bi-weekly or monthly papers. They faced great f i n a n c i a l d i f f i c u l t i e s . The Kaution, a bond posted w i t h the a u t h o r i t i e s , and from which sums were subtracted when papers overstepped the law, was a c r i p p l i n g burden. As w e l l , the newspaper t a x stamp, a tax on each copy^printed, made i t v i r t u a l l y impossible f o r the s o c i a l i s t s to even t h i n k of p u b l i s h i n g more 99 o f t e n than two or three times a month. Compounding the problems of the press was the a t t i t u d e of the government a f t e r 1869. In that year censorship was i m p o s e d . I n s e v e r a l cases s o c i a l i s t papers were dri v e n out of existence by the simple expediency of a r r e s t i n g the e d i t o r s as they were appointed.'^''" As a r e s u l t of a l l these f a c t o r s , and the l i m i t e d f i n a n c i a l means of the i n f a n t movement, the e a r l y s o c i a l i s t newspapers u s u a l l y had a short l i f e - e x p e c t a n c y . By the mid-1870's the s o c i a l i s t movement i n C i s l e i t h a n i a had expanded c o n s i d e r a b l y , but t h i s growth was not r e f l e c t e d i n the c i r c u -l a t i o n of i t s press. In 1877, G l e i c h h e i t , the German organ, had a press run of only 2,000 copies; t h i s compared most unfavourably w i t h the 102 12,000 copies p u b l i s h e d by Vorwarts, the Reich-German party organ. This meant that the s o c i a l i s t press operated at a l o s s ; one h i s t o r i a n 31r. 1-1. ttfSahlion: GrprQiiiuii: 311. • jtcirhcnbcrg. gtomstaj). Jen 2G. Jlcrrmbrr 1871 ^rlictfcrfrcun^ Sojiaf-pofitifd}* 3<itf< r^ift fur &as ar6<it<afc« Uoffi. 1. Mm\. bit zu.'rilUit 19 ti ffoilo: ©if Blfnfditn |o!Itn n-tt fcmtn unb Jtiutttr inn, fc*nn all* iuU) jut ',u'it)fii q<jd)tifi«n iliniotn £>iit net i iadt i t iMi "Jitnnatei b^iunt vm iien*4 Ciidriut unit tr\\i&nH rou ^ucti (lit bi< 'i :abui-hiiti) CfG sBUitieo aliciorio rechl tljiitiii \$u ifiii £ g jiiiui txio^lan ij'l, tjalu-ii bod) Mi' i^i-yiu'i or-i twmiclbi'u v-im-n I K U U U U :Neu<<Ei £ o U i'<> at'a lebciiQf.Tliiii Mcibcti, briuichiii wir'.Hboniicnit'ti tint) &anmi crfndjon mir did) >3ti^  ulkrort-j ttjaliti fin Die 'lu'vbrdluihj B M 'Slntte* Umri'ihljciiii'.evlrinieuDeii bci ^raiianurationd-Iclni.w luirD orfudjt. Daiuit hint <3ldiuiig in bcr tflvebuiiHi cuitrete Aufgcfdjofrn i l l nicQt aufiit'liolu'ii! (JkovffscirM SlitS ben 3Uiitctaflon bcr ofterretdjifefjen 3cnjitr . Figure 3. Censorship: Front page.of-the Arbeiterfreund 1874. 129 estimates that a break even p o i n t wo`
{"ft_lang_label":"__label__en","ft_lang_prob":0.8129126,"math_prob":0.99342537,"size":295055,"snap":"2021-31-2021-39","text_gpt3_token_len":108388,"char_repetition_ratio":0.307557,"word_repetition_ratio":0.48685217,"special_character_ratio":0.37477082,"punctuation_ratio":0.051099032,"nsfw_num_words":3,"has_unicode_error":false,"math_prob_llama3":0.99614394,"pos_list":[0,1,2],"im_url_duplicate_count":[null,null,null],"WARC_HEADER":"{\"WARC-Type\":\"response\",\"WARC-Date\":\"2021-07-27T12:31:44Z\",\"WARC-Record-ID\":\"<urn:uuid:223b08f5-4140-4b2c-8013-08531743b02d>\",\"Content-Length\":\"1049010\",\"Content-Type\":\"application/http; msgtype=response\",\"WARC-Warcinfo-ID\":\"<urn:uuid:92eb1526-7304-4f9e-b7ce-dfc0025cad1f>\",\"WARC-Concurrent-To\":\"<urn:uuid:238635ff-c801-4fab-9fe9-a859efe9cd12>\",\"WARC-IP-Address\":\"142.103.96.89\",\"WARC-Target-URI\":\"https://open.library.ubc.ca/cIRcle/collections/ubctheses/831/items/1.0093430\",\"WARC-Payload-Digest\":\"sha1:GMDC3ZSXVZFVHAIXVW6ISQSTTBKXURMA\",\"WARC-Block-Digest\":\"sha1:WVEBZ4LHEJDG33VBX4ESP4T5QUNP3M5Z\",\"WARC-Truncated\":\"length\",\"WARC-Identified-Payload-Type\":\"text/html\",\"warc_filename\":\"/cc_download/warc_2021/CC-MAIN-2021-31/CC-MAIN-2021-31_segments_1627046153391.5_warc_CC-MAIN-20210727103626-20210727133626-00370.warc.gz\"}"}