Will Sweden's socialist economy be sustainable?

The socialism conception of German social democrats and Swedish socialists

Table of Contents

1 Introduction

2. Initial situation
2.1. Generally
2.2. Germany
2.3. Sweden

3. Personalities
3.1. Germany
3.1.1. Rudolf Hilferding
3.1.2 Fritz Naphtali
3.1.2. Karl Kautsky
3.1.3. Otto Bauer
3.1.4. Max Adler
3.2. Sweden
3.2.1. Gunnar Myrdal
3.2.2. Ernst Wigforss
3.2.3. Per Albin Hansson
3.2.4. Gustav Möller
3.2.5. Hjalmar Branting

4. Selected concepts from the pre- and interwar period
4.1. Organized Capitalism
4.2. Economic democracy
4.3. Volksheim
4.4. comparison

5. German conceptions in Swedish politics
5.1. Social policy
5.2. Housing policy
5.3. Family policy

6. Conclusion

7. Bibliography

8. List of sources
8.1. Web sources

9. Register of persons

10. List of Abbreviations

1 Introduction

Philosophers are often spoken of as people who are primarily older men with gray hair in ill-fitting suits who are concerned with solving problems that would not exist without them. Although this joking phrase inadequately characterizes the group of philosophers, it contains a grain of truth in that humanity has been faced with the task of dealing with and solving problems that it itself created since its inception.

However, the introduction of industrialized production and a capitalist economy, as efficient as these were and are in economic terms, also brought with it problems that had to be addressed politically. For a long time, this did not happen because the political systems of the countries concerned were not yet or insufficiently designed so that the workers and peasants who were mainly affected could have articulated their interests sustainably and effectively. Socialist theorists saw a main reason for the political immaturity of the working class in the unjust and increasingly unjust distribution of economic resources from which economic and political power grows in capitalist systems.[1] As a result, the working class had to work towards developing and offering an alternative to the existing system. To a large extent, she saw this in socialism. On the way to this long-term goal, however, disputes of opinion and direction broke out, which slowed down and divided the labor movement and its effects.

Whether a change should be initiated by means of a revolution, through many small improvements and adjustments in favor of the workers (and a majority in the population) in the form of reformism or even by abandoning the goal in revisionism, has been strong since the end of the 19th century controversial. German social democracy, which at the time can be seen as an engine of the European labor movement, developed remarkable concepts to fight for both a fairer society and a stronger democracy. However, there were such efforts in other countries as well.

In many research areas, scientists complain about the effects of language barriers. Topics that can be approached in your own mother tongue or in the lingua franca of today's world, English, are often much better dealt with than topics covered by the veil of a language spoken by a relatively small group of people become. Unfortunately, this also applies to the Scandinavian neighboring countries. The aim of this thesis is to try to narrow this research gap a little, as far as the Swedish welfare state and the concept of the people's home are concerned.

For comparison, two decisive concepts of German social democrats are used that arose around the same time. On the one hand there is organized capitalism by Rudolf Hilferding and on the other hand it is Fritz Naphtali's economic democracy. The aim of this study is to work out what the German and Swedish socialists' conceptions of socialism looked like in the pre- and interwar period, what they agreed on, how they differed, whether the Germans influenced the Swedish concepts and, if so, how great this influence was and what it can be attached to. Of course, the conditions and circumstances in Germany and Sweden differed, which is why a ceteris paribus situation never existed. However, in order to be able to make a justifiable comparison, I consider the circumstances to be sufficient.

In the following I will first present the historical situation in the two countries, especially with regard to the situation of the respective labor movement, and show the strategies and actions of their parliamentary representation in the political systems. The next chapter is devoted to the political and theoretical leaders from Germany and Austria, to whom I attach a central role and enormous importance in this context. Incidentally, there are two Austrians in the group of Germans who, however, are subsumed under the umbrella term German in this work because of their German mother tongue and the cultural ties between the two peoples.

Afterwards, the three concepts should be briefly summarized, presented and related to each other. In the following part I have listed five, in my opinion, characteristic points, which are representative but expressis verbis exemplary for the Swedish people's home. In the areas of social, housing, family, education and agricultural policy, the measures taken by the Swedish Workers' Party in establishing the welfare state, the similarities and differences to the German concepts, are to be shown by means of concrete political directives.

With this approach and these points it is necessary to sound out the connections between the parties of the labor movement in Germany and Sweden. Not only on the basis of similar thought patterns, comparable political measures or personal contacts and experiences of the management staff. The reason d ' Ê Hopefully, the study will lead to a better understanding of the internal relations of the socialist movement of the first half of the 20th century and to broadening the perspective on the invention and development of the Swedish welfare state.

2. Initial situation

2.1. Generally

A new way of producing goods began to spread in England as early as the 18th century. It would develop in the following century and spread to the continent. The industrial revolution suddenly changed the living conditions of millions of people. Traditional professions disappeared from one day to the next. Activities learned by humans and carried out for a long time were now carried out by machines. Heinrich Heine, for example, adequately addressed the suffering of weavers. Adapting to this changed situation, the way of doing business also changed and a new form of exchange of goods and money emerged, namely Manchester capitalism.

In the factories that were sprouting up there was now a considerable need for labor. Their use played an enormous part in the creation of surplus value, although they did not participate in the profits in any way, because they lacked both the possession of land and, in particular, the possession of the means of production. In addition, they were disorganized and lacked the means of political pressure, as it was often possible to find someone who, out of already existent economic hardship, found himself willing to do the same work as his predecessor. Therefore the living conditions of the workers were very bad. Life expectancy was low, there was no social security, such as in the event of illness or unemployment, and the housing situation in the tenements in the large industrial centers was catastrophic.

Against this background, the evolution of the labor movement was a matter of time. Based on the theories of Marx and Engels, socialist ideas spread. A ghost was around in Europe, as it was in Communist manifesto was called.[2] Nevertheless, the starting position of the labor movement in France differed from that in Russia, that in Italy from that in Great Britain and that in Germany from that in Sweden, which is of increased interest in this context.

When looking at international politics, it is eminently important to understand that not all actors are created equal. Some have more power and influence (political, economic, diplomatic and military), others less. Even at the United Nations there is still in the third millennium the primus inter pares, the five former or equal among the equals - the permanent members of the World Security Council. Accordingly, it would be possible to draw the conclusion that certain developments, if they take place in a country that is powerful in the areas mentioned above, are more powerful and receive more attention. In addition, in a country that is large in this sense, it could be more problematic to initiate revolutionary developments, as the resistance is probably stronger. The geographic location of a country can also be a factor. An actor in the center (Germany), with long borders and many neighbors, has much faster and much greater influence on the actions of his neighbors with his actions and can therefore trigger avalanche-like interactions. An actor on the periphery (Sweden), on the other hand, plays a different role. His work has less weight and is possibly less noticed. It might be easier to do a complete political U-turn. The few neighbors are probably not so strongly influenced by new developments and ideas.[3]

2.2. Germany

After the failed revolution of 1848/49, in the shadow of the Vienna Congress of 1815, the forces of the Restoration succeeded in consolidating the monarchist power structures in the German territories. Both the individual states of the German Confederation and later the North German Confederation, with Prussia at its head, were arrested in the old order. In addition, in the middle of the 19th century these areas were still strongly characterized by agriculture. This was only to change with the onset of high industrialization, coinciding with the unification of the empire in the Hall of Mirrors at Versailles. The formation of industrial centers accelerated and the population development exploded. The population of the empire had almost doubled from 1850 until the outbreak of war in 1914, although there was a large flow of emigrants, primarily to the United States of America.[4]

This is certainly one of the main reasons why a strong labor movement could develop in the German-speaking areas, both in the German Empire and in the German-speaking areas of the Cisleithan part of the Danube Monarchy. In just a few decades, Germany rose to become a major economic power. In the 1860s, many workers' associations and organizations were formed, which culminated in the founding of the SPD. The steady and rapid increase in members, supporters and sympathizers provoked reactions on the part of the state power, the Bismarck socialist law was the result. However, this just failed to have its effect, the strength of the labor movement continued to grow and it was canceled again because of its ineffectiveness. In addition to these aspects, socialist publications were of immense importance, as they were the main medium for disseminating, communicating and explaining socialist theories. In Germany (and Austria) are examples of this The new time, Society, The freedom, struggle and the Forward in which Hilferding, Naphtali, Kautsky, Bauer and Adler published many articles.

Shortly before the turn of the century, a long-smoldering dispute over the royal road to socialism escalated and split the workers' movement. In addition to the latent conflict between revolutionary and reformist forces, there were now advocates of Bernstein's revisionism (or materialism)[5] added. In addition, the truce policy propagated by the leading social democrats at the beginning of the First World War should break the barrel for the pacifist and internationalist-oriented members of the labor movement.[6] In addition, there was a different assessment of the October Revolution in Russia, as a result of which a split in social democrats or socialists and communists could no longer be averted.

In the interwar years, the legacy of the lost world war weighed heavily on the first German democracy. After overcoming the hurdles created by the reparations payments, a flourishing economy developed in the golden 20s, but the earnings of which mostly disappeared in the pockets or in the accounts of the leading industrial captains. In addition, the cartel and trust system increasingly brought about a connection between industrial and banking capital, which had to be responded to with new concepts. Rudolf Hilferding saw in "Organized Capitalism" the chance to intervene on the part of the state in a guiding manner, because because of the monopoly-like structures in some branches of the economy, impulses could now only be given from one place. Fritz Naphtali thought his concept of economic democracy a little less drastic, in which the living conditions and social position of the workers were to be gradually improved through more participation of the workers, better provision and strong union organization.

The world economic crisis made any implementation of these concepts impossible, especially since the Social Democrats no longer had government responsibility towards the end of the Weimar Republic. The conservative-nationalist cabinets and their Reich Chancellors, which from then on only governed by emergency decree, were not up to the demands placed on them and, through Brüning's deflationary policy, the Prussian scandal, the Potsdam Day and the Enabling Act, they advanced to become the stirrup holders of the National Socialists.

However, the social fascism thesis propagated by the communists contributed significantly to making a united front of the workers' movement impossible. Even Wilhelm Pieck shared the view in 1950 that the social fascism thesis was the KPD's greatest strategic mistake.[7] Mikael Argenziano certified it to exist in two forms. According to one, the bourgeoisie was played off against the working class; according to the other, social democracy had taken the initiative in the oppression of the working class from the bourgeoisie. In both cases, a joint approach with the Social Democrats would be prevented.[8] The end of the Weimar Republic, which started with so many birth defects and yet as a democratic ray of hope, marked a turning point. The seizure of power by the National Socialists drove many socialists and communists into emigration, many were taken to prisons or even concentration camps, persecuted and murdered. The chance of implementing economic democracy or organized capitalism in Germany was wasted.

2.3. Sweden

First of all, there is one component that is often underestimated by continental European researchers in relation to Sweden or all of Scandinavia, namely the influence of Swedish society and the national culture on socio-political decisions. Gunnar Myrdal once described him as follows: Swedish culture as a whole has a strong rationalistic and technical tendency. The population, in spite of a highly developed individualism, may have a greater sense of collective participation in social affairs and a greater sense of responsibility for the well-being of the whole country than people of other countries.[9],[10],[11] Behind this is a corporatist tradition that has developed over the centuries.

This form of social organization is often described as a middle way between the extremes. As early as 1936, the American Marquis Childs certified Sweden on one "fairly well-designed middle course"[12] to be. This combination of factors leads to a mélange, the Åke Daun "Swedish Mentality"[13] is called. Jeanne Marie O'Toole characterizes them by highlighting a few features. There is a Swedish willingness to compromise. Furthermore, there is a reluctance to turn the concerns of a minority into a majority obsession. Incontrovertible principles would be rather limited in Swedish politics, there would be a genuine idealism inherent in it.[14],[15]

In addition to the well-known American Marquis Child, the Swedish literary critic Fredrik Böök and the Scandinavian reporter Ludvig "Lubbe" Nordström also toured the country around the same time.The impressions they collected on their travels culminated in two extremely popular books - Det rika och fattiga Sverige (The rich and poor Sweden [o.d.V.]) and Lort-Sverige (Dirty Sweden [o.d.V.]) - in which the conditions in the kingdom were both impressively and eloquently described and could be viewed as a kind of social report.[16]

The situation in the northern European kingdom was different in the middle of the 19th century. While the star of the belated nation-state seemed to be rising and a German century was imminent, Sweden was on the decline. The "Stormaktstiden" (time of great power [Ü.d.V.]) was long gone and Sweden did not play a decisive role in the concert of the European powers. Although Sweden, like Germany, was still dominated by agriculture in the 19th century, there were great differences, both in terms of agricultural and industrial development. Most of the farmers lived in poor conditions, but their legal and social position was considerably better than the situation in Germany. Serfdom, which had long been practiced in continental Europe, was no longer in use in Sweden, as Swedish farmers had been the fourth class since the Middle Ages.[17],[18]

However, they too suffered from the great famine that the kingdom faced throughout the 19th and early 20th centuries. From 1850 to about 1930 Sweden had an enormous net emigration and there were at least five significant waves of emigration during this period that hit the country hard, although the population continued to grow due to the high birth rate. About a fifth of the population left Sweden, which was extremely high compared to other European countries and raised concerns about a potential future labor shortage even among conservatives and liberals.[19] This development was only to put an end to the world economic crisis and the associated collapse in the birth rate. At that time the social democratic population policy of the people's home of myrdal style developed, especially taking into account that of the Myrdals in their book Kris i befolkningsfrågan[20]issues raised in 1934.[21]

Before that, however, Sweden had entered an isolationist phase. In contrast to the phase of immigration, which was strongly influenced by Huguenots, new, progressive ideas and techniques reached the country with a delay. Among other things, this led to a delayed industrialization (from 1890), similar to that in the Danube Monarchy, although the mineral resources (ore and coal) were in abundance. On the other hand, it was advantageous that the urbanization process in Sweden, unlike in many other countries, was more orderly and noiseless, as certain civilization problems did not arise in Sweden. Jeanne Marie O'Toole made the following five factors responsible in her dissertation at the University of Chicago. In Sweden there was an unusual homogeneity in society, culture, language, ethnic composition of the population and religious affiliation.[22],[23] Helga Schultz explains this as follows:

"Swedish researchers highlight favorable historical conditions that have strengthened the national integration discourse: the traditional alliance of the crown with the peasantry against the aristocracy, the tradition of self-government, the weakness of the upper class, the Lutheran national church and the free churches."[24]

The social conditions changed towards the end of the 1880s. The Swedish socialists organized themselves, founded clubs, parties and newspapers. Political agitation was carried out by means of the most powerful mass medium at the time. Domestic and foreign socialists published articles, primarily in the relevant press organs Social-Democrats (Social Democrats, [U.d.V.]), Tiden (Time, [U.d.V.]), Fram (Forward, [U.d.V.]) and Stormklockan (Sturmglocke, [U.d.V.]). After the forced union with Norway was peacefully dissolved in 1905, a severe general strike brought the country's economy to a standstill in 1909 and the First World War broke out in 1914, the pressure for reform also increased immensely in neutral Sweden.

1917 was to be the fateful year of the Swedish social democracy. In February the SAP split, in March the revolution broke out in Russia, famines and food shortages hit the country, hunger riots and mutinies broke out, two conservative governments collapsed, a new election for the second chamber of the Reichstag took place, and finally one took place Liberal-Social Democratic government coalition in October, which should be given the task of establishing parliamentary democracy in Sweden.[25] These eight coincident events in just one year marked the turning point for the Swedish Workers' Party. The dispute between revolutionaries and reformists, which had been simmering for several years, caused a schism in the leadership of the SAP, which inevitably led to power struggles. The revolutionary wing was on the rise, the zeitgeist seemed to be with it, but it was unable to bring its own representatives into leadership positions. Zeth Höglund, Fredrik Ström and Karl Kilbom were strongly influenced by the revolutionary socialists in Germany and were also in direct contact with Rosa Luxemburg and Karl Liebknecht. Furthermore, Zeth Höglund and Ture Nerman took part in the Zimmerwald gathering, a clandestine conspiratorial meeting of revolutionary socialists from all over Europe, in order to discuss their options and to coordinate further action as Europe-wide as possible. Even so, the Swedish revolutionary faction should not have any luck in bringing about a revolution. It was unable to overthrow the long-standing party leader, nor to avert the rise of the second socialist (and reformist) generation, namely Per Albin Hansson and Gustav Möller.[26] Fredrik Ström summarized the situation of the revolutionary left in autumn 1915 as follows:

"The struggle between left and right within socialism is not simply a Swedish occurrence but an international one. It comes driven by the world war, in nearly all the world's socialist parties."[27],[28]

After the loss of many revolutionary comrades-in-arms, but at the same time freed from the ballast of the party-internal dispute over the direction of the party, it was possible for the reformist forces that were now dominant to bring the SAP to power. It provided the prime minister several times in the 1920s and was involved in a number of coalitions. During this time Hansson's Volksheim rhetoric, who after Branting's death in 1927 became the spokesman for the SAP Reichstag faction and in 1928 the spokesman for the entire party, gave him the decisive advantage over his German comrades. While the rhetoric in Germany was permanently racist, nationalist and folkish, in Sweden it was possible to substantiate it with social and democratic content. Hansson wrested the concept of the Volksheim from the conservatives. "The social democrats became nationalists, and the nation became social democratic"[29]because improving the living conditions of the whole Swedish people, no longer just the working class, has been made a primary goal. An Archimedean point for Swedish social democracy.[30]

However, the SAP was not to come to power permanently until 1932. The starting point for this was an unfortunate event, the Ådalen shots. After the outbreak of the global economic crisis, with the devastating consequences also for Sweden (collapse of key industries, banks and trade networks), there was mass unemployment.[31] The strike was used more and more often in labor disputes, with Swedish workers already using this method significantly more often than their European counterparts in a European comparison, and as early as 1902 a demonstration strike because of a debate in the Reichstag was 120,000 workers.[32] In May 1931, the Conservative government used the military against 3,000 to 4,000 demonstrators, firearms were used, five workers died and the mood turned.[33]

In 1932 Hansson managed to forge a stable alliance with the Peasant Party. So the Swedish farmers not only became a coalition partner ad interim, but also a reliable partner in the construction of the people's home, even though the cooperation was based on horse trading. The farmers' party was assured of comprehensive and long-term price guarantees for agricultural products, and in return Sweden succeeded in implementing effective unemployment insurance. In addition, the public sector was empowered to set up its own work programs, which could drastically mitigate the consequences of job losses. In addition, in a unique model, the trade unions were given the task of administering unemployment insurance. This shift in power enabled the Swedish trade unions to achieve an extraordinarily high level of organization. The central federation of the trade unions (LO) and the workers' association (SAF) laid the keystone in the establishment of the "solidarity wage policy" in 1938 in the health resort of Saltsjöbad, on the one hand assuring the maintenance of industrial peace and on the other hand agreeing collective agreements on the upper limit of market wages align.[34],[35] Bo Stråth, a little germanocentrically and anachronistically, referred to the 1930s as "one hour Bad Godesberg in Scandinavia".[36]

The "Bad Godesberger hour" ushered in a phase of forty years of government responsibility for Swedish social democracy, during which it was able to develop its social ideas in practice. Not by imposing the people's home on the Swedish people as a representative of the interests of the working class, but by reforming Swedish society with temporary allies in a democratic manner and by conveying her own ideas and making the Scandinavian country one of the most developed welfare states in the world.

3. Personalities

A selection of formative and respected politicians, scientists or writers who have achieved great impact in socio-political debates is often complicated, difficult to carry out for a variety of reasons and always offers points of attack for critics. Regardless of how deeply the topic was penetrated and how large the radius of the group of people was, which was considered, there is the danger of neglecting people or of not devoting oneself adequately to them, which others consider essential in the description of a process become. In addition, every division made by people, even with a large and extensive level of knowledge, is ultimately saturated with opinion.

In the following, I will justify the selection I made and show why I made it in this form. On both the German and the Swedish side there are several key spokesmen for social democratic and socialist groups whose main concern was a reorganization of economic policy and a reorganization of existing property and property relations.

In my opinion, Rudolf Hilferding, Fritz Naphtali, Karl Kautsky, Otto Bauer and Max Adler are of central importance in German-speaking countries. Rudolf Hilferding analyzed the work published in 1910 The finance capital[37] the constantly increasing accumulation and interdependence of financial and industrial capital. At the trend-setting Kiel party congress of the SPD in 1927, he explained to the comrades present his ideas of an organized capitalism, in which political decision-makers should be able to influence economic decisions through cartels and trusts in monopoly structures. Fritz Naphtali seconded with his book in 1928 Economic democracy[38], in which he wanted to implement democratic elements in companies in order to offer reformist forces the prospect of success in the struggle for the interests of the working class - such as in the form of the works council law - even in a capitalist economy. This theory was immediately subjected to sharp criticism by August Thalheimer, who was positioned on the side of the revolutionary forces.[39] Karl Kautsky certainly held an outstanding position in the development and popularization of theory at that time, although his work is often reduced to the controversy with Eduard Bernstein. His actions in the weekly magazine he founded were of immense importance The new time, in which he and other authors made theoretical considerations about the development towards and towards socialism and at the same time gave ordinary workers a theoretical, theoretical-socialist framework. The historian Helga Schultz calls it that "Teacher of Marxism".[40] In addition, Austromarxist currents had a considerable impact on German social democracy. Although German-speaking Austria was not part of the German Empire either before the First World War (as part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire) or afterwards (as German Austria / Republic of Austria), its most important representatives in this area should be included. German is used here as a lingua franca in the manner of the Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation. Accordingly, the unifying element is not statehood, but the German language. At this point, one should also consider the historical connections between social democrats and socialists since the beginning of the development of the labor movement. Responsible for the fate of the Austrian social democracy were Otto Bauer and his adept Max Adler. In this context of particular interest are their statements on the employment, education, social and housing policy orientation of Austromarxist character.

On the Swedish side, from my point of view, Gunnar Myrdal, Ernst Wigforss, Per Albin Hansson, Gustav Möller and Hjalmar Branting are relevant. In particular, the triad, which was responsible for the Volksheim policy, had a great influence on Sweden's socialists. Hansson in the political field by tearing the concept of the people's home away from conservative-nationalist circles and installing it as an integral part of SAP's rhetoric. Wigforss was responsible for implementing the new concept in terms of economic policy because he was in charge of economic policy after SAP took over government responsibility. Myrdal, whose name is perhaps most strongly associated with the term Volksheim, concentrated his efforts, together with his wife, on social and family policy measures and initiated groundbreaking changes here, although his economic analyzes and theories, as a doctor of economics, continue to be among Swedish socialists received enormous attention. In addition, there are Gustav Möller, Swedish trade minister for many years and social minister for many years, and Hjalmar Branting, the doyen of SAP, who made it politically acceptable and a democratic majority in the early years of the 20th century. In the following, the individual persons, their achievements and their positions are briefly explained.

3.1. Germany

3.1.1. Rudolf Hilferding

Rudolf Hilferding was born in Vienna in 1877, studied medicine at the university there, received his doctorate in 1901 and initially worked as a pediatrician for a few years. Nevertheless, the versatile Hilferding showed a keen interest in socialist ideas even in his youth. The renowned constitutional law scholar and sociologist Carl Grünberg, then an associate professor for political economy and co-founder of the "Frankfurt School", was one of his teachers.[41] Hilferding's circle of friends (Otto Bauer, Karl Renner, Max Adler and Gustav Eckstein) and himself quickly emerged as leading figures of the Austro-Marxist movement. Karl Kautsky protected him, leaving early texts in The new time print and advanced to Hilferding's mentor, which was equivalent to an accolade. In addition, he defended Marx's theory of value against the current academic criticism of Marx, which is piquely brought forward here by one of his former teachers, Eugen Boehm Ritter von Bawerk.[42],[43]

His texts were quickly received and popularized in the German social democracy, which is why Hilferding moved his residence from Vienna to Berlin in 1906. At the party school of the SPD he taught economics and economic history, wrote for the Forward and continued to give the Marx studies with out.[44] Kautsky and Bebel had advocated that Hilferding could start teaching, which, however, should not be long-term. "His teaching activity was soon interrupted by the immigration police, who rightly regarded it as political activity if a Marxist did not want to teach Marxist workers the Marxian critique of political economy; Rosa Luxemburg succeeded him."[45]

"Hilferding was a very political economist.For him, the necessary connection between economic (private) and political (including state) power was at the center of any analysis of capitalist development. "[46] In 1910 he put his main work, Finance Capital - A Study of the Recent Developments in Capitalism, in front. In him "He had analyzed the tendency to overcome the anarchy of the capitalist market economy, which was determined by joint-stock companies and their interdependencies, by cartelization, group formation and by the organization of the financial markets under the domination of (international) big banks."[47]"Karl Kautsky [...] called Hilferding's most important theoretical work >> Das Finanzkapital << an extension of the second and third volumes of Karl Marx's >> Capital <<".[48]

With the outbreak of the world fire, or "the great catastrophe of the 20th century"[49]As George F. Kennan called the First World War, he was one of the few social democrats who did not want to campaign for the emperor and fatherland in false loyalty to the Nibelung. Logically, he campaigned vehemently against the war credits and their approval (and the associated legitimation of the war efforts of imperial Germany), but was drafted into the Austro-Hungarian Army as a field doctor in 1915 and served with his medical expertise until the end of the war in a hospital on the Italian front. The war experiences and disappointments with the politics of the social democratic leadership brought him to the USPD, in which he got in touch with Hugo Haase and editor-in-chief of the newspaper in the early 1920s The freedom has been.[50]

Although Hilferding temporarily turned away from the SPD / MSPD, he saw the need to stop, reverse and ultimately overcome the split in the labor movement. This was true at the level of the parties, the states, the trade unions as well as the socialist-oriented publications.[51] The bundling of the forces of the working class is imperative in order to successfully continue the struggle for a democratic-socialist society. Such a clear position exposed him and he was a target for critics from all camps. Both the revisionists (Bernstein), the revolutionaries (Luxemburg) and the Bolsheviks (Zinoviev) worked on him and his ideas of integrating all wings in a "united front". After the further fragmentation of the USPD, Hilferding reflected on his own ideas, rejoined the SPD, and gave Society out and took over political offices. As early as 1918, through his membership in the Socialization Commission, he had come into contact with the concept of economic democracy, later expanded, systematized and popularized by Fritz Naphtali. As a two-time Reich Finance Minister, he applied his theoretical concepts as far as possible to practical politics (introduction of the Rentenmark) in order to solve the economic problems of the Weimar Republic.[52]

In addition to his parliamentary and ministerial duties, he refined and updated his im Finance capital established theories about the interweaving of financial and industrial capital, the credit system and monopoly formation. In addition, there was an increased focus on trust and cartel systems, which was particularly necessary due to the economic development of these forms of organization in the "Golden Twenties" of the Weimar Republic. Trusts grew like an avalanche, catapulting a few managers to the top of the wealth list. For example, there was a joke among the population that Hugo Stinnes would be made President of the Reich immediately. The only condition for this is that he must bear the entire reparation burden of the Reich alone. From them he distilled the concept of "organized capitalism", in which a democratic state intervenes in the processes of organization, socialization and planning of a thoroughly capitalist economy. According to his thesis, such changes in the power organization and means of the state, if correctly and well-coordinated, prepared the ground for democratic socialism. At the latest since the Kiel party congress in 1927, at which the concept was widely discussed, but probably already since the Heidelberg party congress two years earlier, these and similar ideas had a significant impact on social democratic politics in the Weimar Republic.[53]

Hilferding himself summarized this problem in his speech in Kiel as follows. "If so, then the capitalist organization of the economy on the one hand and the state organization on the other, and the problem is how we want to shape their mutual interpenetration. That means nothing other than that of our generation The problem is, with the help of the state, with the help of conscious social regulation, to transform this economy organized and directed by the capitalists into an economy directed by the democratic state can be called socialism. "[54]

3.1.2 Fritz Naphtali

During his life two hearts beat in Fritz Naphtali's chest, one socialist and one Zionist. For someone who, like him, was born in Wilhelmine Germany with Prussian stamps (in the three-emperor year 1888), the fact that he was socialized as the offspring of a Jewish merchant family could repeatedly (negatively) influence personal development. Naphtali came to terms with his origins early on. After school he completed an apprenticeship as a businessman, attended the Berlin commercial college (heard from Sombart and Jastrow, among others) and completed his studies in 1911 as a qualified business graduate.[55] In the same year he joined the SPD.[56]

Shortly afterwards he took up a journalistic activity. As a business editor, he wrote for both Berliner Morgenpost as well as the Vossisch newspaper, only interrupted by his drafting into the imperial army and the subsequent deployment on the western front.[57] From 1921 to 1926 he held the same position with the Frankfurter Zeitung and also gave with Ernst Kahn The economic curve out. Afterwards he worked at the Berlin Research Center for Economic Policy as deputy or successor to the Reich Economics Minister Rudolf Hilferding in the Provisional Reich Economics Council and as a member of the board of directors of the Bank of Workers, White-collar Employees and Officials.[58],[59] Positions that he was to hold in a similar form in his second life in Israel. "Naphtali's area of ​​activity was primarily the industrial economy and banking and money management. The proposals of the social democrats and the trade unions to reform stock corporation law, in particular to reform antitrust law and to develop an effective monopoly, can largely be traced back to his initiative and advice. and cartel control in Germany. In the area of ​​banking, monetary and currency policy, too, his ideas are expressed in many actions, submissions and resolutions of the socialist organizations. "[60]

Since 1925 he had a strong influence on the theoretical debate in social democracy, in particular through the concept of economic democracy. To this end, he published an anthology in 1928, in which he tried to describe their nature, their path and their goal, also by name.[61] For this he used the stage offered by the General German Trade Union Federation (ADGB) and gave a much-noticed presentation at its congress in Hamburg.[62],[63]

So it said in the resolution of the ADGB Congress on the realization of economic democracy: "The democratization of the economy leads to socialism. Showing this path clearly and leading economic and social development along this path is a task that primarily falls to the trade unions. Not as a distant future goal, but as a daily development process In this process of development the organized workforce has grown up with various individual tasks. The democratization of the economy means the gradual abolition of the domination based on the ownership of capital and the transformation of the governing organs of the economy from organs of capitalist interests into such The democratization of the economy takes place step by step with the more and more clearly visible structural change of capitalism. The development from capitalist individual enterprise to organized monopoly capitalism clearly leads Aroused the genetics of the organized workforce and the politically and democratically organized society. "[64]

His vision of an economic democracy is characterized by reformist and partly revisionist ideas regarding socialism, which he was only able to imagine as a distant, armed goal. Even during the world economic crisis, he stuck to this opinion and tried to improve the living conditions for many millions of people by making small changes in the given system. The SPD must not adhere to revolutionary ideas at any price, but must reflect on ideals such as freedom and justice and through these find the way back to sensible reforms.[65]

Naphtali himself closed his main work with an admission to this problem: "The call for economic democracy, the justification of which in all its varied content was the task of this book, does not mean any change in the goals of the modern labor movement. [...] The clarity of the next stages of the struggle, the illumination of the new fronts of the struggle Rather, the economic development of the trade unions is the most noble means of stimulating the will of the workers to fight. The insight that every small step towards the democratization of the economy is at the same time a building block for the realization of the great ideal of the future, ennobles the struggle of the present. "[66]

3.1.2. Karl Kautsky

At this point, Karl Kautsky's biography can be seen as representative of the multinationality and internationality of the socialist movements in Europe. The German-Czech Kautsky was born in Prague, had a mother of Austrian descent and a Czech father. Born in Prague, soon moved to Vienna, he enjoyed a school education in the capital of what Max Adler would later call the Austro-Hungarian dual monarchy of Austria-Hungary, "multi-ethnic prison"[67] (also "Völkerkerker"[68] ), in which, according to the criticism of many contemporaries, nothing worked, but somehow everything worked. Still penetrated, as in Robert Musil's novel The man without qualities Perfectly described in literary terms, the paper-white sleeve of the administration covered the entire empire and also enabled Kautsky to gain a comprehensive education during his school and university days. In the course of these studies and his interest in the Paris Commune, he soon became involved in social democracy, in particular by writing and drafting socialist texts. For this he stayed in Switzerland (Zurich), through which he was able to establish initial contacts with Wilhelm Liebknecht, August Bebel and Eduard Bernstein.[69],[70]

In The new time, the later "medium of his power"[71], he worked across a broad spectrum to address the classic workers and social democrats and at the same time to set himself apart from writers and students, because he identified the cause of the split in the labor movement in the multifaceted, complicated, multi-layered and frayed theoretical-intellectual debate. After Helga Schultz, he expressis verbis distanced himself from leading economists, namely Gustav Schmoller and Lujo Brentano, whom he disrespectfully but also deliberately dubbed Catholic Socialists. In addition, he was largely responsible for the theoretical-fundamental parts of the revolutionary new party program of the SPD from 1891, developed at the Erfurt party congress.[72] At that time still in close cooperation with Eduard Bernstein, who concentrated more on practical-tactical aspects. After the end of the Bismarck Socialist Law, which completely failed its intention, and in the wake of the steady growth in membership and supporters of organized social democracy, they created one of the most groundbreaking programs in the history of the SPD, under the skilful direction of Friedrich Engels.[73],[74]

However, after Bernstein in 1898 by means of two articles in The new time[75] renounced the ideological ultimate goal of socialism and the revisionist current, under the strong influence of English Fabier socialism, began to speak or use the word, Kautsky began to argue strongly against Bernstein.[76],[77]

Neither in the purely public services of general interest (municipal socialism) nor in the newly emerging stock corporations and trusts he saw a pre-form of socialist socialization, but merely a new form of capitalist accumulation of power through the interweaving of industrial and banking capital, which is very close to Rudolf Hilferding's line of argument should be who made this thought an integral part of his work The finance capital he lifted. Paradoxically, after considerable wage increases, strong occupational health and safety legislation, a reduction in working hours and a significant increase in production with simultaneous self-management of the workers in democratic self-organization, he was able to identify processes of rationalization and concentration in trusts that could take on exemplary character through planned production (on demand, not on profit) .[78]

Interestingly, Kautsky got into a dispute over two other relevant areas with the Austromarxists. On the one hand, as guardian of the Grail of Marxist doctrine, he maintained the link between Marxism and Neo-Kantianism[79] for absurd. Broken down, this meant that he did not consider it necessary to build up a further necessity in the form of a moral command in addition to historically determined socialism. A dispute over the direction broke out with Kurt Eisner and, above all, Max Adler.[80] On the other hand, his aversion to communism and especially to Bolshevism, which earned him the resentment of Lenin and the nickname "renegade Kautsky" through the Russian revolutionary leader, led him to recognize the fascist danger too late. He did not want to or could not support the united front against this threat, which Otto Bauer, Victor and Friedrich Adler were massively promoting, because he was so certain that the labor movement would gain the upper hand.[81]

3.1.3. Otto Bauer

The later leader of the Austrian social democracy and architect of the "Red Vienna", Otto Bauer, was one of the leading Austromarxists alongside Rudolf Hilferding and Max Adler. He was born in Vienna in 1881, spent a large part of his youth in Merano and returned to Vienna to study after completing his school career. At the university he came into contact with various schools of thought in the fields of politics, science and philosophy. Bauer's fellow students included Joseph Alois Schumpeter, Ludwig von Mises and Rudolf Hilferding, and he also enjoyed lessons from Eugen Böhm Ritter von Bawerk, even though he came into contact with socialist ideas during puberty.[82]

His main work is also against the background of the complicated political constitution of the Habsburg Empire The question of nationality and social democracy[83], which appeared as the second volume of the Marx studies.[84] He published the Marx studies with Karl Renner, Rudolf Hilferding, Max Adler and Gustav Eckstein.[85],[86] In addition to the two pillars, the Austrian and the Hungarian, an adaptation of the system seemed indispensable if one was interested in preserving this empire. A possible solution would have been the construction of another, third, Slavic column. This option disappeared because of the assassination attempt on Archduke Franz Ferdinand, who was a modernizer, in Sarajevo and the success of Franz Conrad von Hötzendorf's warmongering efforts should ultimately lead the German Empire into world war and ruin.

Otto Bauer also had to go into this war. He was used in Galicia. At the beginning of the war, the Austrian social democracy pursued a similar strategy to the German truce policy as the German one, although the mood changed more quickly because of the catastrophic military achievements of the Habsburg army. This change in mood was dramatically illustrated by the assassination attempt by Friedrich Adler on the then Prime Minister Karl Graf Stürgkh. Otto Bauer was a Russian prisoner of war from 1914 to 1917.[87] In order to enforce his liberation, the Swedish party leader Hjalmar Branting traveled to Petrograd at the request of Victor Adler, in order to appeal directly to the Kerensky government and probably also to the Danish commission for the release of Bauer.During the time leading up to the transfer, he met both Menshevik and Bolshevik politicians, which would shape him from then on. He later developed a greater understanding of the situation in Russia and the work of the Bolsheviks than many other Western European socialists and social democrats.[88]

In the difficult post-war and upheaval period, the Austrian Social Democrats in general and Otto Bauer personally took on responsibility. As chairman of the socialization commission, he tried to set up an economic organization inspired by guild socialism with Schumpeter, who had already worked with Hilferding and Kautsky in the German socialization commission.[89]"Ultimately, the socialization campaign was exhausted in the declamation of proving the competitiveness of a socialized industry by operating public enterprises, testing its effectiveness and wanting to expand the scope of this economic form in the 'second attempt'. After a brisk start, socialization came soon stalled, came to a standstill and remained a torso. "[90]

Bauer and the Social Democrats achieved greater successes in another field. In cooperation with the works councils and the chambers of labor, it was possible within a very short time under revolutionary pressure to fight for the eight-hour day, minimum wages and unemployment and social insurance for the Austrian workers.[91]"The [...] implemented reform projects made Austria the most progressive state in the world in this field in a very short time, apart from the Soviet Union."[92] Critics, however, accused Bauer of having stabilized a capitalist Austria with these reforms, which were necessary in any case, and had only achieved a minimum instead of a possible maximum. The revolutionary will of the working class was at least appeased, if not broken, by the smallest concessions made by the monopoly capitalists.[93]

After leaving the government, Bauer intensified his focus on programmatic issues. The party program of the SDAP, which was decided in 1926 at the Linz party congress, a year before the SPD party congress in Kiel, should prove to be decisive for the coming years. It clearly bore the signature of Otto Bauer, left no doubt about a determined historical path to socialism and was shaped by the view that the state was an instrument of class interests in accordance with the balance of power of the ruling classes.[94] For him, participation in the government of the SDAP only made sense if there was an approximate equilibrium of class forces - Max Adler expressly does not share his idea of ​​equilibrium at this point, but instead advocates speaking of an equal tension between class forces -[95],[96] rule, because only then would social democracy also be able to adequately represent the interests of the working class. If this requirement is not met, the SDAP must reject coalition offers in order not to advance to the stirrup holder and the legitimizing fig leaf of conservative and bourgeois politics. Reform-oriented socialists have been preoccupied with this problem since Bernstein's theses at the latest, constantly subcutaneously holding up the charge of revisionism. Otto Bauer himself summed up this:

"The working class underestimates the results of its own class struggles in an entire period of history if it downsizes these achievements of the reformist labor movement on the basis of democracy capitalism did not abolish. But it raised capitalism to a higher stage of its development. "[97]

Although social democracy in the First Republic was in opposition to conservative governments at the national level after the revolutionary phase, it was able to translate its social ideas into realpolitik at the local level. A shining example was the "Red Vienna", in which the SDAPÖ won an absolute majority several times. In various fields - educational policy (evening schooling for workers, access to education for women and girls, unified school, secularization, etc.), financial policy (luxury taxes, progressive housing and income tax, etc.), health policy (health care in schools, advice for mothers, public hygiene facilities, compulsory medical examinations), Social policy (kindergartens, cultural institutions, associations), housing policy (tens of thousands of apartments with modern connections [gas, water, electricity]) - the party achieved decisive improvements for the living conditions of many people.[98],[99]


[1] Cf. Hilferding, Rudolf: From the prehistory of Marx's economy, in: Die neue Zeit - Wochenschrift der Deutschen Sozialdemokratie. 1911-1912, Volume 1, Issue 10, Stuttgart, 1912, pp. 346 and 351.

[2] See Marx, Karl; Engels, Friedrich: Manifesto of the Communist Party, Berlin, 1953, p. 5.

[3] Cf. Münkler, Herfried: The Great War - Die Welt 1914 to 1918, Berlin, 2013, Die Last der geopolitischen Mitte, pp. 688f.

[4] Cf. Tenfelde, Klaus: Arbeiter im Deutschen Kaiserreich. 1871 to 1914., Bonn, 1991, pp. 18-30.

[5] Cf. Plekhanov, Georgi: Bernstein and Materialism, in: The new time, 1897/1898, Volume 2, Issue 44, Stuttgart, 1898, pp. 545-555.

[6] See. Bauer, Otto: Integral Socialism, in: Franzke, Michael; Rempe, Uwe (Ed.): Left Socialism, Texts on Theory and Practice between Stalinism and Social Reformism, Leipzig, 1998, p. 291.

[7] See Bracher, Karl Dietrich; Funke, Manfred; Jacobsen, Hans-Adolf (Ed.): The Weimar Republic 1918-1933, Düsseldorf, 1987, p. 525.

[8]Cf. Argenziano, Mikael: Klasskamp och cultural "immunitet". Svenska socialisters reaction inför den italienska facismen 1919-1929., In: Scandia, 61: 2, Lund, 1995, p. 200.

[9] Cf. Helwing, Marcus: Volksheim and welfare state Sweden. The concept of socialism by Gunnar Myrdal, Munich, 2016, p. 6.

[10] See O'Toole, Jeanne Marie: An Analysis of Gunnar Myrdal's Social and Educational Theory, Dissertation, Loyola University Chicago, Chicago, 1972, p. 4.

[11] See Kaufmann, Franz-Xaver: Variations of the Welfare State Great Britain, Sweden, France and Germany - Between Capitalism and Socialism, Heidelberg, New York Dordrecht & London, 2013, pp. 120f.

[12] Etzemüller, Thomas: >> Swedish Modern <<, in: Mittelweg 36 - Journal of the Hamburg Institute for Social Research, 6/2009, Hamburg, 2009, p. 49.

[13] Daun, Åke: Swedish Mentality, Pennsylvania, 1996.

[14] See Helwing, Volksheim and Welfare State Sweden, p. 7.

[15] See O'Toole, p. 16.

[16] See Ottosson, Sten: Sverige som förebild - En discussion om svenska självbilder med utgångpunkt från tre reseberättelser / reportage från andra halften av 1930-talet., In: Scandia, 68: 1, Lund, 2002, p. 110.

[17] See Helwing, Volksheim and Welfare State Sweden, p. 6.

[18] Cf. Branting, Hjalmar: The labor movement in Sweden, in: The new time - review of intellectual and public life. - No. 11, 1892-1893, Volume 2, Issue 50, Stuttgart, 1893, p. 709.

[19] See Schultz, Helga: Transformation - The Swedish Model and the Crisis of the European Welfare State, Berlin, 2014, p. 2.

[20] See Myrdal, Alva; Myrdal, Gunnar: Kris i befolkningsfrågan, Stockholm, 1934.

[21] See Henze, Valeska: The Swedish welfare state. On the structure and function of a political order model., Working papers "Communities" of the Northern European Institute of the Humboldt University of Berlin, No. 19, Berlin, 1999, p. 2.

[22] See O'Toole, p. 4.

[23] See Kaufmann, p. 115ff.

[24] Schultz, Transformation, p. 2.

[25] See Koblik, Steven: Between Reform and Revolution, in: Scandia, 42: 2, Lund, 1976, p. 116.

[26] See Koblik, pp. 119f.

[27] Ibid, pp. 120f.

[28] Cf. Edenman, Ragnar: Socialdemokratiska riksdagsgruppen, 1903-1920, En studie i den svenska riksdagens partiväsen, Uppsala, 1946, p. 165.

[29] Rosenberg, Göran: Volksheim Sweden - From the model state of progress to an insecure nation, in: Lettre International, No. 101, Berlin, 2013, p. 36.

[30] See Schultz, Helga: European Socialism - Always Different - Karl Kautsky - George Bernard Shaw - Jean Jaurès - Józef Pilsudski - Alexander Stambolijski - Wladimir Medem - Leo Trotsky - Otto Bauer - Andreu Nin - Josip Broz Tito - Herbert Marcuse - Alva and Gunnar Myrdal, Berlin, 2014, pp. 454f.

[31] Cf. Embäck, Theodor: En uppgörelse mellan tradition och modernitet? - Förändringar i den politiska argumentationen från Allmänna valmansförbundets or Nya Dagligt Allehandas och Socialdemokraternas or Social-Demokratens sida mellan andrakammarvalen 1928-1932., Lunds universitet, Lund, 2012, p. 11.

[32] Cf. Branting, Hjalmar: The Swedish parliamentary elections, in: The new time - weekly of the German social democracy. - No. 21, 1902-1903, Volume 1, Issue 2, Stuttgart, 1903, p. 54.

[33] See Embäck, p. 12.

[34] See Schultz, European Socialism, pp. 454f.

[35] Cf. Sjöberg, Stefan: The Swedish Experience; The decline of the "Volksheim", Berlin, 2003, in: URL: http://www.rosalux.de/fileadmin/rls_uploads/pdfs/Themen/leftparties/pdfs/Sjoeberg_Schweden_d
.pdf (last accessed: March 5, 2017).

[36] Stråth, Bo: Socialist currents in Europe after World War II. The example of Scandinavia, in: Dowe, Dieter (Ed.): Democratic Socialism in Europe since the Second World War - Lectures and discussions at an international conference of the discussion group on the history of the Friedrich Ebert Foundation and the Institute for Social Movements of the University of Bochum in Berlin on October 2, 2000, Bonn, 2001, p. 128.

[37] Cf. Hilferding, Rudolf: Das Finanzkapital. A study of the recent development of capitalism, reprint of the new edition from 1947, unchanged reproduction of the last edition published by the author, Vienna 1923 - Berlin, 1955.

[38] Naphtali, Fritz (Ed.): Economic Democracy - Your essence, way and goal, Berlin, 1928.

[39] See Thalheimer, August: About the so-called economic democracy, Berlin, 1928, p. 6.

[40] Schultz, European Socialism, p. 13.

[41] Cf. Fromm, Eberhard: Rudolf Hilferding - From Pediatrician to Reich Finance Minister. in: Berlinische Monatsschrift, 8/1997, Berlin, 1997, p. 65.

[42] Cf. Krätke, Michael R .: Rudolf Hilferding and the "organized capitalism", in: Journal for Socialist Politics and Economy, Issue 199, Dortmund, 2013, p.56f.

[43] See Smaldone, William: Rudolf Hilferding - Tragedy of a German Social Democrat, Bonn, 2000, pp. 13-44.

[44] See Fromm, p. 66.

[45] Krätke, Rudolf Hilferding and "Organized Capitalism", p. 57.

[46] Ibid.

[47] Ibid.

[48] Fromm, p. 68.

[49]George F. Kennan quoted from: Winkler, Heinrich August: The long way to the west, Volume 1, German history 1806-1933, special edition for the federal and state centers for political education, Bonn, 2006, p. 332.

[50] See Fromm, p. 66.

[51] See Smaldone, pp. 45-81.

[52] See Fromm, p. 67.

[53] See Krätke, Rudolf Hilferding and "organized capitalism", p. 58.

[54] Minutes of the Social Democratic Party Congress 1927 in Kiel with the report of the women's conference, The party congress met from May 22nd to 27th in the trade union building in Kiel and the women's conference took place there from May 27th to 29th, Berlin, 1927, p.

[55] On Stolberg-Wernigerode, Otto: Fritz Naphtali, Neue deutsche Biographie, Volume 18, Berlin, 1997, p. 730.

[56] See Baade, Fritz: in: Heyde, Ludwig (Ed.): Internationales Concise Dictionary of Trade Unions., Volume 2, Berlin, 1932, p. 1136.

[57] See Schneider, Michael: Fritz Naphtali, in: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung (Ed.): Archive for Social History, Volume 34, Bonn, 1994, p. 548.

[58] See on Stolberg-Wernigerode, Fritz Naphtali, p. 730.

[59] Cf. Riemer, Jehuda: Fritz Perez Naphtali - Social Democrat and Zionist., Series of publications by the Institute for German History, University of Tel Aviv, No. 12, Gerlingen and Tel Aviv, 1991, p. 47.

[60] Baade, p. 1136.

[61] Cf. Nemitz, Kurt: The Shadows of the Past - Contributions to the Situation of Intellectual German Jews in the 20s and 30s, Oldenburg, 2000, p. 133.

[62] See on Stolberg-Wernigerode, Fritz Naphtali, p. 730.

[63] Cf. Tenfelde, Klaus: Unions, Science, Codetermination - 60 Years WSI - Lecture held at the WSI Autumn Forum 2006 - Frankfurt a. M., 2006, p. 7.

[64] Minutes of the negotiations of the 13th Congress of the Trade Unions of Germany, held in Hamburg from September 3 to 7, 1928, Berlin, 1928, pp. 20ff.

[65] See on Stolberg-Wernigerode, Fritz Naphtali, p. 730.

[66] Naphtali, p. 182.

[67] Adler, Max: Political or Social Democracy, Berlin, 1926, p. 20.

[68] Pfabigan, Alfred: Max Adler (1873-1937), in: Euchner, Walter (Ed.): Classics of Socialism II - From Jaurès to Herbert Marcuse, Munich, 1991, p. 86.

[69] See Schultz, European Socialism, p. 18f.

[70] See Gilcher-Holtey, Ingrid: Karl Kautsky (1854-1938), in: Euchner, Walter (Hrsg.): Klassiker des Sozialismus I - Von Babeuf bis Plechanow, Munich, 1991, p. 233.

[71] Gilcher-Holtey, Karl Kautsky (1854-1938), p. 248.

[72] Cf. Gilcher-Holtey, Ingrid: The mandate of the intellectual. - Karl Kautsky und die Sozialdemokratie., Berlin, 1986, pp. 67-76.

[73] See Schultz, European Socialism, p.22f.

[74] See Ruck, Michael; Dauderstädt, Michael: On the history of the future - social democratic utopias and their social relevance, archive of social democracy, discussion group history, issue 90, Bonn, 2011, p. 14ff.

[75] See Schultz, European Socialism, p.26.

[76] Cf. ibid., P. 27 and cf. Gilcher-Holtey, Das Mandat des intellectuals., P. 159.

[77] Cf. Krätke, Michael R .: An "incorrigible Marxist". Karl Kautsky and the "Neue Zeit", in: Journal for Socialist Politics and Economy, Issue 196, Dortmund, 2013, p. 65.

[78] See Schultz, European Socialism, p. 29f.

[79] See Bauer, Otto: Das Weltbild des Kapitalismus, Frankfurt a. M., 1971, p. 56.

[80] See Schultz, European Socialism, p. 31

[81] See ibid, p. 43f.

[82] See Schultz, European Socialism, pp.292ff.

[83] See Bauer, Otto: The question of nationalities and social democracy, Vienna, 1907.

[84] Cf. Krätke, Michael R .: Otto Bauer and the "integral socialism", in: Journal for Socialist Politics and Economy, Issue 198, Dortmund, 2013, p. 58.

[85] See ibid, p. 56.

[86] See Krätke, Michael R .: Otto Bauer (1881-1938) - The Troubles of the Third Way, in: Journal for Socialist Politics and Economy, Issue 97, Dortmund, 1997, p. 56.

[87] On Stolberg-Wernigerode, Otto: Otto Bauer, Neue deutsche Biographie, Volume 1, Berlin, 1953, p. 645.

[88] See Saage, Richard: Otto Bauer (1881-1938), in: Euchner, Walter (Hrsg.): Klassiker des Sozialismus II - Von Jaurès bis Herbert Marcuse, Munich, 1991, p. 168.

[89] See Schultz, European Socialism, p. 312ff.

[90] Butterwegge, Christoph: Austromarxism and State - Political Theory and Practice of Austrian Social Democracy between the Two World Wars, Marburg, 1991, p. 248.

[91] See Schultz, European Socialism, p. 311.

[92] Butterwegge, p. 248.

[93] See Butterwegge, p. 248f.

[94] See Schultz, European Socialism, p. 314.

[95] See Adler, pp. 112-131.

[96] Cf. Helwing, Marcus: Max Adlers "Political or Social Democracy". A source interpretation, Munich, 2016, p. 10f.

[97] Bauer, Otto: Between two world wars? The crisis of the world economy, democracy and socialism, Prague, 1936, p.104f.

[98] See Schultz, European Socialism, p. 317ff.

[99] See Bauer, Between Two World Wars ?, p. 101.

End of the reading sample from 108 pages