Joerg Haider in historical perspective


Previous message   Next message

From: Victor Hugo Lane hlane@duke.poly.edu
Author's Subject: Re: Query: Joerg Haider in historical perspective
Date Posted: Thu, 17 Feb 2000 17:10:14 -0600

The current discussion of Haider continues to raise some important points.
I think the caution urged in drawing parallels between Hitler and Haider,
based in large measure on some of Haider's comments regarding the Nazi
legacy, is wise.  Yet, as Steven Beller's continued skepticism about the
socio-economic thesis for the rise of the FPOe suggests, something more
seems to be going on and I wonder if we have been avoiding more abstract
issues.  In particular, while one can draw some links between economic
anxiety and the appeal of the FPOe's anti-emigrant rhetoric, I am
decreasingly satisfied with such a mechanical explanation.  It has even
been suggested to me off-list that Austrians themselves did not
necessarily draw that link, and it is concern about being overwhelmed by
foreigners as an independent issue, which lies at the center of the FPOe's
growing popularity.  In short, it appears to be a product of a growing
fear of "an other", and that would indicate that what is really at stake
here is what it means to be Austrian at the turn of the twenty-first
century.

  It has been ages since I have been in Austria, and I have never been
there for long enough to explore the subtleties of Austrian identity, but
isn't the apparent new concern about Austrian identity a reflection of two
integral aspects of Austrian identity over the past 50 years, the Proporz
system and the end of Austrian neutrality and its entry into the EU?  Even
if much of the xenophobia seems aimed at peoples on the East, doesn't the
real tension in Austrian identity lie in Austrians' relationship with
Germany and more broadly the EU?  Times have changed, however, and whereas
once upon a time it was Austrians who doubted their distinctiveness, the
issue now is the preservation of a widely accepted Austrian national
identity in the proximity of the much larger and politically and
culturally more influential German Federal Republic. Indeed, I would argue
that support for Haider and the FPOe is the mirror image of the resurgent
nationalism seen among Welsh and the Scots, which incidentally is led in
both cases by nationalist parties with very left of center political
agendas.

  Those phenomena are widely perceived as offspring of the political and
economic climate created by the E.U. economic climate of the E.U and the
notion of a "Europe of regions."  By contrast, as citizens of a
nation-state, it should not be surprising that a significant proportion of
Austrians have some regret about the transformation of their national
identity to a regional identity.  The possession of a state has been seen
as the ultimate expression of an identities distinctiveness for much of
the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, and even if a revision of that
view is recognized as necessary, a feeling of loss is going to accompany
that shift.  That Austria should be one of the first places this should
affect on politics is not surprising, given Austrians' close linguistic
and cultural ties to the German nation.  As a result their relationship
with Germany bears some similarities with that of English-speaking
Canadians' position vis-a-vis the United States, i.e. that Austrian
identity's distinctiveness is generally accepted, but that does not
entirely alleviate the fear of being overwhelmed from a much larger and
more powerful nation. Under those conditions, the pending loss of a
significant symbol of statehood like the Austrian Schilling is is somewhat
analoguous to that that losing a symbol of statehood like the Austrian
Schilling is not going to be viewed with equanimity.  Here, apart from the
lack of any bands of armed thugs officially, or to my knowledge
unofficially, linked to the FPOe represents a key difference between
Haider and the Austrian Nazis with whom he is often linked.  Whether or
not you like the conception of Austrian national identity, the stand
taken by the Haider and the FPOe regarding expansion of the E.U. and
Brussels make them the protector's of Austrian national sovereignty, not
its executioners.

  Such an interpretation of why a sizable number of Austrians are bothered
by this begs at least two questions.  First, if Austrians are so
protective about their national identity, why did they only begin to show
their support for the FPOe now?  Some of that undoubtedly has to do with
internal factors like collapse of the Proporz system described elsewhere,
but I think it is important to recognize the context in which Austrians
chose to join the EU.  That occurred as the prospect of Austria's
exclusion from the benefits of greater European integration loomed over a
decade ago.  Thus, it was arguably a question first of economic survival
which allowed for relatively little sentimentality about Austrian
identity, at least on the surface.  Moreover, at that time the prospect of
Poland, the Czech Republic (then its former guise as Czechoslovakia), and
Hungary joining the E.U. seemed very distant prospect.  Besides, as I
implied above, Austrians' sense of national identity was sufficiently
developed to withstand the preparatory phases for European integration,
when even the introduction of the Euro was not an entirely certain event.

  The other question raised by a thesis based on dwindling Austrian
sovereignty is why do Austrian supporters of the FPOe express so much
anxiety about the threat posed by foreigners, who are not yet members of
the E.U., and may not become members for some time?  One factor is
projection.  Austria's relations with the E.U. are simply too important
for the threat the E.U. poses Austrian national identity to be completely
admitted.  Another, and the one I suspect is more important, is how just
the possibility of EU expansion eastward reveals Austria's lack of
independence in the EU system.

  Given the very different international political climate in Europe when
Austria began to shift away its policy of neutrality, there was little
need to worry about throngs of foreigners with no grasp of Austria's
distinctive heritage coming to live in Austria.  Now, even if likelihood
of EU expansion to inclusion of Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary in
the near future remains debatable, that threat is more real.  What is
more, the transformation of Austrian identity from one linked to a
well-defined independent state to a regional identity within the EU
arguably makes concern about the preservation of identity more pronounced.
But here I think the real issue has to do with the sense that Austria's
ability to influence when and how EU expansion occurs is probably the best
argument for the significant increase in support for the FPOe.

  Even with the opt-out clauses that are available within the EU
structure, only a few countries involved in the decision on eastward
expansion of the EU are immediately exposed as Austria is.  Moreover,
Germany is the one other country as exposed, if not more so given Poland's
much larger population than either Hungary or the Czech Republic.  But
even if violent xenophobia is more common there, Germany's population is
so much larger than Austria's that the threat is not likely to belt as
acutely, or by such a large proportion of the population there.  Apart
from that, Germany's central position within the emerging EU economic
infrastructure means that it will play a key role in setting the timetable
for EU expansion immigration in a way that Austria will not.

  On this last point, I would like to draw a parallel with conditions in
Austria a century ago.  If the Austrian Republic's political system
derives from the three blocs in what is currently Austria, Austrian
politics derives from the four-bloc system that existed in Cisleithania.
The fourth bloc consisted of the Old Conservative elites, including those
in other crownlands, and while it did not survive intact in the Austrian
Repubic its importance in shaping the three-bloc system of the first and
second Austrian Republic.  In particular, Karl Lueger's populism was a
reaction to the continuing power of that conservative bloc, and its
increasing reliance on people with little link to the German-speaking
Austrians.  Herein lies the parallel with the situation described above.
Polish and the Transleithenian Hungarian elite were able to wield
considerable power, at the expense of the Austro-German liberals, which
created the space for Lueger's social radicalism.  Now European
integration has begun to renew that external factor in Austrian politics,
and the sense by a significant minority of Austrians that their interests
will not be heard has opened the door for politicians ready and willing to
stick up for Austrians' right to be Austrians.

Hugo Lane
Polytechnic University