Search Results

From January to June 1919, Keynes was the principal British Treasury representative at the Paris Peace Conference (PPC). He was the Chancellor of the Exchequer’s representative on the Supreme Economic Council (SEC) from its creation in February, and a member of its Finance Section (FS), and of various other committees. This chapter deals with Keynes’s activities during the peace conference: concerning food supplies for Germany and Austria; seeking cancellation of war debts, and promoting a credit scheme for the rehabilitation of Europe; and concerning reparations, including his attempt to modify the draft Treaty.

This chapter continues to evaluate the effect of selection methods on presidential activism with a thorough investigation of countries employing indirect (Estonia, Hungary, Germany) or direct (Austria, Ireland, Poland) presidential elections. Case study analysis allows for the consideration of other aspects of activism in addition to the president's role in cabinet formation, including the use of veto, appointment, and legislative powers; initiation of public debates; and intervention in international affairs. The study of presidential behavior in all six countries reveals significant amount of variance in how actively presidents use these powers among countries with similar election method. The latter, therefore, cannot account for the observed variance. Presidents selected through different processes can either be active or passive depending on whether other institutions provide incentives and opportunities conducive to their activism.

The author describes three policy debates in Austria: initial legalization in the early 1970s, the defeat of an anti‐abortion referendum initiative in 1978, and the authorization of Mifegyne—the ‘abortion pill’—in the late 1990s. The women's movement has been very influential in all abortion debates through their activism in the left‐wing Austrian Social Democratic party and the long‐term commitment of that party to women's right to self‐determination. In all debates as well, the women's policy agencies acted for the movement inside the state policy‐making processes. Austrian abortion politics is an example of movement success in part through state feminism.

Although Austria, the Netherlands, and Belgium are so seemingly alike in their tightly coupled, consociational, and corporatist democratic structures and in the “Bismarckian” origin of their welfare states, they have had radically different experiences since the 1970s. While the Netherlands, which appeared in the 1970s and early 1980s to be afflicted with a terminal ‘Dutch disease’, has seemingly been cured, Belgium, with a similar initial profile, has been malingering and Austria has managed to avoid the crises from which the others are recovering. Since all three countries have internationally exposed and hence vulnerable economies as well as policymaking structures with plural veto positions, the success or failure of adjustment policies did depend on the ability of actors to adopt action orientations that emphasize common, rather than separate, interests. The Austrian social partners succeeded in maintaining this ‘encompassing’ perspective throughout the period under study; the Dutch had to relearn it after dismal failures; and in Belgium, the increasing salience of linguistic cleavages added to the difficulty of achieving, and acting on, convergent perceptions and interest definitions.

Since the constitutional reform of 1929, Austria comes under the rubric of semi‐presidentialism as defined in this volume: alongside the chancellor (prime minister), who is fully responsible to parliament, there is a directly elected president, who appoints the government and can dismiss it, although in practical terms the president has very little accountability. Nevertheless, Austria is generally considered as a parliamentary system by leading comparativists, and indeed it is parliamentary elections rather than presidential elections that decide the distribution of power. This chapter concentrates on the post‐war period, although the interwar years are also important for understanding the gap between the large constitutional powers and limited role that presidents have actually played. It draws on the literature on the Austrian presidency, original archival work, and interviews with political actors. The different sections of the chapter are: The Historical Legacy of Introducing Semi‐Presidentialism; Constitutional Powers and Their Practical Relevance; The Presidency and Party Politics; and Conclusion.

Although this chapter touches on the long-term development of the Austrian permanent representation at Brussels (which dates back to the mid-1950s, when Austria had a mission for handling relations with the European Coal and Steel Community), it concentrates on the time since Austria has been a member of the European Union (1995). The first two sections deal with the organization and personnel of the permanent representation. The following section locates the permanent representation in the policy co-ordination process. A discussion follows of the limits to co-ordination that are inherent in the set-up of the Austrian institutions, and there is also a brief discussion of activities and strategies. The conclusion attempts to situate the empirical findings in the context of models of government.

This chapter on the national co-ordination of European Union (EU) policy in Austria starts by discussing the challenge of co-ordination, and outlining the policy changes and reforms in the lead-up to membership of the EU. The strategy employed has resulted in high ambitions concerning EU co-ordination, and this co-ordination ambition is supported by a policy-making culture that values co-ordination and integration, and is based on the country’s long tradition of wide consultation, grand coalition government, parliamentary consensus seeking, and corporatism. The remainder of the chapter looks at the various actors involved individually, briefly pointing out in which way membership of the EU constitutes a challenge, mapping out the respective actor’s formal role in the co-ordination process, and evaluating the actor’s impact on Austria’s position- taking in the EU. The five sets of actors examined are: the central players ( the cabinet and the central administration); Parliament; the President; the Länder; and interest groups (corporatism). The conclusion aims at an overall evaluation of the EU co-ordination process from a political power perspective.

First provides an overview of the formal structure of the civil service in post‐war Austria and the position of senior officials within it. Includes a discussion of recent changes aimed at making the civil service more flexible and effective and their impact on the top layer of the permanent bureaucracy. The following two main sections look at the incumbents in these positions, and provide information on the demographic and educational background and career patterns (duration in office and inter‐ministerial mobility) of the top civil servants and members of the cabinets ministériels who served in the 1970–1995 period. The next section turns to the political role of senior officials, and the penultimate section discusses the impact of party politics on the civil service. The concluding section summarizes the main points of the chapter.

Discusses the expansion of the cooperation established between the US and Western Europe in the period 1950–1962, and analyses the Atlantic community, Germany's role in the relationship, and Western European integration. The first section looks at the dominant status that America had achieved in Europe by 1950, and at Europe's centrality to American–European cooperation—the shared assumption that Europe was the area of the world that mattered most, and that the struggle between East and West was primarily a struggle over Europe. The second section discusses the (North) Atlantic community in terms of balance of power (notably the threat of Soviet communism), the domestic threat from communists and other anti‐democratic groups, and from Germany, and the third discusses European integration in relation to this Atlantic framework. The fourth and fifth sections examine the motives for America's support of European integration, and the European economic challenge to the Atlantic framework. The sixth section analyses the development of the ‘special relationships’ formed between the US and various European countries, notably Britain, but also West Germany, Norway, Switzerland, Austria, Ireland, Sweden, Finland, and Yugoslavia. The last section looks at some of the concessions that the US had to make, and some of its defeats, in its relationship with Western Europe.

This chapter focuses on the transformation Austria’s FPO political party from a ‘liberalist’ into a right extremist. The party is placed much closer to right extremism rather than liberal-conservatism due to a number of factors. These include its constant de-legitimising of representative democratic institutions, disdain for liberal democratic procedures, distrust for the idea of equality of man, and the appeal to natural community and ethnicity against citizens’ rights.

This chapter considers the nationalist underpinnings of late-century musicology by examining the diverse and even contradictory cultural associations that Adler forged through the medium of his work. In his publications on the medieval origins of harmony, Adler distanced himself from attempts to claim exclusively Germanic origins for polyphonic phenomena. But in essays on Bach, Handel, and Mozart, penned in the mid-1880s, he indulged a brand of cultural chauvinism associated with Wagner and his followers. In his work on the Monuments of Music in Austria series of editions, Adler embraced a supranational vision of Austrian cultural identity endorsed by Habsburg officialdom, yet in his 1904 monograph on Wagner he declined to engage the composer's most inflammatory statements on race and identity. Each of these cases illuminates Adler's response to a specific crisis that shook his society, and together they testify to the difficulties of defining the German in the late-century musicological discourse.

Ferdinand II successfully terminated a Counter-Reformation campaign that had received its first impetus from the meeting of Habsburg and Wittelsbach princes in Munich in October 1579, but which had failed to achieve its main objectives in the reign of Karl II. This chapter assesses the achievements and shortcomings of the Ferdinandean Counter-Reformation by looking at the confessional development from the general expulsion in 1628 to the abolition of religious persecution in 1780–1781. Particular attention is given to the activity of the protagonists of the process of confessional consolidation which roughly spanned the century from the Inner Austrian edict of emigration to the resumption of systematic persecution in 1731. The imperfections of the Catholic achievement are discussed as part of an analysis of the governmental and ecclesiastical response to the problem of crypto-Protestantism in the Austrian lands and Bohemia in the 18th century.