of the bourgeoisie to maintain their apartment and, thus, the outer appearance of their existence.) Das österreichische Wirtschaftsproblem. Denkschrift der österreichisch-deutschen Arbeitsgemeinschaft (Edited by Bruno Enderes, Karl Herrmann, Benedikt Kautsky, Rudolf Kobatsch, Hermann Neubacher, Edmund Palla, Erich Seutter-Lötzen, Gustav Stolper and Max Tayenthal), Vienna 1925, p. 21 f.
22 Marie-Theres Arnbom, Friedmann, Gutmann, Lieben, Mandl, Strakosch. Fünf Familienporträts aus Wien vor 1938, Vienna – Cologne – Weimar 2002.
23 It would be tedious to list the numerous examples. Friedrich Engel-Janosi never forgot to refer to the “wisdom” of the economist Schumpeter that a crown is a crown, cf. F. Engel-Janosi, ... aber ein stolzer Bettler, Graz 1974, 71: “Die Besuche österreichischer Finanzgrößen bei den Eltern hatten schon ihre Spuren in Gestalt voluminöser Pakete von Kriegsanleihen hinterlassen, sie erwiesen sich später als vorzüglich geeignet zu Tapezierungszwecken. (...) Man mußte wirklich ein so bedeutender Nationalökonom wie Professor Schumpeter sein, um dem Zauber der Formel ‘Krone ist Krone’ so völlig zu verfallen ...” (The visits Austrian financial stars made to my parents left their traces in the shape of voluminous packets of war bonds that later proved themselves to be ideal for wallpapering. (…) One would really have to be such an important economist as Professor Schumpeter to completely fall for the magic formula that ‘a crown is a crown’.).
24 Marija Wakounig, Konsumverhalten des Wiener Bürgertums im 19. und 20. Jahrhundert, in: Jahrbuch des Vereins für Geschichte der Stadt Wien 44/45, 1989, pp. 154–86, here p. 174.
25 Stefan Zweig, Die Welt von Gestern. Erinnerungen eines Europäers (Frankfurt/M. 1970).
26 Arnold Madlé, Die Bezüge der öffentlichen Angestellten. In: Julius Bunzel (ed.), Geldentwertung und Stabilisierung in ihren Einflüssen auf die soziale Entwicklung in Österreich (Schriften des Vereins für Sozialpolitik 169, Munich – Leipzig 1925), pp. 131–136. As a comparison, workers and employees received around 75 per cent of their real pre-war wages in 1925.
27 Siegfried Strakosch, Der Selbstmord eines Volkes. Wirtschaft in Österreich, Wien – Leipzig – Munich, 1922, p. 50 f.
28 Franz Haber, Österreichs Wirtschaftsbilanz. Ein Vergleich mit der Vorkriegszeit, Munich 1928, p. 95.
29 Strakosch, Selbstmord, p. 110.
30 Ernst Bruckmüller, Sozialstruktur und Sozialpolitik, in: Erika Weinzierl – Kurt Skalnik (eds.), Österreich 1918 – 1938, vol., 1, here pp. 406–407.
31 Bruckmüller, Sozialstruktur und Sozialpolitik, p. 406.
32 Alexander Spitzmüller, “...und hat auch Ursach, es zu lieben.” Vienna – Munich – Stuttgart – Zürich 1955, p. 71.
33 On the Creditanstalt crisis: Spitzmüller, as well as Dieter Stiefel, Finanz-diplomatie und Weltwirtschaftskrise. Die Krise der Creditanstalt für Handel und Gewerbe, Frankfurt/M. 1989. On the application of the enabling act for the war economy, cf. Peter Huemer, Sektionschef Rudolf Hecht und die Zerstörung der Demokratie in Österreich, Vienna 1975.
34 Spitzmüller, ibid., p. 371 ff.
35 Hans Loewenfeld-Russ, Im Kampf gegen den Hunger. Aus den Erinnerungen des Staatssekretärs für Volksernährung 1918–1920, Isabella Ackerl (ed.), Vienna 1986, p. 331 ff.
36 Exemplary for the banking sector: Peter Melichar, Neuordnung im Bankwesen. Die NS-Maßnahmen und die Problematik der Restitution (Veröffentlichungen der Österreichischen Historikerkommission. Vermögensentzug während der NS-Zeit sowie Rückstellungen und Entschädigungen seit 1945 in Österreich, vol. 11, Vienna – Munich 2004); Peter Eigner – Peter Melichar, Enteignungen und Säuberungen – Die österreichischen Banken im Nationalsozialismus, in: Dieter Ziegler (ed.), Banken und “Arisierungen” in Mitteleuropa während des Nationalsozialismus (Geld und Kapital, Jahrbuch der Gesellschaft für mitteleuropäische Banken- und Sparkassengeschichte, Alois Mosser, Alice Teichova, Richard Tilly (eds.), 2001, Stuttgart 2002, pp. 43–118.
Fundamental Principles of the Civil Society
Which Trends Do We Need to Protect Ourselves Against?
Werner J. Patzelt
Summary: A civil society of the Western style is not achieved once and for all. A civil society can only develop when – and for as long as – its complex cultural prerequisites exist. In addition, there are several trends that are currently endangering the civil society. As has so often been the case in history, political thought and speech are now subjected to rather strict regulations and restraints. These are guaranteed by creating taboos, and censorship imposed by oneself or others, as well as the social exclusion and condemnation of dissidents.
1. Fundamentals of a Western-style civil society
It is often the case that, when one is looking for insights that are beneficial for the present time, it is a good idea to dwell on some thoughts from the past. If these still seem plausible today, they contain lessons that have remained valid. One of the core statements in the dialogue by the Roman politician and intellectual Marcus Tullius Cicero (106–43 BC) “De re publica” fulfils this in our search for the fundamentals of a civil society: “Est […] res publica res populi, populus autem non omnis hominum coetus quoquo modo congregatus, sed coetus multitudinis iuris consensu et utilitatis communione sociatus.” Translated into English in a way that suits our purpose, this means: “The civil society is an affair of the people; however, they should not be understood as a group that has come together in one way or another, but as the collaboration of many such groups that become connected to form a society through their agreement to uniting regulations, as well as common benefits.” The principles of a civil society understood in this manner include rules that are followed jointly, as well as experiences of common benefits arising out of actions in keeping with these rules. The benefit is the common good.
Cicero’s concept is based on one of the central concepts of the Greek polymath Aristotle (384–322 BC). With the Greek city state – the polis – in mind, he spoke of the kononia politiké, the citizenry united by binding law, and binding ethics that – precisely through the acceptance and performance of public offices – aimed at a “good life” for all. Of course, neither Aristotle nor Cicero thought about equal rights for men and women. They also found the status of a slave without rights completely normal. However, restrictions of this kind, which we find intolerable today, can be shaken off without changing anything about the core concept of this kind of political vision: Self-aware citizens do not only take care of their own interests – in Greek: of tà idia, which makes them “idiots”. They also care for the interests of the community they belong to: for the common good of a polis as “politai”, and as “cives” for the common good of a “civitas”, a “res publica”.
Naturally, what we are referring to here could be described as a “civil society”. However, this term has become somewhat stale through its Marxist connotation. There, the “bourgeoisie” follows the feudal lords as a class and precedes the “civil” society of the socialist style. That is the reason that the German term “Zivilgesellschaft”, which emulates the French and English expressions of “société civile” and “civil society”, has been in use for many decades. Nevertheless, the Germanised concept of the “Zivilgesellschaft” also includes comparisons such as “civilised vs. barbaric” and “civil vs. military”. The first is absolutely reasonable, seeing that regulations, complete with their orientation on the
