Preliminary Programme

Spain and Austria both were subject to totalitarian and authoritarian regimes that have its origins in the 1930s, and in the case of Spain, went on to last for several decades. This paper aims to explore the similarities and differences in the theoretical frameworks debated and implemented by the intellectual elites in their respective countries utilizing a comparative approach. Interestingly enough, the information flow between intellectuals in the 1930s is unilateral - while the Austrian theorists of the “Organic State” reference Spain and spanish developments, the spanish discourse seems to be largely self-referential, with sideway glances at the developments in Portugal. However, the similar ideological and organizational concepts used under the general term “Organic Democracy” - the central role of the Catholic Church as “spiritual leader”, who defines the normative orientation of the system and the concept of “greater good” used within it, the authoritarian and controlling attitude towards its citizens and the categorical rejection parliamentary democracy - justify a comparative approach. Johannes Messner (1891 − 1984), largely considered one of the founding fathers and leading theorists of the concept of “Organic Democracy”, developed the framework used by the organised, political sector of roman-catholicism in Austria to combat and oppose parliamentary democracy. The normative character of “organic democracy,” deeply ingrained in its very foundations corresponds with the categorical rejection of the egalitarian approach imminent in a representative parliamentary system. Messner’s idea of “Organic Democracy” is based on the interaction of various, autonomous, self-governing entities (“classes”, or “Stände”), that are formed taking into consideration the position of the respective Stand in its economic context. The Spanish idea of Nationalsyndicalism formed and focused by José Antonio Primo de Rivera, envisions a similar organization of the state, however utilizing the concept of syndicates, or unions. The intention of the nacionalcatolicas or national catholicists to estatlish themselves as a driving agent in the Primer Franquismo leads to a interesting political and power-swapping strategies within the consolidating franquist state. The analysis of the political strategies and goals utilized by the institutional actors in Austria and Spain constitutes the second part of this research paper.

Keywords: Comparative approach, Austria (1933 - 1938), Spain (1939 - 1945), Johannes Messner, Falanje, Sändestaat, Corporativism, Nacionalsindicalismo (Show less)

The years 1918 -1940 marked the existence of the First Republic of Estonia. This period covers at least two transitions – a transition to democracy and a transition to authoritarian rule. Among the core institutions of a democratic political society are elections and electoral rules. During this period, the rules on local elections were amended before almost every election, which is a sign that local elections were an important tool for certain powers to gain and/or keep the political power and control. The paper seeks to identify the decisive election-related aspects of the two transitions. For this purpose the paper describes and examines the local election legislation in Estonia, the electoral system, and elections from 1918 until 1940, in the context of the transitions. (Show less)

My paper will examine the influence and dissemination of corporatist ideas in inter-war Greece. Greek intellect and politics were certainly not immune to corporatism. As a matter of fact, one sixth of the members of the Greek Congress, a legislative body that was (re)founded in 1929, were representatives of professional organisations. However, in the first decade of the inter-war period corporatist theory was a rather hazy response to rising communist agitation. Corporatist ideas became widespread in Greece in the late 1920s, following a series of agricultural crisis that inflicted the national economy. Since nearly 60% of the country’s economically active population was engaged in agriculture and husbandry, Greek corporatism became entangled with radical agrarianist and ‘peasantist’ nationalist ideas. Konstantinos Karavidas, the head of a department in the Ministry of Agriculture and a publicist who became well-known for his radical agrarianist, nationalist and corporatist ideas, developed the notion of ‘communalism’ (κοινοτισμός) as an answer to his misgivings about the agrarian co-operative movement. The global economic crisis of the 1930s, which inflicted Greece in April 1932, and the exacerbation of class conflict gave a greater incentive to conservative intellectuals and nationalist activists to elaborate on corporatist ideas. For instance, Greek war veterans espoused in 1936 the ‘full co-operation of capital and labour’, along with the other social reforms, in support of the existing social order and in the name of the attainment of ‘social justice’. Nevertheless, parliamentary democracy was a serious barrier for the application of such ideas. The establishment of the Metaxas semi-fascist dictatorial regime on 4 August 1936 turned the tables in favour of corporatism. The regime declared from the very beginning, in September 1936, its intention to establish a corporatist state, and drawing on the fascist model envisaged the establishment of a Great Council of National Labour and the Assembly of Professions. Corporatism was fully put into practice in agriculture: in November 1938 the ‘Houses of the Farmer’ replaced the Agricultural Chambers. The foundation of a Ministry of Co-operatives in September 1939 was another clear landmark towards this political direction. However, the eruption of the Second World War at the time precluded the expansion of such institutions to other sectors of the economy. Last but not least, it should be noted that corporatist ideas were not limited to conservative and quasi-fascist circles but inspired different nuances of intellectuals. For instance, Demetrius Kalitsounakis, a prominent economist of social-democratic leanings, was admittedly enticed by ‘social corporatism’. (Show less)

Facing an unprecedented economical, financial and social crisis in the early years of the third decade of the 20th century, several European countries decided to opt for authoritarian constitutional features to deal with their internal social unrest, political instability and economic crisis. In such a political transformation, liberal democracy – the mainstream political regime promoted by the 1919 Peace treaties – was severally attacked by new political solutions as state’s corporatism and fascism. It is the intention of this paper to present a comparative study of these constitutional changes. (Show less)