Nationalism and the Habsburg Empire
common), increased radicalism among the working class. Proletariat participation in the uprisings was therefore a response to worsening material conditions rather than a newly found national consciousness. During this period, there are numerous accounts of workers made unemployed by mechanization (particularly those who worked in the weaving industry) assailing those who remained in work, particularly in major centres of the trade such as Brno – ‘The Manchester of Moravia’ (Judson, 2016, p. 263). In a pattern that would remain true for the next fifty years, much national sentiment instead proliferated among the more literate middle and upper classes who had greater access to the concept of nationalism (Cohen, 2007, pp. 266–267). Vienna experienced some of the most extreme violence and rioting despite being majority German-speaking and surrounded by German-speaking countryside. The urban uprisings of 1848 therefore cannot be seen as a sign of strong nationalist feeling, and the failure of the empire to create a supranational, imperial identity. The leaders of many of these movements may have espoused nationalist ideas, but the root cause of the uprisings was not based on nationalist outrage at the lack of accommodation for national minorities. Instead, they were caused by a dissatisfaction primarily the product of worsening material conditions as a result of the economic changes of the period. The ‘national apathy’ (Judson, 2016, p. 38) of the general population during this period is further highlighted by events that took place just two years prior to the revolutions of 1848. Polish peasants rose up in counter-revolution against the Polish nobility in Austrian Galicia (former Polish territory now held by Austria). The Polish nobility, wanting to restore the Poland that had been partitioned between Russia, Austria, and Prussia had organized (very poorly) a revolution across Galicia. They had been relying upon the support of local peasants to push through their demands (Clark, 2023, pp. 131– 134); they believed that, if the importance of national identity was espoused to them by their ‘betters’, the peasantry would assist. In line with Marxist principle, however, the peasants recognized that they would be equally oppressed, if not more so, under an independent Polish state. The Polish nobility maintained their right to robot (Clark, 2023, p. 132), which meant that they could force their tenants to work for them for a far lower wage than what their labour entailed. In opposition to this, tenants appealed to their rights as subjects of the German-speaking Habsburg crown against those of the Polish nobility. The Galician peasantry believed that an independent Poland would mean more powerful landowners and therefore a more liberal use of robot . It therefore made sense to them to oppose the formation of an independent Polish state. This was particularly felt in east Galicia among the Ruthene (Ukrainian) population who would have not even gained national self-determination from the revolution. The Habsburg state was most successful in inspiring loyalty among the most oppressed racial groups, Jews and Ruthenes, ironically both concentrated in Galicia. This was by providing them with greater empire-wide acceptance than they would experience locally (Cohen, 2000, p. 220). There were numerous accusations that Jews were collaborating with German-speakers to keep national minorities disenfranchized (Cohen, 2000, p. 220). Despite their antisemitism, they reflect the greater loyalty of
263
Made with FlippingBook - PDF hosting