Nationalism and the Habsburg Empire
Working class parties like the Christian Social Party – largely popular among more conservative, rural workers – and the Social Democracy Party – representative of the socialist proletariat – had much less power. Although the Christian Social Party was later able to have greater success, both parties suffered greatly under the parliament’s curia system (Judson, 2016, pp. 252–253). There were four curiae, divided between wealthy landowners, the bourgeoisie, the proletariat, and the peasantry. The wealthier two had greater electoral power and were therefore favoured in the democratic system. The lesser ability for the working class to participate in their country’s governance and their very poor working conditions meant they were the group with the most resentment towards the system. Although this did not create a desire to divide the empire, the proletariat – who made up much of the socialist movement – were the greatest threat to the established monarchical system. Indirectly however, these experiences pushed such people to more radical positions. These included the valorization of historical figures such as Jan Hus as a hero who fought to break workers’ chains and who were viewed in a distinctly nationalist light (Beneš, 2015, p. 330). The introduction of universal male suffrage in 1907 in Cisleithania was not able to fully grant a voice to the poorest in society. In Cisleithania this was largely due to the curia system, and in Transleithania, to gerrymandering, aimed at weakening the political power of national minorities. In areas such as in Moravia and Budejovice, compromises had to be made based on nationality which weakened the central authority and unity of the state (Cohen, 1999, pp.271-273). The First World War However, it was the suspension of parliament in the first years of the war in Cisleithania which would dramatically reduce confidence in the central state. Its suspension thereby brought about the collapse of the empire in 1918. This was not the only major change during the war that caused the empire’s citizens to reconsider their attitude to the empire. Martial law was also imposed in ‘military frontier zones’ which comprised a very large proportion of the empire (Cornwall, 2000, p. 120). The greater fear of the period combined with the imposition of martial law and the suspension of democracy was especially negative for nationalities that experienced prejudice even before the war (Scheer, 2013, p. 128). Italians, Czechs, Serbs, Ruthenes, and Romanians were the objects of greatest suspicion, and the police now had recourse to punish them harshly. This meant that huge numbers of innocent civilians were tried, imprisoned, and executed by the police simply based on their nationality and the fear that they were therefore traitorous. Ironically, this suspicion of treachery drove many persecuted by the government towards it (Scheer, 2013, p. 129). This was likely a more significant factor in growing dissatisfaction than even the aforementioned changes or the large influxes of refugees and difficulty feeding the population (though these were certainly significant). During the war, even before the rebellions of 1918 that caused the empire to collapse, both the Italians and the Russians were able to exploit this. The Russian army created a Czech Legion comprised both of Czech civilians and soldiers that actively fought against Austria-Hungary to liberate their people from the yoke of the Austrians (Cornwall, 2000, p. 41). The Italians were also able to use growing resentment throughout the war against the Austro-Hungarian empire – particularly in intelligence and espionage positions (Cornwall, 2000, pp. 123–126). Through promises of the creation of an independent Yugoslavia the Italian military was able to lure south Slavs in the Austro-Hungarian military to reveal military secrets (Cornwall, 2000, pp. 133–136). This was
268
Made with FlippingBook - PDF hosting