Post by Georg Ebner on Jan 23, 2018 17:38:08 GMT
Lower Austria (NiederÖsterreich/NÖ)
METTERNICH: „Asia begins in the Landstraße.“ (LandStraße – nowadays a district in InnerVienna – was the street from Vienna towards Hungary.)
The preliminary results of HumanGenetics seem to indicate a strong hiatus between Austria and its eastern neighbours, the LandScape of the Wachau and other areas in westernNÖ differs to the PannonicBasin aso., meaning, that NÖ isn’t so strongly influenced by the East.
On the other hand, ethnologists (like W.Hellpach) bordered West- and East-Europe already before 1945 from Lübeck to Trieste via Linz, thus putting LowerA. to the East, what is affirmed, if You look at a PhysicalMap:
The border between Upper- and LowerA. is a BottleNeck of the DanubeValley, LowerA. is open towards the East (and North), thus it has been overrun by Huns, Avars, Magyars, Turks and the RedArmy (1945-1955).
EastA. – Vienna, Burgenland and NiederÖ. – is far away from what their genius loci (K.POPPER) celebrated as Open Society, has had a certain inclination to asiatic despotism: The iron fist, the missing volatility, the institutional corruption (a gigantic publicPartyFunding, ministers buying the tabloids with advertisement-masses) of SPÖ in Vienna and Burgenland, of ÖVP in NÖ, of both in FederalPolitics, all more honoured than disliked by the electorate, are already by WestA. perceived as strange. 20 years ago, thousands were asked for SelfDiscription as either “liberal” or “conservative” - NÖ was as expected most conservative, in front of SPÖ’s Burgenland and Vienna (!) on fourth place. Another point is, that NÖ was granted by ÖVP&SPÖ a quite generous constitution in the late 1970ies, for example enabling referenda to an extent unseen east of Vorarlberg, had there has happened only once so far. (ÖVP’s big agenda in the 1980ies to establish an own capital in St.Pölten, agreed by 56%, TurnOut was 61%.)
“The XXth century was the century of the SocialDemocracy.” (R.Dahrendorf)
Especially in easternA. “socialism” hasn’t been a vague “ideal” of some urban “intellectuals”, but real existing. [What is “socialism”? The phlegmatic LowerClasses (farmers, FactoryWorkers, CraftsMen,...) adopted bourgeois attitudes in the XIXth and needed the state or corporations for being able to rob the bourgeoisie.] Who enabled NÖ’s socialism? Us usual the Liberals, who “liberated” the peasants in 1848, what meant, that these had (in order to survive capitalism) to organize – often with help of the Church and her wealthy monasteries – banks, insurances (Raiffeisen being still very important in NÖ), SalesMarkets. As an historian wrote: “The NÖ-peasant fell directly from medieval feudalism into modern AgroSocialism.”
In the monarchy parties had limited rights to establish local branches, but the NÖ-farmers were indirectly very early very well organized.
After Vienna became a Land of its own, restNÖ “belonged” to the farmers, all regional PrimeMinisters (Landeshauptleute/LH) before 1981 were members of the “BauernBund”.
The ChristianSocials of the FirstRepublic were dominated by Seipel et alii from Vienna, but below this more ideological caste came immediately NÖ’s BauernBund, generating the PMs Buresch 1931/2, Dollfuß 1932-34 and Figl 1945-53 (other PMs from NÖ were Breisky 1922, v.Streeruwitz 1929 and Raab 1953-60, all CSP/ÖVP; SPÖ’s Renner 1918-20 and 1945, Kreisky 1970-83 [shortly leading SP-NÖ, living in Vienna], Klima 1997-2000, Gusenbauer 2007/8).
Important for Austria as a whole was, that - different to Carinthia and Styria - the GermanNationals weren’t able attracting the small farmers in Tyrol and NÖ.
In e.g. 1949 ÖVP-NÖ had as PartyMembers (these being already 30% of their voters): 40.000 public&privateEmployees, 22.000 BusinessMen - and over 90.ooo farmers. 1995 under25% (20.000) of ÖVP’s PartyMembers among BusinessPeople were living in NÖ, under35% (80.000) of the ÖVP-labourers&employees – and over40% (150.000) of its farmers.
The SeatDistribution of NÖ’s FarmersParliament:
Austrians are aware, that NÖ is nowadays A.’s most important FoodProducer. But overlook, that NÖ has had a substantial minority of industry, what means also: SPÖ. (And as a BackwardRegion, the share of industry was stagnating in NÖ as far as the late 1980ies around 40%.)
Historically western NÖ – presently the remotest areas – were industrial: In the SW – “MostViertel” (=”MustQuarter”) –, the southern fringe was&is called “EisenWurzen” (=”IronRoots”) for obvious reasons. The NW - “WaldViertel” (=”WoodQuarter”), officially “Quarter above the Manhartsberg” – was so poor, that its peasants were engaged in PuttingOut-systems for weaving and spinning, in 1800 comprising ~28% of the population. Both industries were dying out. During the XIXth century the SE - “IndustrieViertel”, nomen est omen – became the (second) most important industrial region of the DanubeMonarchy. And while northernCzechia was focussed on several KeyIndustries, the country between Vienna and UpperStyria (with its ore) or the harbours Venice/Trieste was A.’s Birmingham, producing roughly everything, a series of small, medium, big factories. (Favourable was, that before METTERNICH fled to England in 1848 mills weren’t allowed to be built in Vienna directly.) British bombs and the RedArmy, the lack of ERP-support before 1955 ruined this area and its industry has never recovered. Being a depressed area for decades, the SE recovered as commuting area of Vienna (~42% of all WageEarners). Increasingly similar the NE, the “WeinViertel” (=”WineQuarter”): Remaining rural and the ChristianSocials and ÖVP’s best basis, its eastern fringe (the district of Gänserndorf) is situated along a RailWay and has lots of Vienna-commuters, who were trending towards SPÖ. The same applies to the mid of the SW, the line Vienna-St.Pölten-Amstetten-Linz, where Motor+Rail-Ways are cutting through.
Commuters (Vienna-share = DarkRed):
The Land suffers under the second-highest PerCapita-debts (after Carinthia) and its municipalities – very much the remote ones with demographical decrease - have high debts, too:
The DanubeMonarchy had not only a dualism Austria–Hungary, but also one within Austria’s regional administrations: The juridical causes were a matter of the ArchDuke of LowerAustria, id est the Emperor and his governor, the “LandesStatthalter”, while the Land-government (to be precise: the permanent standing committee of the LandTag, presided by the “LandesMarschall”) as a relict of the old tiers was allowed to build small roads, to run hospitals, schools, kitchens for the poor. (As a consequence, the imperial officers had to fulfill the laws adopted by the LandTag and at the same time supervised his services...)
The former was dominated by “Theresianists”, members of Upper&higherMiddle-Classes, educated in the Theresianum, an elitarian school, devoted to an unpolitical “serving the public” in the tradition of Josephinism, Austria’s version of the “Enlightenment”. The latter was dominated by the actively pro-k.u.k., pro-cath.-cons., “CartellVerband/CV”, students deriving from the mid&lowMiddle- or upperLower-Classes.
When both administrations were merged after 1918, the ChristianSocialParty naturally preferred the CV, while the Nazis brought back the Theresianum-EuNuchs. (The GermanNationals – common in the mid&low ranks - were rather disdained as traitors...)
After 1945 ÖVP made PowerPlay: While in other Länder SPÖ was able to participate (e.g. Salzburg 50:50), NÖ’s CivilService is entirely “black”, when SPÖ risked to candidate, they never received more than 10%. (The regionalParliament’s officers being the only exception.)
Before government&parliament were transferred to St.Pölten in the 1990ies, the LandTag – embedding the new eras 1848 and 1918 – and government resided prominently at the MinoritenPlatz, opposite the PM-office, between ForeignOffice, HomeOffice and EducationMinistry. (And NÖVP in the LöwelStraße, between the PM-office, the HeadQuarters of federalSPÖ and A.’s most famous theatre, enabling very close ties!)
Parties & Elections:
Delivering numbers for LandTag-elections before 1919 doesn’t make much sense, as the LandTag was never elected by universal franchise in the monarchy and was consisting of the 2 bishops and 1 for the university of Vienna plus 4 “curia”: The “Great LandOwners”, naturally dominated by conservative aristocrats, the (german)liberal “CommerceChambers”, the towns&cities and the rural rest.
As Vienna was part of NÖ before 1920, the Liberals were dominating the LandTag, when 1878 the first clerical peasant-representatives came into parliament, next time – 1884 – they gained most rural seats, 1890 22/72 seats (together with the antisemitic MiddleClass-GermanNationals, who had defected from the old UpperClass-Liberals, roughly halving the LandTag), 1896 the ChristianSocialists and their allies captured the majority by winning 64% on the land (GermanNationals 21%) and 50% in the towns&cities (GermanLiberals 30%). 1902 CSP took 45/78 (and the SocialDemocrats won – after an ByElection ~1900 - their second seat). 1906 the CS-PartyPresident Aloys von Liechtenstein became the first “black” LandMarschall, 1908 the SD still achieved no BreakThrough (6/127).
A LandTag containing both – rural LowerA. and urban Vienna - was crucial for making it possible&necessary, that Karl Lueger’s ChristianSocialists (initially a radical antiEstablishment-coalition mainly of small ShopKeepers and CraftsMen from Vienna, not necessarily clerical, “christian” meant more “non-jewish”) reached out to the catholic-conservative farmers, naturally modifying both groups. Still, the differences remained too strong; so, while in UpperA. all cath.-cons. groups merged into 1 party, the CS in NÖ fell into 2 groups before 1920: land (1922: 115.000 members) and towns&cities (christianTradeUnionists & CivilServants & BusinessPeople, 1920: over 60.000).
First Republic (1918-1938):
An OverView of the LandTag-ElectionResults (1919-above is including Vienna):
As You can see, the ChristianSocials sive ÖVP have always stood above/at 50%, receiving at least 50% of the seats (the 1990ies being the exception).
It hadn’t started so well for the ClericalCamp – these are the results of the FederalElection in February 1919:
(The NS didn’t run separately in the NW, but won ~9% there.)
While the “GroßDeutsche VolksPartei /GDVP” (=”GreaterGerman PeoplesParty“) alone - without the nationalistic/anticlerical farmers from the “LandBund/LB” and the NationalSocialists - performed in this way:
...the GermanNationals alltogether (incl. LB & NS) did strongly in the NW:
The Quarters in the FederalElections plus LandTag 1932 (“VOW”=SW, “VUW”=SE, “VOM”=NW, “VUM”=NE):
D.Hänisch, who researched mainly the NSDAP-voters in Germany (and Austria), conducted also a study on LowerAustria. Using Pedersen’s LogitMethod (not unproblematic, i know), he wants to have detected those VoteStreams from FederalElection 1919 to 1920 (above: WaldViertel/NW, below: NÖ in total; left: % for parties of origin 1919, right: % for benefitting parties 1920; “Nat 1919”: a small german-national party, “X”: others, “NV”: NonVoters):
Unsurprising is (would be, if true), that antiMarxistic voters assembled behind the CSP in 1920; remarkable is (would be) the gains of the GDVP at the expense of the SocialDemocrats, perhaps caused by the collapse of the CSP+GDVP-coalition in NÖ and an anticlerical alliance in reforming NÖ’s EducationSystem immediately before the election.
The ChristianSocialists 1920:
The SocialDemocrats 1920:
The NonVoters 1920, the NW once again being an OutLier:
The (potential, Pedersen-method) VoteStreams in later FederalElections:
Only the Clericals had – what is well known, of course - more female than male voters:
Also generally not new is, how the parties performed by size of municipality, though rebutting the often heard claim, that the authoritarian “HeimatBlock”/”HBL” was predominantly rural; NÖ and Austria in general were closer to Prussia, in that NSDAP succeeded most in medium&small towns, while in catholic West&South-Germany the large cities were brownest (“SchoberBlock”/”NWl”=GDVP+LB; “Nvote”=NonVoters):
EconomicalSectors (“Landw.”=agriculture, “Dienstl.”=WhiteCollars, “Berufslose”=UnEmployed):
After 1945, the FilmIndustry liked to present the Wachau, a lovely LandScape along the Danube in the easternNW, famous for wine and apricots, as a symbol of idyllic and friendly Austria, far away from bad, bad Nazism – but as You can see:
Wachau within LowerAustria:
2 nationalSocialistic sects (NSDAP and “VölkischSozialerBlock/VSB”) in 1927 (Nationalrat-election):
...and in 1930:
Special for the WaldViertel was, that - according to observers - the Nazis managed to be supported even by lots of women.
Some scientists have explained NSDAP’s strength with G.v.Schönerer, the founder of antiSemitic GermanNationalism, who was living in the WaldViertel. But his home was castle Rosenau at Zwettl in the centralNW, where his successors weren’t as strong as further in the east.
Another reason could be, that the NW – where also Mr. Hiedler, Hitler’s father came from – had been strongly influenced by the Hussites, as was NationalSocialism (cf. Mussolini,Benito: “Giovanni Huss il Veridico” 1913).
That the NW as a former home-industrial area was slightly deprived (similar to Carinthia) and that especially the small towns at the Danube suffered (since the RailWay) from the decline of riverineTraffic, should be kept in mind.
D.Hänisch wants to have identified (see above), that only 7% of the NSDAP-voters 1932 had elected the biggest party, the CSP, in 1930. (Generally, only those, who believed strongly in the 2 - quite different - Jews: JESUS or MARX: and were living in enclosed milieus, resisted to Nazism. Thus NSDAP gained in Vienna 1932 only from the CSP, but in rural areas also from the SDAP.)
Meanwhile ¼ would have come from the SDAP. Contemporary observers meant, that especially the MustQuarter (SW) saw this shift (D.Hänisch: ~47% of the Nazis from the SDAP?).
Initially, as a MicroParty, NSDAP had strong results in the low CivilService (RailWay, post, rangers,...), some workers&employees - more unspecific, compared to the other parties; but finally, as Nazism absorbed ~70% of NÖ’s GermanNationals (wrote the SecretService), the SocialStructure became in the 1930ies increasingly similar: Strong OverRepresentation of private&public employees, a weak one among entrepreneurs (while in Vienna GDVP/NSDAP were perhaps below average), a weak UnderRepresentation with BlueCollars, a strong one at farmers.
Local surveys in parts of NÖ found out, that there the NS-PartyMembers split into a moderate&older group, born 1890-1910, sociologically close to the outdated GDVP+LB, and a radical&young one (1900-1920) of more proletarian appearance.
Not unimportant for NSDAP – but also for the FPÖ - was, that the GreatGermanPeoplesParty’s (GDVP) membership was 1929 consisting of only 17.0+10.5=27.5% public+private employees (Vienna: 28.5+19.4=47.9%), therefor 25.0% employers (13.4%) and 8.3% farmers (0.2%).
Second Republic (1945-now):
ÖVP&SPÖ remained alone in the LandTag 1959-1988, the public interest in regional politics was the lowest of all austrian Länder, normally overshadowed by FederalPolitics (NÖ has not had more than few ÖVP-leaning weeklies, all dailies are printed in Vienna for the whole of A.) et cet., what meant, that NÖ was (in)famous for its BackRoom-deals of ÖVP&SPÖ or the ÖVP-groups.
As all austrian federal®ional JuniorPartners, SPÖ has fallen into oblivion, having additionally the problem, that A.’s regions are reduced to minimal LawMaking-competences (in boring&indisputed issues like BuildingLaws) and that RegionalGovernments are mainly responsible for “soft” issues (environment, SpatialPlanning), administrate hospitals, streets, EnergyProviders and spill out lots of subventions – making any criticism of the dominating party close to impossible. Thus they have to choose between an infertile opposition, waiting for a unique chance for change – achieved in all 9 Länder since 1918 only once sustainably (Burgenland 1964) - or begging for some crumbs.
In NÖ SPÖ has tried both strategies now and again and also ÖVP reacted differently: Older politicians like Reither (NÖ-PM 1945-49) or Figl (the federal PM was also NÖ’s LH 1945, 1962-65) from ÖVP’s PeasantsAssoc. and close to the Dollfuß-regime were cooperative, while especially the “Ö.Arbeiter&Angestellten-Bund/ÖAAB)” was rather hostile towards SPÖ and filled the hospitals and EnergyProviders with their people. (As a result – while normally assembling workers&employees mostly only in theory, in practice consisting mainly of CivilServants – the NÖ-AAB was consisting 1960 of 50% labourer, 36% CivilServants, 14% PrivateEmployees .)
Ad NÖAAB: The ÖVP-conservatives were either led by academics from Vienna like I.Seipel, H.Drimmel, A.Khol or by the “SteelHelmets” from NÖAAB (Prader, Withalm, Mock, Spindelegger, Sobotka).
Presently ÖVP’s formula is, that the farmers from the NÖBB and NÖAAB alternate in appointing the LandesHauptmann (before1980 + 1992-2017 NÖBB, 1980-1992 + since2017 NÖAAB), thus it is well known, that Pernkopf will follow MiklLeitner.
The BusinessAssociation (Ö.WirtschaftsBund/ÖWB”) has always been powerless, J.Raab (federal PM 1953-1961) being the exception, but also only ad personam.
When i made MunicipalityMaps for the FederalElection 2013, i realized to my own surprise, to what extent the ÖVP-VoteShare was based on the regions:
So, NÖ with its 20.0% of A.’s electorate delivered ÖVP 27.6%!
No wonder, that a reduced support by NÖVP hurt the Federal Party severely, that E.Pröll (LandesHauptmann 1992-2017) was noticed by the public as the most powerful politician in the – federal! –ÖVP.
The SocialDem. were able to rule NÖ – for 1 year (1919/20, gov. Sever), before Vienna dropped out.
SP-NÖ has usually been dominated by the right, “non-ideological” wing (Renner, Helmer, Czettel, Höger) focussed on bread&butter-issues. (And apparently an orator from Germany [Adolf H.] was once attacked by “red” demonstrators, but rescued by Schneidmadl, a SDAP-minister...)
Once far behind Vienna, SPÖ’s NÖ-section carries these days in FederalElections normally most votes for the party (due to the very high TurnOut in NÖ), giving them usually at least 1 FederalMinister.
The larger cities – St.Pölten, WienerNeustadt, Schwechat, Stockerau aso. – have had deeply red CityAdministrations (Krems, Baden, Mödling, Klosterneuburg not so), St.Pölten being the first municipality raising taxes on FlatBuilding - worldwide! TradeUnion and the chamber for all labourers&employees have been run by them (e.g. 1926: 111/130 seats), the replacement of BlueCollars by WhiteCollars have reduced their majorities, of course.
The 1960ies included in A. 2 big revolutions: While NÖVP supported 1963 the conservative candidate H.Drimmel, the “reformer” Klaus was elected by Styria&westA. to head ÖVP. And 1967 Kreisky (leader of SP-NÖ, living in Vienna) defeated (with help of the other Länder) H.Czettel from NÖ), who was supported by the “invincible” SPÖ-Vienna (plus TUs).
1969 – when a ÖVP governing alone in Vienna lost all RegionalElections and was weakened by a scandal (causa Müllner) in 1966 – and 1979 – when Kreisky received few months later his best result ever (and federally SPÖ passed ÖVP for the first time!) – would have been SPÖ’s best chances, but failed, the ÖVP-LandesHauptmann’s popularity was too high and the volatility too low at that time.
Since then, they fell into oblivion, squeezed by ÖVP’s Pröll, FPÖ and GREENS.
Strongest party in Landtag-elections 1993 and 2013:
Of course, SPÖ has its industrial&urban areas (having held St.Pölten, gained Krems, lost WienerNeustadt recently), but ÖVP has targeted several MayorOffices in recent periods with success.
Mayors with an OverallMajority (in NÖ they are indirectly elected):
Different to all other 8 Länder FPÖ had in all LandTag-elections before J.Haider/1988 never been able to achieve a “BasicMandate”, those ~1/19 in the populous SE (or SW) necessary in order to enter parliament. (KPÖ with its local strength in/around WienerNeustadt/SE was, though.)
KPÖ sat in the LandTag and 1 seat in the RegionalGovernment was donated to them 1945-54 in order to be spies for (and vice versa ambassadors to) the RedArmy. The public industry established by Hitler-Germany (oil, chemistry aso.) was annexed by the SovietUnion (shortened “USIA”), finally comprising ~50% KPÖ-PartyMembers, with “FactorySecurity”, i.e. a private PartyArmee, permanently endangering A.’s freedom. Immediately after the departure of the RedArmy 1955 (and before the XXth PartyConference and the HungaryInsurgency 1956) their PartyMembership in NÖ fell from 30.000 to 16.000 (and coincidentally mostly in those exUSIA-companies...) and in 1959 KPÖ lost representation in the LandTag. (They survived in few factories quite some time, though.)
The “LiberalForum” was established by FPÖ-dissidents around H.Schmidt in February 1993, had an antiHaider-hype and succeeded in May’s NÖ-election. Their small ParliamentaryClub fell apart and it would have been anyway hard to move in once again. (Although the wealthy CommutingBelt west of Vienna has been better ground for LeftLiberals like LiF/NEOS than for the GREENS.)
The GREENS came in not before 1998, but have been proceeding to a certain extent:
Once more comparing LandTag-elections 1993 & 2013:
As usual, ÖVP and SPÖ lost mostly in their old fortresses, as peasants and (later) FactoryWorkers have been replaced more and more:
Change in TurnOut 1993-2013:
An OverView of the DeViations in FederalElections since 1945 (italics: EuropeanParliament):
As You see, the TurnOut has been high and even improving, the ÖVP has always been above NationalAverage, 2017 being the worst result so far, benefitting FPÖ (it would have ended in a catastrophy, if ÖVP had been led by a Liberal like Mitterlehner):
Changes ÖVP 2013-2017:
Changes 2013-2017 FPÖ:
SPÖ and FPÖ aren’t so clearly below any longer, while the GREENS have been the further below the stronger they have been nationally.
According to a left journalist Haider labelled Strache as “a Haider for poor people” and indeed, the Strache-FPÖ is below NationalAverage in its old StrongHolds in thriving WestA., while being better in EastA.. FPÖ passing SPÖ in NÖ was supposed to be impossible, but look, what happened last fall:
First (left) and second (right) place: