Sam McDougle

Where’s Austria?

Reasons for Austria’s Lack of Industrialization

 

“He who will not economize will have to agonize.1” - Confucius

 

Compared to most powerful states in Europe in the 18^th and 19^th century, Austria was industrially outdistanced. Its progress was restricted by several key factors: strong political conservatism and absolutism, conservative class structure, and strong protectionist trade policy. Vienna, Austria’s capitol, remained a strong cultural and political center, though it never became an economic power like the other urban centers of Western Europe. The Austrian government’s preoccupation with keeping a powerful aristocracy, complete reliance on its internal resources, and failure to join the international industrial market were responsible for its lack of economic development and strength.

Since the economic realities of Austria did not necessitate industrial export at first, Austria was able to uphold the vast empire with its agricultural richness, and the rest of Europe surpassed Austria economically during the Industrial Revolution. Although Austria did export some non-agricultural products, it was far behind the rest of Europe in manufactured exports. Even by 1870, Austria was still responsible for less than one percent of the world’s manufacturing production, while England was responsible for 31.8 percent. (Austria even trailed behind Sweden and Canada).2 Also, Austria’s output of pig iron from 1825 to 1829 was only 85 metric tons compared to England’s 669 and France’s 212.2 Austria also lagged in some raw material outputs, including cotton, and from 1820 to 1840 Austria produced only 0.1 million metric tons of coal and lignite compared to England’s 17.7 and Germany’s 1.2.2 Much of Austria’s agriculture was strong -- the vast Austrian Empire had rich prairie soil, multitudes of grain, ore, and exceptionally arable soil in parts of Hungary.3 This strength relieved some possible pressure to industrialize, but this richness alone served only to maintain the status quo, rather than move the vast empire forward economically. Austria was not in the industrial loop, and it missed out on an extremely profitable market of exportation.

The protectionist tax policies of the Hapsburg Dynasty allowed Austria to survive with the small amount of industry it had without having to enter the international fray, though Austria surely did not profit from these policies in the long run. In the 1850’s, many countries and states had entered Prussia’s Zollverein, a trade union created to lower international tariffs and attempt to unify the international market, primarily in central Europe. Because of its protectionist tax policies, Austria was not allowed into the agreement. Its rival kingdom Prussia could thus prevent its acceptance into the Zollverein and ensure that Austria had little influence in the European market.3 Many German states prospered because of the Zollverein,4 but Austria remained in the back of the economic line due to its isolationist approach. If Austria had, perhaps, opened itself up to the global manufacturing market by lowering its high tariffs and promoting trade, it could have entered into the lucrative world of industrial growth and exportation.

In addition, Austria’s class structure created an environment that was not supportive of industrial growth. Monarchial conservatives dominated politics in Austria for most of its history. When Emperor Francis died in 1835, he said in a letter to his son, “Govern, and change nothing.5” With the exception of Joseph II (whose liberal reforms were quickly reversed), changing nothing was exactly what the Hapsburg’s did in Austria. Aspects of Feudalism lasted until 1848 when serfdom was finally and hastily abolished by Ferdinand I during the revolutions. Before then, however, peasant serfs in Austria’s countryside were bound by heavy taxes and feudal duties. Until 1848, it was legal in Austria for a lord to cane a peasant if the proper duties were not fulfilled.6 The presence of feudalism made it very hard for a farmer to change jobs or have the opportunity to move to an urban area such as Vienna where most of what little industry there was present. The identity of the working class in Austria was very dissimilar to the factory working class of London, Paris, or Berlin. Austria’s working class was made up of peasants chained to the countryside, so the Austrian government did not need to industrialize to put anyone to work.

Finally, Austria did not have a mercantilist middle class like that of England or France. While the large majority of the Austrian working class was bound by the feudal system, the Bourgeoisie of Vienna was contained to professionalism or service to the powerful aristocracy. Unlike London or Paris, Vienna had much different revolutionary voices during the revolutionary years in the middle of the 19^th century. The middle class led the revolutions and the smaller working class only feebly supported them.7 In contrast, in France and England, the working class usually led the revolution and courted the middle class for support. Because of Austria’s very small amount of exportation, mercantilist principles never took hold. The isolationist tax policy impeded any possible middle class migration to the industrial market. The weakness of Austria’s urban working and middle classes contributed to the lack of a large unified revolutionary voice in Vienna. This helped make the aristocrats more comfortable and the monarchs more powerful, and enabled them to quell revolution.

The walls of Vienna provide a physical manifestation of this isolationist approach, the idea of self-sufficiency and nationally contained economic systems. Vienna was an extremely strong cultural and political center, though not much more. Austria never seized the opportunity to become a supreme economic force and gain the strength England and France had. Also, Austria was not involved in the surge of imperialism and consequent profitable businesses in the late 19^th century. Vienna did not take down its walls (which were originally built to defend against the Turks) until 1857, by which time it could have already created a large amount of factories in this populated area. Austria’s lack of economic progress and strong isolationism were huge factors in the eventual downfall of Hapsburg dynasty, the monarchial family in Austria since the 13^th century, in World War I. Austria never completely entered the industrial light, showing how a powerful, absolutist monarchy like the Hapsburg’s could shape and dictate the people’s—and its own—economic destiny.

 

Sam McDougle

Bibliography

 

1) World of Quotes, 2003

<http://www.worldofquotes.com/topic/Economy/1/index.html>

2) Modern History Sourcebook: Spread of Industrialization, Halsall, Paul, Aug 1997

< http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/mod/indrevtabs1.html>

3) Heaton, Herbert Economic History of Europe. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1936.

4) The Era of Industrial Revolution in Europe. Thayer Watkins. May. 2003. San Jose U.

< http://www2.sjsu.edu/faculty/watkins/austria.htm>

5) BOME Reader, Metternich on The Death of Emperor Francis.

6) Feudalism in the Austrian Empire. Nov. 27. 2003

<http://www.angelfire.com/tx5/texasczech/Studies/Feudalism%20in%20the%20Austrian%20Empire.htm>

7) Richard E. Sullivan, A Short History of Western Civilization. Boston: McGraw-Hill, 1994.