Page - 158 - in Otto Bauer (1881–1938) - Thinker and Politician

158 chapter 4 realm,while economic questions have an international character by nature’ (our translation).89Althoughquestionsof languageandeducationplayedan importantroleintheHabsburgmonarchy,theassumptionthatnationalambi- tionscouldbeconfinedtothecultural realmwasillusory.Similarly,Bauerand Renner’sbelief that theeconomiccommunityof interestsunitingthepeoples ofAustria-Hungarycouldoffset their separatist tendencieswaswishful think- ing. VoicesfromtheMarxistcampdidnotsparetheconceptofnational-cultural autonomy from criticism. It was approved neither by the sdap nor by the nationalist parties, where Ignaz Seipelwas one ofmanywho viewed itwith contempt. The policywas criticised for disregarding the socio-political con- ditions ofAustria andEurope, or else for its conservative stance towards the independencemovements. Stalin reproached Bauer for failing to explicitly mention the right of nations to self-determination,while Leninaccusedhim ofGermannationalism.90Kautsky tookaparticularly critical view ina series of articles printed inDieNeue Zeit (1908) and a pamphlet,Nationalität und Internationalität (NationalityandInternationality, 1908).Whileconcedingthat autonomywas crucial for working-class organisation in the struggle against nationalism,hedisagreedthatonecouldachieve it inamultinational state.91 In Kautsky’s opinion, Bauer underestimated the strength of themovements for self-determination.As early as 1908,Kautskypredicted thedemise of the monarchy.Inhiscritiqueofautonomy,heconsideredtwofactors:economicdif- ferencesandlanguage.Kautskyemphasisedthatautonomywouldnotsuspend national conflicts.Hebelieved that they resulted fromtheunequaleconomic developmentofnations,whichnecessarilyupset theequaldistributionof fin- ancialmeans forculturalandeducationalpurposes.Conversely,hepresumed that languagewas a basic criterion for a nation’s development – he saw the future of nations in communities of language. In his reply toKautsky, Bauer acceptedthatnational-culturalautonomywasonlyahalf-solution,giventhat theprincipleof legalequality forself-administrationdidnotrevokeeconomic 89 Mommsen1963,p. 10. 90 Stalin1953,p.338. 91 KautskywroteonAustria-Hungary: ‘Austria itselfwill thenbecomesuperfluous to those nations that still today think that they need it. If thewhole of Europewere structured according tonationsandeconomicareas–whatplacewouldthere thenbe fora federal stateinafederalstate?AndifallnationsofcontemporaryAustriajointogetherwiththeir fellow language speakers outsideof theexisting territoryof theEmpire to formentities that are autonomous for the purpose of language culture, what elements remain for a specificmultinationalstate?’–Kautsky2010,p. 163.