Seite - 320 - in Otto Bauer (1881–1938) - Thinker and Politician

320 chapter 8 SocialistParty inGermany,butwas inventedandestablishedbythegov- ernment, andwas imposed on themass of the people by the coercive powerofthestate. InthiscaseFascismisnotthenaturalproductofgrass rootsmovementsandclassstruggles,butanartefactwhichtheconstitu- tionalstatepowerhas imposeduponthepeople.50 In light of the above, itwas essential todefine the social base andclass con- tent of the Austrofascist dictatorship. Bauer had to determinewhich social forces had elevatedDollfuss and the circle of politicians around him to the levelsofpower,andwhose interests thenewregimerepresented.Onceagain, Bauer returnedto the theoretical frameworkofBonapartism,which impeded him from identifying the actual agents of fascism in Austria, where demo- cracyhadbeen abolishednot by forces outside of thebourgeois parties, but byaright-winggovernment.Oncemore,Bauerreiteratedthethesisofa ‘third force’ standing above the bourgeoisie and proletariat. The two classes both appeared incapable of coordinating their political activities. The ‘third force’ supposedlycomprisedthearistocratic landownersandchurchhierarchy,who used theHeimwehr to seizepower.Meanwhile, thedeclassedpeasants, petty bourgeoisie andunemployedworkerswerenot awareof the trueaimsof the political struggleandwere thereforemere toolsof thearistocracy.Bauercon- cededthat thearistocracy initiallyhadtosharepowerwithrepresentativesof themajor industries, yet itemergedvictorious fromits struggle for leadership againstbigcapital,whichwasinclinedtowardsNationalSocialism. As to the class content of theAustrian fascist state, Bauer’s viewwas not entirely thought-through.Hispoint that theAustrofascistdictatorshiprepres- ented theconcernsof thecapitalists against thedefeatedworkingclass coex- istedwithpermanentdenialsofbourgeoisclassruleunderAustrofascismand anemphasisontheregime’sclerical-feudalcharacter.Bauer referredto itasa ‘historicalanomaly’ andthoughtof itasa feudal relic.Forhim,Austrofascism embodiedtheruleofclasseswhosehistorical timehadpassed–ananachron- isminthecapitalistepoch. Letusexaminethecorporativestate,theStändestaat, todeterminewhether a fascistdictatorshipwas introducedinAustria.Tostickwiththeterminology proposedbyBauer,weneedtoestablishwhetherthedictatorshiphedescribed reallydidhaveafeudalcharacter.Theshortanswerisno–the‘historicalanom- aly’ described by Bauer never existed. Not realising that the aristocracy and churchhad lost their pre-capitalist character in theeraofmonopoly capital- 50 Bauer1978e,p. 184.