The Pan-German movement

The authority of the State can never be an end in itself. If that were so, any kind of tyranny would be inviolable and sacred.

If a government uses the instruments of power in its hands to destroy its own people, then rebellion is the duty of every citizen.

The question of whether and when such a situation exists cannot be answered by theoretical dissertations but only by the exercise of force, and it is success that decides the issue.

Every government, even if it betrays the people, will claim that its duty is to uphold the authority of the State.

Its adversaries, who are fighting for national self-preservation, must use the same weapons which the government uses if they are to prevail against such a rule and secure their own freedom and independence.

Therefore, the conflict will be fought out with ’legal’ means as long as the power which is to be overthrown uses them.

But the insurgents will not hesitate to apply illegal means if the oppressor himself employs them.

The highest aim of human existence is not the maintenance of a State of Government, but rather the conservation of the race.

If the race is in danger of being oppressed or even exterminated, then the question of legality is only of secondary importance.

The instinct of self-preservation on the part of the oppressed will always justify, to the highest degree, the employment of all possible resources.

Human rights are above the rights of the State. But if a people be defeated in the struggle for its human rights, this means that its weight has proved too light.

The world is not there to be possessed by the faint-hearted races. Austria affords a very clear and striking example of how easy it is for tyranny to hide its head under the cloak of ’legality'.

The legal exercise of power in the Habsburg State was then based on:

• the anti-German attitude of the parliament, with its non-German majorities
• the dynastic House, which was also hostile to the German element.

The whole authority of the State was incorporated in these two factors.

It would have been senseless to attempt to alter the lot of the German element through these 2 factors.

Those who advised the ’legal’ way as the only possible way, and also obedience to the State authority, could offer no resistance. This is because a policy of resistance could not have been put into effect through legal measures.

The German element was actually saved only because the State as such collapsed.

The spectacled theorist would have given his life for his doctrine rather than for his people.

Because man has made laws he subsequently comes to think that he exists for the sake of the laws.

A great service rendered by the pan-German movement then was that it abolished all such nonsense, though the doctrinaire theorists and other fetish worshippers were shocked.

When the Habsburgs attempted to come to close quarters with the German element, by the employment of all the means of attack which they had at their command, the PanGerman Party hit out ruthlessly against the ‘illustrious’ dynasty.

This Party was the first to probe into and expose the corrupt condition of the State; and in doing so they opened the eyes of hundreds of thousands.

To have liberated the high ideal of love for one’s country from the embrace of this deplorable dynasty was one of the great services rendered by the Pan-German movement.

When that Party first made its appearance it secured a large following–the movement threatened to become almost an avalanche.

But the first successes were not maintained. When I came to Vienna, the pan-German Party had been eclipsed by the Christian-Socialist Party and had sunk to almost complete insignificance.

I studied the rise and decline of the Pan-German movement on the one hand and the marvellous progress of the Christian-Socialist Party on the other.

When I came to Vienna all my sympathies were exclusively with the Pan-German Movement.

I was impressed by them having the courage to shout HEIL HOHENZOLLERN.

To avow one’s principles publicly on every problem that concerned Germanism, and never to make any compromises, seemed to me the only way of saving our people.

George von Schönerer was the leader of the PanGerman Movement.

Dr. Karl Lueger was the leader of the Christian-Socialists.

As far as personality goes, both were far above the level and stature of the so-called parliamentary figures.

They lived lives of immaculate and irreproachable probity amidst the miasma of all-round political corruption.

Schönerer foresaw the inevitable downfall of the Austrian State more clearly and accurately than anyone else. But he was very often much mistaken in his judgment of men.

And herein lay Dr. Lueger’s special talent.

He had a rare gift of insight into human nature and he was very careful not to take men as something better than they were in reality.

He based his plans on the practical possibilities which human life offered him, whereas Schönerer had only little discrimination in that respect.

Schönerer ideas were right in the abstract. But he did not have the forcefulness or understanding necessary to put his ideas across to the broad masses.

He was not able to formulate them so that they could be easily grasped by the masses, whose powers of comprehension are limited.

Therefore all Schönerer’s knowledge was only the wisdom of a prophet and he never could succeed in having it put into practice.

This lack of insight into human nature led him to form a wrong estimate of the forces behind certain movements and the inherent strength of old institutions.

Schönerer realized that the problems he had to deal with were in the nature of a WELTANSCHAUUNG.

But he did not understand that only the broad masses of a nation can make such convictions prevail, which are almost of a religious nature.

Unfortunately, he understood only very imperfectly how feeble is the fighting spirit of the so-called bourgeoisie.

That weakness is due to their business interests, which individuals are too much afraid of risking and which therefore deter them from taking action.

A WELTANSCHAUUNG can have no prospect of success unless the broad masses declare themselves ready to act as its standard-bearers and to fight on its behalf wherever and to whatever extent that may be necessary.

In all this Dr. Lueger was the opposite of Schönerer. His profound knowledge of human nature enabled him to form a correct estimate of the various social forces and it saved him from under-rating the power of existing institutions.

He saw only too clearly that, in our epoch, the political fighting power of the upper classes is insignificant.

Thus he devoted most of his political activity to winning over the middle class.

He also adopted all available means for winning the support of long-established institutions, so as to derive the greatest possible advantage from those old sources of power.

His extremely wise attitude towards the Catholic Church rapidly won over the younger clergy in such large numbers.

• The old Clerical Party was forced to join his new Party in the hope of gradually winning back one position after another.

He wished to conquer Vienna, the heart of the Monarchy.

His idea was correct in principle, but his timing was limited.

It came too late. His rival, Schönerer, saw this more clearly.

Thus both these men failed to attain their further objectives.

• Lueger could not save Austria.
• Schönerer could not prevent the downfall of the German people in Austria.