31. The German National Cause in Austria The German Clerics and Their Friends

During the latter period, the German nationalists often expressed the view that they should come to an understanding with the clerical Germans in order to take joint action with them against their Slavic opponents where national issues were concerned. In doing so, the party formation of these opponents was kept in mind, in which strong political and religious differences were held together by the bond of common nationality. If the view were to become more widespread that we should use the fighting methods of our national opponents in the struggle for our national cause, we would find this very alarming. For it would show how little the profound contrast that exists between the national idea of the German and that of the non-German nationalities in Cisleithania is still being grasped.

The Germans are fighting for a cultural task that was given to them by their national development, and what they are up against in this struggle is national chauvinism. It is not our dear national ego, not the name that has come to us by chance of birth, that we have to defend, but the content that is linked to this ego, that is expressed by this name. We do not want to confront our opponents as what we were born as, but as what we have become in the course of many centuries of development. What do our opponents have to confront us with? Nothing but that they are also a nation. The empty national "I" that presents itself as pretentiously as possible and at the same time makes no claim other than that it is there. That is the hallmark of chauvinism as the German people have never known it. What is wrong with this narrow-minded national ego, which only wants to assert its own emptiness as much as possible and wants to know nothing of the whole world, when it allies itself with parties that would prefer to destroy the achievements of our European culture of the last centuries? With parties that are only national, it does not matter how the national self exists, whether it is at the level of education of the time or not, it only matters that it has as much space as possible for its inanity and as much validity as possible for its intellectual barrenness. Who will join the Germans, say the Slovenes, if they make it a condition that we should not close our minds to the level of education they have achieved and that we should erect a barrier to our national character in their education? We are more comfortable with the clerics, who demand nothing but submission to the Church, but leave our national pretensions completely free rein.

The hostility of the Slavic nations towards German education coincides with the hostility with which the Roman Church opposes modern culture, which is mainly supported by the Germans. Only those who have never set foot on the ground of historical observation can delude themselves into believing that there is a reconciliation between German character, German culture and the Roman Church. If circumstances may make it necessary for truces to occur at certain times, the opposites will always sharpen the weapons again. The deep trait of the German nature will never fail to bring forth the religious mission from its own interior at the same time as its culture. Indeed, one might say that everything the German does has the deeply religious imprint that lies in his character and which rears up powerfully when his conscience, his heart, is to be given direction from outside. The German always appears as a totality, and just as his other education is, so he also wants his religious conviction to spring from within himself. The German cannot need an international religion, he only understands his national religion. That is the reason why the German protests again and again against the shackles of Rome. But do not think that this spirit of protest lives only among Protestants, German Catholics and Old Catholics; it exists among all enlightened Germans, even if it is not outwardly displayed. For it is the protest of the German heart against foreign beings. Only those for whom Germanness has become indifferent, has sunk to an empty name, can place themselves completely at the service of this foreign being. It is of no use if peasant members of parliament recall their German ancestry from time to time if they have no idea of the spiritual ties that bind every true German to his people. It is not possible to unite with such a party as long as we do not want to lose ourselves, as long as we do not want to give up that which alone earns us the right to bear the German name. We do not want to achieve what we want to achieve through lazy compromises; we want to achieve it solely under the banner of the German idea. We do not want to give up our hundred-year-old traditions, we do not want to slap our entire national development in the face in order to gain a few questionable concessions from a government which, according to its own statement, can govern without the Germans, in association with an un-German party made up of born Germans. However, as much as the idea of such coexistence contradicts the healthy development of German party life and our national organization, it seems to be in constant expansion. The path that may be quite fruitful for our national opponents, the path of gaining as much as possible for each individual through mutual concessions, can never be a good thing for us Germans. For there can be no doubt in the mind of anyone who considers our circumstances objectively that the political basis on which Count Taaffe's government rests can never have any understanding of the tasks of the German people. Does anyone believe that a real government program can be made without the Germans in Austria? There are two kinds of government. One with a political program that sets the direction for the circumstances, and one on a case-by-case basis that seeks to maintain itself on the surface at all costs through diplomatic use of the political constellations that present themselves. What one calls a politician in ordinary life is also decidedly in favor of governing in the latter sense. And Count Taaffe is a not insignificant politician in this sense. And because he is, and because the Germans are only able to put up insufficient resistance to his external art of governing, hence their miserable situation. It does not occur to us to expect the Germans to devote the stirrings of their hearts to the art of diplomacy, but a little more political sense would be necessary. Above all, we must know which parties can make common cause with us and not give ourselves over to insubstantial political chimeras. There is so much in the turning away of Austria's non-German nationalities from German education that suits the clericals that the latter cannot be thought of turning away.

The "keeping afloat" through diplomatic arts without a guiding state idea cannot be without end; what is not borne by inner necessity, but only by the ambition of honor, must dissolve itself. Rumors keep surfacing that the Ministry of Education is drafting an Imperial National School Act, which is supposed to be such that Prince Liechtenstein can waive his application with a clear conscience. Mr. v. Gautsch, who only recently rejected any influence from the left or the right in the most self-confident language, must understand this. Certain wills will soon be broken in this regime, and men from it who still impressed with their energy last year have already become quite colorless today. In the meantime, it is up to the Germans to work on their national organization, to show false pleasures the door and to protest against rotten compromises, if such are represented within their own party.