This book provides preliminary information about the development of Central European economic thought for approximately four hundred years. It is an introduction to a history of economic thought in Central Europe.
We perceive Central Europe as a compact territory of the four present-day countries: the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and the Slovak Republic. This region represents a geographical concept and a concept that has acquired a political and a cultural undertone and is based on claims of shared identity, culture, and history. Central Europe varies culturally, historically, politically, and economically from Europeâs other parts and regions.1
Jordan (2006)âin an expert paper for the Permanent Committee on Geographical Names of the European Union on sub-division of Europe into regionsâargues that a subdivision of Europe naturally begins with Central Europe. Once Central Europe is defined, Europeâs further division to regions comes somehow naturally, even if boundaries between areas are not clear-cut. Jordan (2006) points to differences between Central Europe and other European regions. For example, industrialization in Central Europe happened more slowly than in Western Europe but faster than in Eastern and Southeastern Europe. Similarly, independent urban society counter-balanced nobility and church more slowly than in the West but quicker than in Eastern and Southeastern Europe. In contrast to Western Europe, Central Europe was typically oriented toward the continent and not overseas.
In Central Europe, traditionally prevailed ethnic and linguistic variety ended in the middle of the twentieth century.2 Afterward, the countries became ethnically relatively homogenous, which the example of Bratislava3 and Budapest4 as well as of other large cities nicely documents.5 There is higher homogenization in smaller cities and villages.
The affairs shared by the Central European nations define them more than their unique features separate them. Their shared past is the basis of the comparable economic and educational systems, foreign relations, cultural norms, and similar. For an extended period, they were part of the Austrian Monarchy and also of the Soviet Empire. Even in periods when these countries were independent, their development was also reasonably similar. There were disparities in individual responses to both domestic and foreign events, but shared similarities prevailed.6
It is challenging to write a book without some pre-conceived inclinations.7 Nevertheless, one can somehow assess progress by bearing in mind civilizational advancements, developing non-oppressive inclusive societal structures, and favoring economic development to ideological aspirations. We take a stance that is skeptical and critical of social, economic, and political activities in Central Europe, which slowed down the regional economic development. In the period before World War II, we negatively assessed the role of land-owning classes as they were prolonging feudal structures when the Western world has already begun to move away from them. The old feudal property relations persisted for too long, especially in Hungary.
In the twentieth century, we evaluate negatively representants of totalitarian views, whose actions caused agony and pain to a large number of people, and did not achieve most of their economic aims.8 Finally, we also discern the negative role performed by those who place at the top of their values belief in their nationâs uniqueness and spread animosity, aversion, and distrust toward other communities.9 They are not aware of the advantages that accumulate to their nation if their neighbors prosper.10 However, we also value those who somehow began their career standing on the totalitarian or nationalistic positions, and were able to shift and become critical to their original views. We prefer respect to an individual, which none of these universal, either totalitarian or nationalist views accept. Instead, they prefer collective to individual, nation vis-Ă -vis other nations, labor class vis-Ă -vis other classes, believers vis-Ă -vis infidels, and similar. A neutral approach does not differentiate between these concepts as it believes it should âobjectivelyâ study any of them.
As we cover a relatively long period, we divide the Central European history of economic thought into shorter time fragments. The first period starts from the early beginnings and ends with the emergence of World War I. Afterward, we discuss the interwar period and the socialist episode. Finally, we provide some observations about the period after the break-up of socialism. We present a political and economic context that characterized the specific period, and afterward, we present a discussion of economic thought. In each chapter, we offer brief presentations of the work and life of some representatives of the economic thought in Central Europe. We describe the work and the life of those economists who impressed by their knowledge, originality, life attitude, and intellectual stories. These are not necessarily the most excellent economists as considered by these daysâ mainstream. Neither are they the most notable economists as seen by national histories of economic thought. However, this does not mean that there is no overlap between these approaches.
We do not follow any specific methodology in the presentation of different epochs. Our work is eclectic. We âsometimes talk about doctrine sometimes talk about persons, sometimes talk about periods.â11 We provide information to the reader, which, for the most part, was scattered in different sources and typically not provided in the English language. Our interest is then quite general, and less specifically economic, which also reflects Central European economistsâ spirit, as they were in various epochs more interested in issues as the organization of the society, problems of hierarchy and equality than problems of pure exchange.
There is little permanency in Central European history, and this also extends to the history of economic thought. This discontinuity in national histories creates the foundation for shared regional history. It is difficult to find the continuing existence of specific themes or particular sets of problems, which would be researched by successive generations of scientists in the same nation or across the region. To no small extent, this type of discontinuity prevented the formation of a national tradition of specific economic thinking, even if movements happened in this direction at specific periods. These discontinuities also meant that individual scholars could not continue functioning in their country of origin and needed to move to another country, which guaranteed them possibilities of continuing their work. An Appendix lists a little less than a hundred notable economists, some world-famous, born in Central Europe, and settled outside this region, mostly in Western countries.12 One sees the flow of talent from these countries to the West, especially the United States, the United Kingdom, Germany, Austria, and other countries. This list documents the vitality and talent of economists originating from Central Europe. When working in the Western environment, these economists became more known, and their contribution was recognized as part of the Western world.
In a certain sense, we would like to save some of the authors from oblivion. These are typically authors whose importance is granted mostly in the historical context of their time. Some contributions were significant in one period and considered banal in the next period. There is another group of scholars who somehow never ceased to attract attention as their contribution remained valid through different epochs. We discuss the contributions of both categories of economists: those who were notable only in their historical context, and those whose work survived the examination of time. In this way, we present incompatible judgments about economic thought, conflicting conceptions of a social inquiryâs appropriate direction. In a certain way, we judge not the correctness or incorrectness of particular opinions but the fruitfulness of the subsequent knowledge advancement.
As the political character of the Central European lands often changed, so the names and spellings changed. Names used in this book are in the Czech, Polish, Hungarian, Slovak, Latin, German, Russian, and English. Some authors mentioned in this book had consequently differently spelled names. We will signal if different versions of the name occur, and typically also point to older versions. We do not present different names of Central European regions, towns, or places that are generally familiar to English-speakers. Also, the names of universities changed quite often. We present the universityâs proper name as known at the actual historical time under consideration, but it might happen that, at times, we use just the stylized name.
In Central Europe, political events played determining role in economic development. All significant decisions concerning assets ownership and assets redistributionâespecially in the twentieth centuryâwere politically determined. These include partial nationalization of assets after the break-up of the former Austro-Hungarian Monarchy, nationalization and redistribution of assets in the period 1938-45, n...