Reinventing “Red Vienna” after 1945: Habitus, Patronage, and the Foundations of Municipal Social Democratic Dominance

Berg, Matthew P.

doi:10.1086/676885

Cited by 3 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 4 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In the absence of a viable political alternative, a culture of patronage dating back to the interwar period was revived and extended to those who had previously sympathised with the Nazis. 36 Another, more common option was to contain urban individuality by moving against sexual minorities and putatively deviant youth with renewed vigour. And it is worth emphasising that Jewish survivors found themselves in an especially precarious position.…”

Section: From the Post-war Years To The 1980smentioning

confidence: 99%

Urban Individuality and Urban Governance in Twentieth-Century Europe 1

Föllmer¹

2020

New Approaches to Governance and Rule in Urban Europe Since 1500

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

At first glance governance represents the softer side of power in twentiethcentury European cities-certainly compared with air raids, military invasions or politically motivated street battles. Yet the activities of urban planners and municipal agencies are often identified with top-down disciplinary power and consequently seen as the opposite of bottom-up rebellion. Leif Jerram in his survey of twentieth-century urban Europe treats dictatorial intervention in stark narrative contrast to popular politics. 2 Other urban historians have extended this view to democratic systems, and criticised reformist as well as conservative forces for their use of disciplinary power. Helmut Gruber has faulted Social Democratic councillors and planners with coercing working-class families on the new housing estates of 1920s Vienna into a narrowly prescriptive behavioural model. 3 Rosemary Wakeman has explored the vibrant left-wing culture of post-war Paris with its street demonstrations, popular songs and café intellectuals-before arguing that this culture was ultimately sidelined and submerged by the technocratic urban policies of the 1960s. 4 Without wishing to detract from the merits of these important studies the present chapter proposes a different reading of how urban governance worked in twentieth-century Europe. Loosely defined as 'a set of institutions, rules and procedures by which an area is governed' the concept has served to broaden the picture of decision-making and social control in modern cities beyond the realm of municipal government proper. 5 Governance means that a wide range of 'social actors', including private ones such as associations and companies, can determine 'the formulation and pursuit of collective goals at the local level of the political system'. 6 This chapter branches out further to include city dwellers' needs and ambitions, whose complexity made it difficult to define collective goals in the first place. Foregrounding the interplay between urban individuality and urban governance brings into sharp relief that residents were not merely the objects of various policies but put municipal governments under pressure by making all sorts of demands upon them. Conversely it expands on the classic view of the modern city as a site of both personal freedom and impersonal anonymity.

show abstract

Section: From the Post-war Years To The 1980smentioning

confidence: 99%

Urban Individuality and Urban Governance in Twentieth-Century Europe 1

Föllmer¹

2020

New Approaches to Governance and Rule in Urban Europe Since 1500

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Housing movements: From solidaristic discourse to solidaristic fields

Werner

2024

Political Geography

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The sociology of individuality and the history of urban society

Föllmer

2019

Urban History

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article explores the role of individuality in Europe's urban past. In so doing, it builds on Georg Simmel's famous article 'The metropolis and mental life' as well as recent work especially by Bernard Lahire, Niklas Luhmann and Uwe Schimank. The article brings out key sociological insights and links them to a range of studies by urban historians, which are thus revisited from a fresh angle. The focus is on three key dimensions of the modern city: first, sites of social and cultural life; secondly, politics and government; thirdly, nonhumans such as material objects, animals and natural elements.At the beginning of the twentieth century, Georg Simmel proposed an analysis of how individuality and the urban condition are intertwined in modern times. In his famous article 'Die Großstädte und das Geistesleben', he argued that the big city enabled an unprecedented degree of personal freedom by providing an anonymous environment that freed individuals from social control. 1 This anonymity, however, had a downside: it reduced individuals' influence and visibility. In the big city, driven by a clockwork-like rationality and impersonal relations, they did not count for much. Individuals protected themselves from the daily onslaught of urban life by becoming indifferent to sensory impressions and developing a reserved attitude towards others. At the same time, they longed to be valued. Hence, their inclination to seek solace in intellectual fashions, such as an extreme individualism inspired by Friedrich Nietzsche which, as Simmel astutely pointed out, was staunchly anti-urban yet popular chiefly in the big city. † A first version of these reflections was presented at a workshop of the Urban Agency network in Antwerp. I would like to thank Bert de Munck for this opportunity and the participants for their questions. Further thanks are due to Rüdiger Graf and the anonymous reviewer for their critical readings.

show abstract

Reinventing “Red Vienna” after 1945: Habitus, Patronage, and the Foundations of Municipal Social Democratic Dominance

Cited by 3 publications

References 4 publications

Urban Individuality and Urban Governance in Twentieth-Century Europe 1

Urban Individuality and Urban Governance in Twentieth-Century Europe 1

Housing movements: From solidaristic discourse to solidaristic fields

The sociology of individuality and the history of urban society

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About