Vienna, 8 February 2000

The election in Austria on October the 3^rd marked the end of a period of 50 years of political and social stability. The electoral success of the extreme right Freedom Party (FPÖ) and the fact that it is now in a government with the conservative People’s Party (ÖVP), which was the main bourgeois party, has sparked off big protests in Austria as well as in other countries.

Daily demonstrations have taken place in Vienna, the capital, since the announcement of this new right-wing government. Demonstrations and protest have also been held in other towns across Austria. Tens of thousands of people have taken to streets. The demonstrations have involving different layers of society and express both the deep anger that exist and the willingness to make an active stand against the new government. This movement is the biggest movement in Austria since the big strikes in 1950, but take place against a totally different political and social background then that strike wave. The situation in Austria has changed dramatically in the last week.

Austria looks, for several reasons, back on a long history of stability. Because of its location – at the border of the former eastern block – it was of strategic interest for the West and was therefore, with money from the Marshall Plan, rebuilt after the Second World War. The Socialist Party (SPÖ, since 1991 renamed the Social Democratic Party) quickly became the dominant political force. The weak Austrian bourgeois had no other choice than to rely on the SPÖ leadership in the so-called "Second Republic". The SPÖ already at the beginning of the Second Republic advocated a policy of Social Partnership (class collaboration) and power sharing with the main capitalist party, the ÖVP.

However, all these factors combined to provide a political and social framework for strong economic growth from the 1950s and up to the end of the 1970s. The standard of living and the conditions for the working class improved and Austria became, together with Sweden, a capitalist model of welfare and social peace.

This situation and the stability existed was also prolonged through the 1980s and 1990s because on the one hand the dominant role of the SPÖ and the specific weight of Austrian trade union movement and on the other hand the weakness of the bourgeois.

But the last 15 years have also been the period when the FPÖ has grown from a tiny force to becoming the second biggest party in Austria. The FPÖ only got 5 percent of the votes in 1983, but 26.9 percent in last general election, 1999. (Some of the latest opinion polls are saying that FPÖ has become the single biggest party with 33 percent of the votes).

The growth of the FPÖ went hand in hand with the strengthening of the position of the Austrian bourgeois as well as the weakening of the influence of the SPÖ.

The anger and discontent that had developed over the years against social cuts, along with the hatred towards the old political order, suddenly came to the fore after the last election. 50 years of stability came to a sudden and definite end.

Why is it that an extreme right wing party can gain such a big support, among voters, in a country with a relative high living standard compared to other European countries? In a country where the economy is still in a recovery.

We have to look at different factors in order to answer that question.

The main factor is the effects of Social Partnership and the policy of the last coalition governments between SPÖ and ÖVP in the years of 1986-99.

Social Partnership did not only existed in Austria, but it became more institutionalised then in any other country and penetrated every part/corner of the society. It became an official policy and ideology. The trade union bureaucracy saw themselves as part of the state and their responsibility was to work in the interest of "the people, the country" and not just the working class. The main instruments where negotiations and the number of strikes dropped almost to zero in the 1980s and the 1990s.

This ideology went hand in hand with the building of completely undemocratic structures within the trade unions, which reduced members to sub-payers. The long practice of the "policy of representing workers" from above meant that the working class was kept totally inactive by the trade union bureaucracy. The working class went through a long period without experiencing any tradition of organising and acting in collective struggle.

The so-called "grand coalition", the governments of SPÖ-ÖVP in 1986-99, carried out a policy of privatisations and social cuts. , Two major package of cuts packages where passed during the 1990s which included a number of severe attacks against the living conditions of big sections of the working class. These packages where not only also supported by the SPÖ, but implemented by it.

The SPÖ is a historical very strong party – at its highpoint in the 1970s it had more then 700.000 members, out of a total Austrian population of 7 million. Its leadership carried out a bourgeois policy from the first day of its re-establishment in 1945, but was still, particularly as a result of the social reforms implemented in the 1970s, seen by workers as "their party".

The process of total bourgeoisfication of the SPÖ accelerated in the 1990s. That led to enormous anger against the policy of the SPÖ in the 1990s, particularly after the 1995 elections.

That election was called after the break down of the previous SPÖ-ÖVP coalition. The SPÖ used social rhetoric in that election campaign which gave people a hope that there may be a change on its way. But then after the election, the SPÖ immediately went into a new coalition with the ÖVP and introduced a new, even worse, package of cuts.

The FPÖ was formed as an organisation for ex-NSDAP-members (the Nazi party). Though it had also a bourgeois liberal wing, it was most of the time politically dominated by the extreme right. The turning point for this small party came in 1986 when Haider became the new chairman. He turned the party into a "modern" extreme-right populist party. Populism is its main element, although there is still a fascist wing in it. Their main policies are:

• Austro-Nationalism: Formerly they where in favour of a unification with Germany now, – relating to the changed mood in society, they put Austro-nationalism in front. This is reflected in their anti-European Union position.
• Racism: For years they have made extremely racist propaganda – in the mid-1990s with a referendum against foreigners, in every election struggle and especially in the last one. In Vienna they had posters with the slogan "no mercy for drug dealers" giving the impression that all black people are drug dealers. Another poster stated that Austria was "being swamped by foreigners", the German word used was Überfremdung", which is a fascist term. They spread a lot of lies such as foreigners getting privileges from the state.
• In relation to the trade unions, on the one hand they argue that the influence of the trade unions should be reduced. But on the other hand the FPÖ makes populist criticisms of the weaknesses of the ÖGB, the Austrian TU-federation, and that it is not acting in the interests of the working class (which, of course, are correct). The FPÖ has, like every other Austrian party, its own political faction inside the trade union movement. The FPÖ tried to split the unions and form their own separate union a couple of years ago, but this ended in a complete failure.
• Economy: The FPÖ stands for a neo-liberal policy, but for mainly for populist reasons it was at one stage against the EU and EMU.
• In relation towards the working class the FPÖ tries to present itself as the party of the "honest, hard working people". This is not true. In reality, all their representatives are capitalists, big landlords, part of the military and the police, or well paid white collar workers. The FPÖ is advocating a neo-liberal policy and is in favour of a de-regulated labour market that gives little room for workers’ protection. However, a lot of workers vote for them, mainly as a protest against the protest against the policy and actions carried out by the two main parties, the SPÖ and the ÖVP.
• On women the FPÖ previously had a very reactionary policy on women, but they changed it consciously in order to win more votes from women. Now they have put women in leading positions. Their main propaganda now is for money for all mothers, which may sounds nice, but is combined with less money for kindergartens.

The reasons for the strength of the FPÖ are:

• The Social Partnership put forward by the trade union leaders and the SPÖ, expressed in the idea that "We are all Austrians, we have to stand together, there is no general conflict between the classes but we have to work together". The trade union leadership never mobilised the workers, it has in fact an interest of maintaining the passivity that existed and the rank-and-file and bureaucracy became enormous.
• In Austria there has never been a proper accounting with fascism, as Austria was always presented as the first victim of Nazism. Therefore fascists remained in their positions and the real victims – the working class, the communists, Jew’s, gays.... – still had big problems after 1945. The predecessor-party of the ÖVP was the austro-fascist Christian Social Party that killed workers in the civil war in 1934 and established a Mussolini-type regime before Hitler’s take over in 1938. But also the SPÖ had former Nazis in its ranks.
• The mood in society in relation to racism has changed quite a lot in the last years. The FPÖ started with racist propaganda, but the government passed racist laws and therefore to some extent legitimate the policy of FPÖ.
• For a long time the workers accepted to be "represented" by the leaders of the SPÖ and the trade unions. However, this policy of "representation from above" also reinforced passivity and the idea that this was the way things should be, i.e. workers should not rely on their own strength and solidarity but instead "be represented by someone". Haider is, in the eyes of a section of the workers, a person who "represents" a way of the protesting against the government, as he could present himself as someone outside of the establishment.
• Haider, as a person, is the best candidate to use the opportunities for opposition parties – he is an excellent speaker and a good populist.
• The weakness of the left: The left was traditionally inside the SPÖ, there was always a very strong mood for unity and against splitting away from the party. The KPÖ, the Communist Party, has not played any role since the 1950s. There is no sign yet of forces that can constitute a new workers party, although now there are splits opening up between the "twins" SPÖ-ÖGB. Nevertheless, there is no possibility, at this moment, that a new mass workers’ party will be formed as part of an initiative from the trade unions.

After the last elections on October 3^rd the FPÖ became the second strongest party. The negotiations between the SPÖ and the ÖVP broke down because the ÖVP wanted everything from the SPÖ, meaning they wanted every possible concession. The trade union wing in the SPÖ came under pressure from its rank-and-file and could not sign the coalition agreement. It is quite obvious that the ÖVP secretly had negotiations with the FPÖ at that time but tried to see how far the SPÖ would go. After the deal with the SPÖ broke down, the ÖVP very quickly formed a new government with Haider.

For decades the ÖVP has been losing votes and since 1970 been behind the SPÖ. Since then when the ÖVP has been in a coalition it has been the junior partner. For them, the question of getting the Chancellor’s position was vital, this could be the last time the party was going to have a chance of being influential. This, combined with the personal ambition of ÖVP leader Schüssel to become Chancellor, was the basis for them to go into the coalition with the FPÖ, a party they have always been criticising for its instability and unreliability.

After starting the negotiations with the FPÖ the ÖVP dropped in the opinion polls. So in the end they had to form the government, if not the ÖVP faced the prospect of a getting disastrous result in a new election. Their only role at this moment in time is, although they have the Chancellor, to defend the FPÖ publicly.

The president Klestil, who had spoken out against the government, anyway swore it into office.

For the Austrian bourgeoisie it was necessary for the SPÖ to be in government because of its still strong connection to the trade unions. They were therefore the ideal party for implementing social cuts. But for two reasons, the bourgeoisie started to draw away their support from the SPÖ and consider the possibility of an ÖVP-FPÖ coalition: They could not take for granted anymore that the trade union leadership was going to be able to control the workers. The rank-and-file is becoming more and more dissatisfied, with some handing in their union membership card. During the negotiations between SPÖ and ÖVP a lot of protest letters and calls came in to the union offices the plans for the pension ‘reform’ became known. At the same time as it was going to be more and more difficult for the SPÖ to maintain its control over the trade unions.

The other reason is the situation of Austrian capitalism. The ruling class wanted neo-liberal measures to been implemented more quickly and deceive. The Austrian economy is heavily dependent on exports and, because of its small size, on the German economy and the world economy in general. At this moment in time, the economical situation is still slightly better then that of the EU generally, but the welfare state has not been reduced enough for the needs of the bourgeoisie to keep up their rate of profit, along with their demands for more tax-reforms, deregulation, privatisation.

Therefore the bourgeoisie decided to swift from the traditional, stable coalition between the SPÖ and the ÖVP to the more unstable, but the more "aggressive", neo-liberal government of the ÖVP and FPÖ. The ruling class expected protests but they also expected that the trade union leadership would not be prepared to mobilise their members at this moment in time. The union leadership would make verbal protests, but no actions, because of its tradition of social partnership and the absent of an alternative political way forward.

The program of the ÖVP/ FPÖ government is full of attacks against the working class:

• Collective bargaining not for the whole branches of the economy, but for every individual company

• 20 % to pay for health-care/Operations etc.

• up to 19 % reduction of pension for people retiring early (which people do if they cannot find a job)
• privatising the unemployment offices
• force unemployed to do "community work"
• more privatisation
• Reduction of taxes, social security and labour costs for the capitalists
• Increasing the taxes for cigarettes, higher prices for electricity and the compulsory car insurance
• Apprentices in the service sector are allowed to work until 23.00 at night
• A cut of 9000 public sector jobs
• Less money for over-time working in the public sector
• Student fees

The protests started with the first demo on Wednesday February 2nd. An organisation called "democratic Offensiv" (a mixture of "do gooders ", artists etc) called for it. 15.000-20.000 turned up after a 3 days mobilisation only via mail and telephone calls – no leaflets.

After that official demo was over, the protesters just went on. Since then there has a big demo every day. Although demos have to be registered by the police 24 hours before, this is not done at all. So all demos are illegal. Every day thousands of people turn up, we don’t know where they get the information.

The participants are very mixed – women and men, youth and older people, workers and people dressed in expensive suits and furs, Austrians and immigrants. At the first demos we mainly went through the inner city, but then we started to go also in other parts of Vienna, where people live. Some people stand at their doors and windows, applauding, wavering red flags (or anything in red) from their window and join the demo. During the demo it grows and usually becomes between 3-7.000 people. The demos are militant but in general not aggressive, although there where clashes with the police.

After clashes with the police on Friday February 4^th the press and government started a campaign against the "terrorists", "anarchists", who are said to come from abroad to "disturb our peaceful Austria". This has an effect on the population, but also on the demonstrators who often demand "peaceful demonstrations". In Friday’s clashes the police for the first time used water canons and tear gas. But, in comparison with other European countries and also with demonstrations in Austria in the 1980s, the police has so far tried to avoid a full scale attack against the demonstrations.

Not many police officers have been around during the last days. Their main role is to control and infiltrate the demos (using the secret police), and to control the traffic. There has been some arrests and some threats ("we know you did this and we fine you for it") but this is not general.

The demos start normally at 17.00 at the place where the President’s palace is, as well as the government building. It grows while it marches and it is extremely lively and loud. They never stop before 23.30; the longest started at 10.00 in the morning and went on until after midnight. This is not because anybody who leads it wants to go on, but because the participants don’t want to stop. And although the demos have now gone on for 6 days they do not yet get smaller. On Sunday February 6^th the demo went to one of the outside parts of Vienna, where the headquarter of the state broadcasting company is located. On Sundays at 21.50 there is a weekly discussion program with the spokespersons of all the parties. Usually the programme is held in the centre of Vienna, but because they knew we would come, they moved it. Nevertheless a demo of between 5-8.000 went, or nearly ran, 3 hours through the city to get to the broadcasting headquarters before the program stopped

One problems is the media boycott. The situation is in Austria totally different to the rest of the world, where the reports seem to be more on our side. If the Austrian media reports anything at all about the demos then they talk about very small sizes (saying some hundred instead of some thousand). On one radio programme it is forbidden to report about the movement. One journalist, who is known to be critical of the FPÖ and ÖVP was fired "because of the new situation" (and the unions have protested against this). Although a committee of different left organisations started to organise the demos a little bit more (mainly to organise stewarding and to lead them to working class areas) the demos have very high dynamic and its own, spontaneous life. We have never experienced a movement like this. You cannot say where the people come from, how they get information and how many come – but they are there.

We held our SOV Conference only the weekend before the movement started. We analysed in our perspective document that there is a polarisation in society, that there would be protests if a FPÖ-ÖVP government was formed. But we where astonished that our analysis proved to be correct just within 3 days.

Our Conference also decided to re-launch our organisation as a party – the Sozialistische LinksPartei (SLP, Socialist Left Party). This step was perfectly right and although we planned the launch originally only for the 18^th of March, we intervene in the movement already as SLP and immediately were accepted. The SLP is widely known in the movement. We have the leading banner, the leading megaphone speeches and we have the only "paper for the struggle". Most of the other groups do not even have leaflets (maybe also because they would be "a drop in the ocean") and only sell their usual paper.

We have produced special editions of our paper, Vorwärts. These have been a single A3 sheet with articles on one side and a poster to hold on the other. Until now we have brought out 3 editions and sold over 3,000 of them. We give them out for donation and get an extremely good response also in money, 1 Pound for the paper is quite usual.

The main slogan of the movement, "Widerstand" (resistance), came from us and is also on our banner, as well as on the headline of the papers. Our first special paper was on the new government in general and the necessity to fight it, together with our program. The second issue was a call to be active, to form Action Committees, organise for the school-student strike and the day of action on the 18^th of February. It also had an article on the repression by the state and asking readers to join the SLP. The third issue was headlined "Warnstrike" (a call for a warning strike) and has an articles on the need of for strike action, joining the SLP and that we do not want to go back to the old, bad SPÖ/ÖVP coalition, but that we need a different "new, socialist Austria".

We want to work out a strategy and a programme that can build a movement strong enough to topple the government. Daily demonstrations alone will not be enough. Our call for a day of action/school student strike on the 18^th is a step towards lifting the movement to a higher level. The next step is the call for a "Warnstrike", although a date needs to be set. We try to win active support for the need to take strike action. This idea seems to be widely accepted, which represent a quality change after decades of no big struggles. We stress in our material the need to for united struggle against racism, but more to the front are the social issues. The support for the FPÖ can only be undermined if the movement is putting forward a working class fighting alternative against social cuts and other neo-liberal measures.

There can be no lasting solution on the basis of capitalism. We want to get rid of this government, but are not in favour of any other capitalist government, whether it be a SPÖ government or SPÖ in coalition with another party.

There has to be no trust in the established parties, all of them are responsible for rise of Haider. Their policies and actions, of carving up jobs, positions, etc. paved the way for FPÖ. This movement is the beginning, or represent in an embryonic form of the formation of a new government. There is an urgent need for the formation of new political organisations of the working class that can form the basis of a such government. Our party has been formed in order to give a socialist voice to all who wants to fight. We are calling for a new mass workers, party at the same time as we are building our own, revolutionary party. We have an uncountable number of contacts, name and addresses.

The trade union leadership, although even they sometimes have been speaking about strike action, is not prepared to organise such actions. The union bureaucracy have used the clashes with the police to stop even discussing about strikes. But there is also enormous pressure from below, there are discussions in the workplaces, especially amongst the public sector workers, the railway workers etc. The protest movement is still gaining momentum.

The government is under enormous pressure – nationally and internationally. Also there are tensions inside. The only role the ÖVP has to play is to try to defend the FPÖ and Haider, although Haider is not even in the government. Inside the FPÖ there are tensions inside the leadership, some of this around some top-officials who want to get more influence, but Haider does not want this.

Nobody speaks about the "work of the government" but only about the protests against it. It is weak and shaky government. They cannot do anything that would take the steam out of the movement because of the mood that exists. The only thing the government can do is to hope that tiredness will set in and use the media against the demonstrations, i.e. talking about "terrorists", vandalism, etc.

The movement followed the formation of the new government has give way to not only a polarisation but to an enormous politicisation. It is much wider and much more political then any movement in the last 50 years. It still can develop into a mass movement that can toppled the government, if it can get a firm base inside the working class and the trade unions.

It can also be the starting point for the development of a new workers party in Austria. But from now on a new tradition of struggle has been established.

John Evers,

Sozialistiche Offensive Vorwarts, Vienna

BY WINNING 27% of the vote in Austria’s general election in October, the far-right Freedom Party (FPÖ) became the second strongest party in the country. What lies behind this success? And is the FPÖ leader Jörg Haider now on the road to power?

The election success of the FPÖ did not fall from heaven but was the result of a long process, which started with the take-over of the party leadership by Haider in 1986. Step by step Haider changed the party from a grouping of ‘Altnazis’, left-over fascists, with some liberal officials at the top, to the most successful organisation of the new far-right in Europe. In Austria, consequently, there has existed since the middle of the 1980s a united extreme-right force, with a developed apparatus and a charismatic leader, which has political experience and money. The FPÖ is not a fascist party but mixes key far-right ideas - racism, an authoritarian state, anti-trade union policy - with a very flexible populist phraseology. However this alone does not explain the success of the FPÖ.

Inseparably linked with the rise of the FPÖ was the coming to power in 1987 of the so-called ‘grand coalition’, made up of the Social Democratic Party (SPÖ) and the conservative Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP). Since then the SPÖ and ÖVP have privatised the former nationalised industries, seen unemployment double, and have carried out two major ‘savings-packages’ (ie cuts).

The shock this created within the working class has been deeper than elsewhere. Austria in the 1970s, with the SPÖ in power since 1970, had been seen as a social democratic ‘model-state’, similar to Sweden. But the ‘stability’ which the SPÖ put forward in this election campaign as their only slogan, does not exist any longer. In the former social democratic idyll, up to a fifth of the population now live on the poverty line! The politics of the present SPÖ have nothing to do with those of the 1970s. Instead the social democrats have stood in recent years at the head of a government that has made Austria, at breathtaking speed, part of the neo-liberal change in Europe - symbolised through joining the EU at the beginning of the 1990s. A whole generation has experienced the SPÖ only as a party of social cuts.

What has also been critical is that all these changes have been forced through without significant resistance from below. The trade union federation (ÖGB) has been tied into the government’s policies and has often actively participated in pushing through the cuts. Historically, this absence of resistance can be traced back to the system of proportional representation (‘proporz’) and ideas of social-partnership - as well as the extreme ‘anti-communism’ spread by the social democrats in the the workers’ movement since 1945, an important reason why a party to the left of the SPÖ has not emerged to date. Proporz and the idea of social-partnership led to power-sharing between the SPÖ and the ÖVP, as well as the involvement of the trade unions at all levels of society. The ÖGB is and wants to be part of the state apparatus, and has given up use of the strike weapon and any other form of resistance to achieve this. Now, however, this strategy is in deep crisis. More and more entrepreneurs want to rule without involving the SPÖ and the trade unions. For them the FPÖ puts forward the demand for the elimination of trade union influence and an end of social-partnership.

Other, wider sections of the population, are against the corruption that is connected with this system and for many of them the FPÖ can present itself as an (apparent) alternative. On the other hand, the SPÖ is the only force which identifies itself fully with this outdated model - another reason for its decline.

The price for the neo-liberal turn of the SPÖ has been the loss of its traditional members and voter base, as well as the total disappearance of the youth from this party. Only 40% of workers and 25% of those under-30 voted for the SPÖ this time. Amongst both groups the FPÖ was the strongest party - with 45% of workers (mainly male) and 35% of the youth vote. These figures clearly show that the position of the SPÖ as the traditional workers party is coming to an end. However, the FPÖ can only partially fill the vacuum. The SPÖ lost 230,000 voters to the FPÖ in these elections, but lost a further 275,000 to abstentions. And although the FPÖ won the biggest share of working class votes, it has not succeeded at all in sinking roots into the workers’ movement itself: less than one per cent of shop stewards identify themselves with the FPÖ’s trade union fraction.

In addition, in organisational terms, Haider has not been able to benefit from the declining membership of the two big parties. With about 40.000 members, the FPÖ has stagnated at the same level since the middle of the 1980s (in comparison both the SPÖ and ÖVP have up to 400,000 members). The FPÖ remains a protest party, the strength of which is the result mainly of one circumstance - it has, so far, no significant opponent.

Most commentators no longer question whether the FPÖ will at one point come into government. The only question that they put is ‘when’. The ÖVP, which portrays its election result as a success because it lost less votes than the SPÖ, is split on this issue. Governing with the SPÖ guarantees the continued decline of both parties and, for the ÖVP, means abandoning any chance of claiming the position of chancellor. On the other hand a coalition with the FPÖ would be a hard to calculate risk, and not only because the FPÖ could benefit much more from such an alliance.

The election result has caused an enormous polarisation in Austria. Everywhere, in workplaces, pubs, and on the street, the discussion is about the political situation. On October 1, at Haider’s last public election rally in Vienna, hundreds of unorganised FPÖ-opponents turned out to protest. Since then, especially amongst the youth, there has developed a mood very similar to the period at the beginning of the 1990s. Anti-racism and opposition to the FPÖ are central topics, which politicise and activate. According to opinion polls up to 60% reject the ‘grand coalition’ - but even more oppose the participation of the FPÖ in government.

The fact that none of the established parties could prevent the rise of Haider however, or will prevent his further ascent, has become obvious to many. The FPÖ already has the regional Landeshauptmann (governor) position in Carinthia and the vice-Landeshauptmann in the state of Vorarlberg. The result of the strengthened position of the FPÖ will be that whatever government is formed will try to continue the turn to the right of recent years - as with the extremely repressive and restrictive immigration policy. The discussion on the budget for 2000 has not yet started: a tax reform will be needed to finance it while the EU pact for stability will have to be fulfilled.

Political instability, and the question of what political alternative is necessary, will be the essential features of the next period. There will be many opportunities to put forward a socialist alternative and, with it, the idea of a new workers’ party as the only way forward.

social democrats – Social-democratic Party of Austria SPÖ

main bourgeois party – Austrians Peoples Party ÖVP

far-right party – Freedom Party Austria FPÖ

other parties are the Greens, the LIF (Liberals who did not get back into Parliament in 1999) the KPÖ (CP)

Election results 1999 compared with those in 1995

1995 1999

Votes % Votes %

SPÖ 1843474 38,06 1532448 33,15

ÖVP 1370510 28,29 1243672 26,91

FPÖ 1060377 21,89 1244087 26,91

LIF 267026 5,51 168612 3,65

Green 233208 4,81 342260 7,4

CP 13938 0,29 22016 0,48